5 ms·

It's unusual if they didn't have unmonitored access to the internet. Helicopter parenting takes a lot of energy and technical parents can only do so much. A 1

It's unusual if they didn't have unmonitored access to the internet. Helicopter parenting takes a lot of energy and technical parents can only do so much. A 12yo without a phone is a social pariah. What is odd to me in the story was the absence of a moral compass of the child and lack of knowledge of the internet as a potentially hostile place.

throwaway59601 3y ago
That's what happens when parents restrict kids instead of teaching them about the dangers.
- WeylandYutani 3y ago
  Americans believe children are pure innocent creatures who should not be told about sex. Hilariously churches are hotbeds of pedophilia. And the Republican party advocates child marriage.
  - listenallyall 3y ago
    I guess I'm missing the joke... what's hilarious about pedophilia?
- mc32 3y ago
  Because we know that adults who get addicted to deleterious drugs in adulthood didn't know the dangers of it, right? Sometimes availability and the wrong situation can land people in a lot of trouble. Finance is another area where despite knowing the severe drawbacks. People in the wrong circumstance may seek out loan sharks.
  - throwaway59601 3y ago
    Not sure why you're bringing up drugs here. We're talking about webpages, not substances directly altering your neurochemistry. But yeah, indeed - usually it's a fault of parenting. Instead of properly teaching about the dangers and responsibility (in case of weed/alcohol, or finance) they made it a tabu.
    - mc32 3y ago
      Point is, grown adults who "know better" fall into these traps too. It's not only about inculcation or knowing better. If it's there, despite all you know, sometimes you fall for it. That's the point.
      - throwaway59601 3y ago
        That adults know better is a myth. They don't. It's not about knowing better, it's about being taught to be reasonable with the thing, and that takes long exposure to that thing, ideally with the support of a parent.
        mc32 3y ago
        You don't get it. People trained, educated, fall for scams all the time. People in pen testing who know they will get hit also fall. There is a case for a moat or external protection.
- scarface74 3y ago
  Yes, just like the “Just Say No” campaign completely stopped children from using drugs and parents telling children to “save themselves until marriage” stop children from having sex.
  - giantg2 3y ago
    I agree with both you and the parent. Early on it's good to have restrictions, then phase them out as they're ready. At some point they need to be prepared to function on their own. Otherwise you might end up with 18 year olds acting like 12 year olds.
  - throwaway59601 3y ago
    That confirms my point - I'm saying that restriction, blocking access or making it a tabu never works, it does the exact opposite (and worse, because it builds a sense of urgency to have/experience the thing). Instead of forbidding it, you have to teach the children about the actual dangers of doing the thing and how to do it safely, how to limit the damage and what are the limits they shouldn't cross - and the reasons for these limits. Telling them "just say no" or "you have to wait until marriage" only makes them even more curious, and in many cases they will absolutely overdo it once they finally are out of the reach of their parents.
waselighis 3y ago
>What is odd to me in the story was the absence of a moral compass of the child and lack of knowledge of the internet as a potentially hostile place. The term I see being used again and again is "grooming". I also saw another story that mentioned one person who was convicted, and reportedly contacted THOUSANDS of children online (using many fake profiles, of course). While most children probably aren't being pulled in, it seems like they're "fishing" for the vulnerable few that they can manipulate into being trafficked. A public education campaign, especially in schools, could do much to reduce the problem, but still there will always be those children who are vulnerable. We should still try to educate children and parents on the dangers, but like climate change, there is no one solution to the problem.
- psychlops 3y ago
  Well said. I wonder if there is a way to target a particular profile of child who might be vulnerable and direct education to those areas. Maybe a bad idea but for example DM'ing using the methods of those convicted.
giantg2 3y ago
"A 12yo without a phone is a social pariah." If I give a kid that young a phone, then I'd probably want it to be a dumb phone, no camera, etc for emergencies only.

throwaway59601 3y ago

That's what happens when parents restrict kids instead of teaching them about the dangers.

WeylandYutani 3y ago
Americans believe children are pure innocent creatures who should not be told about sex. Hilariously churches are hotbeds of pedophilia. And the Republican party advocates child marriage.
- listenallyall 3y ago
  I guess I'm missing the joke... what's hilarious about pedophilia?
mc32 3y ago
Because we know that adults who get addicted to deleterious drugs in adulthood didn't know the dangers of it, right? Sometimes availability and the wrong situation can land people in a lot of trouble. Finance is another area where despite knowing the severe drawbacks. People in the wrong circumstance may seek out loan sharks.
- throwaway59601 3y ago
  Not sure why you're bringing up drugs here. We're talking about webpages, not substances directly altering your neurochemistry. But yeah, indeed - usually it's a fault of parenting. Instead of properly teaching about the dangers and responsibility (in case of weed/alcohol, or finance) they made it a tabu.
  - mc32 3y ago
    Point is, grown adults who "know better" fall into these traps too. It's not only about inculcation or knowing better. If it's there, despite all you know, sometimes you fall for it. That's the point.
    - throwaway59601 3y ago
      That adults know better is a myth. They don't. It's not about knowing better, it's about being taught to be reasonable with the thing, and that takes long exposure to that thing, ideally with the support of a parent.
      - mc32 3y ago
        You don't get it. People trained, educated, fall for scams all the time. People in pen testing who know they will get hit also fall. There is a case for a moat or external protection.
scarface74 3y ago
Yes, just like the “Just Say No” campaign completely stopped children from using drugs and parents telling children to “save themselves until marriage” stop children from having sex.
- giantg2 3y ago
  I agree with both you and the parent. Early on it's good to have restrictions, then phase them out as they're ready. At some point they need to be prepared to function on their own. Otherwise you might end up with 18 year olds acting like 12 year olds.
- throwaway59601 3y ago
  That confirms my point - I'm saying that restriction, blocking access or making it a tabu never works, it does the exact opposite (and worse, because it builds a sense of urgency to have/experience the thing). Instead of forbidding it, you have to teach the children about the actual dangers of doing the thing and how to do it safely, how to limit the damage and what are the limits they shouldn't cross - and the reasons for these limits. Telling them "just say no" or "you have to wait until marriage" only makes them even more curious, and in many cases they will absolutely overdo it once they finally are out of the reach of their parents.

waselighis 3y ago

>What is odd to me in the story was the absence of a moral compass of the child and lack of knowledge of the internet as a potentially hostile place. The term I see being used again and again is "grooming". I also saw another story that mentioned one person who was convicted, and reportedly contacted THOUSANDS of children online (using many fake profiles, of course). While most children probably aren't being pulled in, it seems like they're "fishing" for the vulnerable few that they can manipulate into being trafficked. A public education campaign, especially in schools, could do much to reduce the problem, but still there will always be those children who are vulnerable. We should still try to educate children and parents on the dangers, but like climate change, there is no one solution to the problem.

psychlops 3y ago
Well said. I wonder if there is a way to target a particular profile of child who might be vulnerable and direct education to those areas. Maybe a bad idea but for example DM'ing using the methods of those convicted.

giantg2 3y ago

"A 12yo without a phone is a social pariah." If I give a kid that young a phone, then I'd probably want it to be a dumb phone, no camera, etc for emergencies only.