6 ms·

I thought the parent comment was a great point, but yours is as well. Question for you though, since I've been trying to figure this out since I pulled up this

I thought the parent comment was a great point, but yours is as well. Question for you though, since I've been trying to figure this out since I pulled up this post: What exactly is the point of "hiding" this from adults, besides cute gimmick? It's not like an abuser can somehow prevent a child from seeing a billboard that they themselves also see. Are we afraid that access to the phone number can be restricted? Well, this article does that all on its own. What's the point? What's the benefit? On the flip side, I'm VERY concerned at marketers trying to direct a message to my child while deliberately hiding that message from me, the parent. I personally don't care what that message is. It could be for abused kids or it could be to tell them that their parents should be turned into the authorities for not agreeing with the government. The message is irrelevant. As a responsible parent in charge of creating the best 18 year old man I can out of my 6 and 4 year old boys, I NEED to be aware of as much as possible that their little brains are taking in. Not to censor them (although in some cases this is appropriate), but to temper that intake with a does of 38 years of wisdom that they simply do not possess at the moment. I have no issues discussing child abuse with my sons. In fact I would love to do so in an effort to ensure that they come to me (or another adult) if one of their classmates or friends is in this situation. Hell, I want them to come to me if they feel in this situation too. This billboard does not promote any of this. It separates me from my child in a very underhanded way.

btilly 13y ago
In my case, my abuser threatened my life if ever I told, and used to brag about how good he was at finding people. With the implication that he could track me down. If he'd recognized a billboard like that, he could have taken it as an opportunity to warn me. I would have believed that warning from someone I viewed as incredibly powerful. Which would make the billboard entirely useless. But if he didn't see the ad, he couldn't deliver that threat. If by chance I became aware that he couldn't even see the ad, it would have undermined my impression of how powerful he was. Would it have worked? I don't know. Quite possibly not. Maybe it would for some but not others. The only way to really find out is to try it. Furthermore they should keep track at the other end of how many kids calling saw that billboard. If those statistics say it is effective, then roll it out to a bunch of places for as long as it keeps on working. (Over time abusers will become aware of the trick and be on the lookout for it.) As for the marketing issue, I hear you and do not disagree. The technology could be used in very bad ways. I just happen to think that this is a good use of it, and is something that is worth trying.
- run4yourlives 13y ago
  You were already living is such fear of the power of your abuser that I doubt this ad would help much. As it stands, there is nothing to tell the child that the abuser isn't seeing exactly what they are. I hear what you are saying and sympathize with where you are coming from. However one must always be mindful of the unintended consequences of our good intentions. In this case, I see a huge potential for abuse with little positive payoff. I can't logically conclude otherwise without simply making a play to emotion.
  - btilly 13y ago
    Sorry to be blunt, but you fail at logic. You have a theory about my behavior that might or might not be correct. You have extrapolated that to a theory about all abused children that is even less likely to be correct than the first. You have concluded from that that you see no point in actually trying the experiment and collecting data because it is guaranteed to fail. Your initial theory about me is incorrect. After years of abuse I got to that point, sure. But I didn't start there. I believe from my own memories of myself that there was a period where I would be willing to try it, and a period where I wouldn't. Your generalization of my experience (which you weren't there for and know almost nothing about) is even less correct than your initial theory. I was but one child with one set of experiences. Different children react differently. Different children go through different patterns of abuse. My description is anecdote, not data. And finally your absolute certainty that it is useless to even try is nothing short of absolutely galling. On what evidence do you give up before trying? I've got a heck of a lot more experience/knowledge than you do, and I certainly don't think it is hopeless to try this! (I don't necessarily think it will work, but it seems like a promising idea.) As for the message itself, well, I am not in a position to judge. Ideally it was crafted with input from people who had suffered the exact kind of abuse they are targeting about what would have been most likely to work for them. I know that the most effective messages are often not what someone without experience would guess them to be. They've got more knowledge about physical abuse than I do. My experience was sexual abuse, which is different in many ways. But if it shows any signs of effectiveness for one then it can be repeated with messages aimed at other kinds of victims. For sexual abuse I might suggest a message along the lines of, He says you asked for it, and it sometimes feels good. But it is wrong and you don't want it. We understand. We can make it stop. Why that message? Because the best way to show you actually understand is to state the deepest, darkest truth of sexual abuse. Which is that abusers try to convince themselves and their victims that this is an act of love, and children are not equipped with the emotional maturity to distinguish "this feels good" from "I want this". (That message might be a bit too raw. I've known a lot of adults who were unable to look back at their own abuse and face that statement. And explaining it to your kids would be extremely hard. But it is a statistical certainty that they will have kids in their classrooms who are actually GOING through that, but nobody knows it...)
hosh 13y ago
Heh, that's an illusion. Children are subjected to a number of underhanded marketing and impulses all over the place. Whatever your intent, as a nurturing parent looking out for their child, or as a control freak trying to censor everything, kids find out all sorts of things on their own. Then puberty hits, and all bets are off. Wisdom is not measured by the years. I've met wise people who are old, and I've met wise people who are the age of your boys. I've met the foolish both young and old. Rather than tempering the intake of 38-years of wisdom, perhaps instead, consider sharing some of that 38-years-of-wisdom so that your children grow strong enough to make choices of their own. But hey. Ultimately, you're the parent. Good luck.
- run4yourlives 13y ago
  You're digressing, and probably not a parent. Nonetheless, I'm under no false pretenses that I'm able to control what my child is taking in outright. I can in fact provide input to how they choose to make decisions. The only people I've ever met that don't think that experience and age provides a value to decision making are the young and inexperienced.
  - nitrogen 13y ago
    The only people I've ever met that don't think that experience and age provides a value to decision making are the young and inexperienced. This doesn't seem like a very convincing argument ;-). Of course people will value whatever it is they have and someone else doesn't. ... and probably not a parent. I submit that experience being a child is just as valid in a discussion of parenting as experience being a parent, and is underappreciated.
    - btilly 13y ago
      Of course people will value whatever it is they have and someone else doesn't. And likewise people discount the value of whatever it is they don't have that someone else does. Please don't let that fact keep you from realizing that experience has real value, and this is an advantage that older people consistently have over younger ones. Obviously it isn't the only important factor. Plenty of 15 year olds have better judgement than most 40 year olds. But very few people have better judgement at 15 than they do at 40. (However many have worse judgement at 80 than at 60. Such is life.) Don't let the frequency of stupidity among adults cause you to discount the fact that experience has value. I submit that experience being a child is just as valid in a discussion of parenting as experience being a parent, and is underappreciated. Having been both a parent and a child, I absolutely know that you're wrong. Before I was a parent, this wouldn't have been obvious to me. The experience of having been a child is indeed relevant to a discussion of parenting. All competent parents draw on this experience to help inform their decisions. However until you've been on both sides of that relationship you simply don't have a full perspective to judge by. It is like deciding on who is right in an argument between two friends after having only heard one side. The information that you got is clearly relevant and important, but you simply aren't (yet) in a position to make a fair judgement. I know that you don't agree. But if you choose to be a parent, after you've had the experience of being shocked by hearing yourself sound like an echo of your own parents, come back and tell me that you didn't just learn something very important about your parents. (Before you wonder, every parent that I've asked about it has had this experience. And every one has at that point understood their parents better.)

btilly 13y ago

In my case, my abuser threatened my life if ever I told, and used to brag about how good he was at finding people. With the implication that he could track me down. If he'd recognized a billboard like that, he could have taken it as an opportunity to warn me. I would have believed that warning from someone I viewed as incredibly powerful. Which would make the billboard entirely useless. But if he didn't see the ad, he couldn't deliver that threat. If by chance I became aware that he couldn't even see the ad, it would have undermined my impression of how powerful he was. Would it have worked? I don't know. Quite possibly not. Maybe it would for some but not others. The only way to really find out is to try it. Furthermore they should keep track at the other end of how many kids calling saw that billboard. If those statistics say it is effective, then roll it out to a bunch of places for as long as it keeps on working. (Over time abusers will become aware of the trick and be on the lookout for it.) As for the marketing issue, I hear you and do not disagree. The technology could be used in very bad ways. I just happen to think that this is a good use of it, and is something that is worth trying.

run4yourlives 13y ago
You were already living is such fear of the power of your abuser that I doubt this ad would help much. As it stands, there is nothing to tell the child that the abuser isn't seeing exactly what they are. I hear what you are saying and sympathize with where you are coming from. However one must always be mindful of the unintended consequences of our good intentions. In this case, I see a huge potential for abuse with little positive payoff. I can't logically conclude otherwise without simply making a play to emotion.
- btilly 13y ago
  Sorry to be blunt, but you fail at logic. You have a theory about my behavior that might or might not be correct. You have extrapolated that to a theory about all abused children that is even less likely to be correct than the first. You have concluded from that that you see no point in actually trying the experiment and collecting data because it is guaranteed to fail. Your initial theory about me is incorrect. After years of abuse I got to that point, sure. But I didn't start there. I believe from my own memories of myself that there was a period where I would be willing to try it, and a period where I wouldn't. Your generalization of my experience (which you weren't there for and know almost nothing about) is even less correct than your initial theory. I was but one child with one set of experiences. Different children react differently. Different children go through different patterns of abuse. My description is anecdote, not data. And finally your absolute certainty that it is useless to even try is nothing short of absolutely galling. On what evidence do you give up before trying? I've got a heck of a lot more experience/knowledge than you do, and I certainly don't think it is hopeless to try this! (I don't necessarily think it will work, but it seems like a promising idea.) As for the message itself, well, I am not in a position to judge. Ideally it was crafted with input from people who had suffered the exact kind of abuse they are targeting about what would have been most likely to work for them. I know that the most effective messages are often not what someone without experience would guess them to be. They've got more knowledge about physical abuse than I do. My experience was sexual abuse, which is different in many ways. But if it shows any signs of effectiveness for one then it can be repeated with messages aimed at other kinds of victims. For sexual abuse I might suggest a message along the lines of, He says you asked for it, and it sometimes feels good. But it is wrong and you don't want it. We understand. We can make it stop. Why that message? Because the best way to show you actually understand is to state the deepest, darkest truth of sexual abuse. Which is that abusers try to convince themselves and their victims that this is an act of love, and children are not equipped with the emotional maturity to distinguish "this feels good" from "I want this". (That message might be a bit too raw. I've known a lot of adults who were unable to look back at their own abuse and face that statement. And explaining it to your kids would be extremely hard. But it is a statistical certainty that they will have kids in their classrooms who are actually GOING through that, but nobody knows it...)

hosh 13y ago

Heh, that's an illusion. Children are subjected to a number of underhanded marketing and impulses all over the place. Whatever your intent, as a nurturing parent looking out for their child, or as a control freak trying to censor everything, kids find out all sorts of things on their own. Then puberty hits, and all bets are off. Wisdom is not measured by the years. I've met wise people who are old, and I've met wise people who are the age of your boys. I've met the foolish both young and old. Rather than tempering the intake of 38-years of wisdom, perhaps instead, consider sharing some of that 38-years-of-wisdom so that your children grow strong enough to make choices of their own. But hey. Ultimately, you're the parent. Good luck.

run4yourlives 13y ago
You're digressing, and probably not a parent. Nonetheless, I'm under no false pretenses that I'm able to control what my child is taking in outright. I can in fact provide input to how they choose to make decisions. The only people I've ever met that don't think that experience and age provides a value to decision making are the young and inexperienced.
- nitrogen 13y ago
  The only people I've ever met that don't think that experience and age provides a value to decision making are the young and inexperienced. This doesn't seem like a very convincing argument ;-). Of course people will value whatever it is they have and someone else doesn't. ... and probably not a parent. I submit that experience being a child is just as valid in a discussion of parenting as experience being a parent, and is underappreciated.
  - btilly 13y ago
    Of course people will value whatever it is they have and someone else doesn't. And likewise people discount the value of whatever it is they don't have that someone else does. Please don't let that fact keep you from realizing that experience has real value, and this is an advantage that older people consistently have over younger ones. Obviously it isn't the only important factor. Plenty of 15 year olds have better judgement than most 40 year olds. But very few people have better judgement at 15 than they do at 40. (However many have worse judgement at 80 than at 60. Such is life.) Don't let the frequency of stupidity among adults cause you to discount the fact that experience has value. I submit that experience being a child is just as valid in a discussion of parenting as experience being a parent, and is underappreciated. Having been both a parent and a child, I absolutely know that you're wrong. Before I was a parent, this wouldn't have been obvious to me. The experience of having been a child is indeed relevant to a discussion of parenting. All competent parents draw on this experience to help inform their decisions. However until you've been on both sides of that relationship you simply don't have a full perspective to judge by. It is like deciding on who is right in an argument between two friends after having only heard one side. The information that you got is clearly relevant and important, but you simply aren't (yet) in a position to make a fair judgement. I know that you don't agree. But if you choose to be a parent, after you've had the experience of being shocked by hearing yourself sound like an echo of your own parents, come back and tell me that you didn't just learn something very important about your parents. (Before you wonder, every parent that I've asked about it has had this experience. And every one has at that point understood their parents better.)