3 ms·

> Is it porn that gives them the wrong idea, or is it because porn is the only concept of sex that they get exposed to? My wife works at a kindergarten and she

> Is it porn that gives them the wrong idea, or is it because porn is the only concept of sex that they get exposed to? My wife works at a kindergarten and she has first hand experience with 4-year olds being exposed to porn and the effects really aren't nice. What do you propose actually? Live demos or experiments under adult supervision? > Why wouldn't you have fatherly talks about sex regardless of exposure to porn? Because there is no proper way to bring up people having sex with horses and dogs into a conversation with a child, let alone that the act of making love doesn't necessarily involve slapping a woman and forcefully shoving your dick inside her mouth, as not all women like that. You either missed my point or you don't have children of your own, but really, I'd love to get your idea of a conversation with a six year old. > Playing any sound is disrespectful to your colleagues, by breaking their concentration. The pornographic part is irrelevant Are you seriously implying that all sounds are created equal, especially given that some people end up behaving like children when hearing sounds related to sex? Do you also fart in elevators? When it's hot outside, do you also come butt-naked at your office? When you get horny, do you make announcements?

icebraining 13y ago
Well, I was certainly not thinking about 4 and 6 year olds; in general, I don't see how would they get exposition to porn, unless they were left unattended in front of a web-connected device, and in that case porn wouldn't be my main concern (as difficult as it sounds, I'd rather explain bestiality than suicide bombings). Sorry for the misunderstanding. I was thinking more about 8-10 year olds, to whom there's plenty of ways to introduce the concept of sex, not only through conversation but also vetted media (e.g. books, films). I don't have kids, no, but was involved in the education of my (much) younger brother, and so in a privileged position to discuss this with him (compared to his parents), and he has grown up knowing about sex way before discovering porn. Are you seriously implying that all sounds are created equal, especially given that some people end up behaving like children when hearing sounds related to sex? I'm implying that a porn filter wouldn't solve the real problem. As for people behaving like children when hearing sounds related to sex, I have to say I don't know any above 20 years old. Do you also fart in elevators? When it's hot outside, do you also come butt-naked at your office? When you get horny, do you make announcements? No. I also try not to make silly comparisons on online discussions.
VLM 13y ago
"My wife works at a kindergarten and she has first hand experience with 4-year olds being exposed to porn and the effects really aren't nice." I think this is made up, or at most the kids are reacting to the teacher freaking out or trying to tease the teacher knowing its a great way to freak her out. It is comical to think back at what I thought of sex-ploitive-ish TV when I was a kid, pre-puberty. Now yes I know this wasn't "XXX chicks with happy horses" or whatever, merely broadcast TV, but I don't think that would change the reaction very much. The women on Charlies Angels? Eh whatever, the A-Team was a better action show although even for a kid, a little formulaic. The actresses on Laverne and Shirley don't wear bras? Who cares they look like goofballs wearing 50s clothes this is 1980 lets watch battlestar galactica (the original). The dukes of hazard was all about the car chases, I didn't even notice Daisy's attire (or lack thereof) until my hormones kicked in and suddenly she was very interesting indeed, like from zero interest to 1000+ in what seemed like weeks. When I was young I thought it was a stupid show, like a lame version of Knight Rider which I much preferred. So the happy couple is reunited and their relationship rekindled on the love boat. Well good for them but I have no interest in watching them smooch and grope each other for thirty seconds on camera. Heck I'd switch to Mr Belvedere if it was on. Baywatch, seriously, that is the dumbest show ever if you're under 13 or so. Why is the intro this woman running along the beach in slow motion, if she's rescuing people she should be swiming into the ocean not running along it, even a dumb kid knows that. Once the hormones kick in all a filter does is get in the way of whats suddenly tremendously interesting. I could see it being awkward for a 7th grade teacher where suddenly some of the boys instantly find Miley Cyrus (or whoever) completely fascinating and the rest are all "eh, girl music, who cares". But at grade-K I'm thinking the reaction is going to be pretty minor most likely "eww gross" but mostly "so what". I would worry more about gore and gore-shock sites, which is getting pretty far off topic. So I'm a geezer, so what. So we'll try something more contemporary. How many kids actually required therapy after the famous janet jackson wardrobe malfunction during the superbowl. If they needed therapy it was probably for the agonizing awkward experience of watching what 60 year old bald white guys in NYC think suburban teen youth of america think urban rap stars think is cool and more or less screwing it up hilariously.
- Zimahl 13y ago
  I'm actually annoyed that you got modded down. Your post brings up an excellent point although I don't think it's intended. These days, it comes down to exposure and access. Back when I was a teen (early 90's) we didn't have the internet as it is. Sure there were BBSs but that was about as convenient as trying to get a dirty magazine. While I may had idle curiosity when I was pre-teen, I had zero access to it (my father didn't have any magazines, etc) and therefore it would've taken way too much effort to see it, so it was easily dismissed. In context, it was equally difficult to even see an R rated movie. These days, my 8 or 10 year old self could be exposed to literally anything within a couple seconds. It's free and prevalent, and can show up in unexpected places. I don't have kids (will soon) but I don't look forward to dealing with those situations. As for Janet Jackson, I agree that was overblown. If anyone needed therapy for that it was because their parents were overbearing. However, we aren't talking about a bare breast here, we are talking about simulated rape, bestiality, and some other things that just aren't my thing. But, hey, if they are someone's thing that's fine - let's just try to keep that stuff out of the hands of the kids until they are old enough to reason for themselves about what's really going on.
lotsofcows 13y ago
People seem not to realise that children take only what they can understand. If you show a 6 year old violent porn, they won't be traumatised by the porn but by the violence. If you show a 6 year old "normal" porn they'll ask lots of questions that you'll find more or less awkward depending on how puritan you are. The conversation with the 6 year old is easy. It's the conversation with the 13 year old that's the problem. Liberals have "the talk" early. Right-wingers have "the talk" late. Very few people have talk regularly as the child grows up. I'm not sure what your last sentence has to do with the argument.

icebraining 13y ago

Well, I was certainly not thinking about 4 and 6 year olds; in general, I don't see how would they get exposition to porn, unless they were left unattended in front of a web-connected device, and in that case porn wouldn't be my main concern (as difficult as it sounds, I'd rather explain bestiality than suicide bombings). Sorry for the misunderstanding. I was thinking more about 8-10 year olds, to whom there's plenty of ways to introduce the concept of sex, not only through conversation but also vetted media (e.g. books, films). I don't have kids, no, but was involved in the education of my (much) younger brother, and so in a privileged position to discuss this with him (compared to his parents), and he has grown up knowing about sex way before discovering porn. Are you seriously implying that all sounds are created equal, especially given that some people end up behaving like children when hearing sounds related to sex? I'm implying that a porn filter wouldn't solve the real problem. As for people behaving like children when hearing sounds related to sex, I have to say I don't know any above 20 years old. Do you also fart in elevators? When it's hot outside, do you also come butt-naked at your office? When you get horny, do you make announcements? No. I also try not to make silly comparisons on online discussions.

VLM 13y ago

"My wife works at a kindergarten and she has first hand experience with 4-year olds being exposed to porn and the effects really aren't nice." I think this is made up, or at most the kids are reacting to the teacher freaking out or trying to tease the teacher knowing its a great way to freak her out. It is comical to think back at what I thought of sex-ploitive-ish TV when I was a kid, pre-puberty. Now yes I know this wasn't "XXX chicks with happy horses" or whatever, merely broadcast TV, but I don't think that would change the reaction very much. The women on Charlies Angels? Eh whatever, the A-Team was a better action show although even for a kid, a little formulaic. The actresses on Laverne and Shirley don't wear bras? Who cares they look like goofballs wearing 50s clothes this is 1980 lets watch battlestar galactica (the original). The dukes of hazard was all about the car chases, I didn't even notice Daisy's attire (or lack thereof) until my hormones kicked in and suddenly she was very interesting indeed, like from zero interest to 1000+ in what seemed like weeks. When I was young I thought it was a stupid show, like a lame version of Knight Rider which I much preferred. So the happy couple is reunited and their relationship rekindled on the love boat. Well good for them but I have no interest in watching them smooch and grope each other for thirty seconds on camera. Heck I'd switch to Mr Belvedere if it was on. Baywatch, seriously, that is the dumbest show ever if you're under 13 or so. Why is the intro this woman running along the beach in slow motion, if she's rescuing people she should be swiming into the ocean not running along it, even a dumb kid knows that. Once the hormones kick in all a filter does is get in the way of whats suddenly tremendously interesting. I could see it being awkward for a 7th grade teacher where suddenly some of the boys instantly find Miley Cyrus (or whoever) completely fascinating and the rest are all "eh, girl music, who cares". But at grade-K I'm thinking the reaction is going to be pretty minor most likely "eww gross" but mostly "so what". I would worry more about gore and gore-shock sites, which is getting pretty far off topic. So I'm a geezer, so what. So we'll try something more contemporary. How many kids actually required therapy after the famous janet jackson wardrobe malfunction during the superbowl. If they needed therapy it was probably for the agonizing awkward experience of watching what 60 year old bald white guys in NYC think suburban teen youth of america think urban rap stars think is cool and more or less screwing it up hilariously.

Zimahl 13y ago
I'm actually annoyed that you got modded down. Your post brings up an excellent point although I don't think it's intended. These days, it comes down to exposure and access. Back when I was a teen (early 90's) we didn't have the internet as it is. Sure there were BBSs but that was about as convenient as trying to get a dirty magazine. While I may had idle curiosity when I was pre-teen, I had zero access to it (my father didn't have any magazines, etc) and therefore it would've taken way too much effort to see it, so it was easily dismissed. In context, it was equally difficult to even see an R rated movie. These days, my 8 or 10 year old self could be exposed to literally anything within a couple seconds. It's free and prevalent, and can show up in unexpected places. I don't have kids (will soon) but I don't look forward to dealing with those situations. As for Janet Jackson, I agree that was overblown. If anyone needed therapy for that it was because their parents were overbearing. However, we aren't talking about a bare breast here, we are talking about simulated rape, bestiality, and some other things that just aren't my thing. But, hey, if they are someone's thing that's fine - let's just try to keep that stuff out of the hands of the kids until they are old enough to reason for themselves about what's really going on.

lotsofcows 13y ago

People seem not to realise that children take only what they can understand. If you show a 6 year old violent porn, they won't be traumatised by the porn but by the violence. If you show a 6 year old "normal" porn they'll ask lots of questions that you'll find more or less awkward depending on how puritan you are. The conversation with the 6 year old is easy. It's the conversation with the 13 year old that's the problem. Liberals have "the talk" early. Right-wingers have "the talk" late. Very few people have talk regularly as the child grows up. I'm not sure what your last sentence has to do with the argument.