Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > Chatter > General Discussion


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 09-03-2007, 05:23 PM   #1 (permalink)
Banned
 
Underage children: "self-pic" amateur pornographers

So I'm browsing through a porn site today, and I was rather enjoying the variety of women laid out (sometimes quite literally) before me. I say women, because these were legitimate, very definitely "legal" females. But they are not what this thread is about.

As I browsed further, I started to get into a "webcam" area, and an area featuring the user-submitted pornography of a certain other site. I won't mention either, and don't PM me because I won't tell you by PM, either.

The idea behind these pictures is that they're "self-taken", either by steady webcamera, or by holding a camera/setting a camera timer to take pictures. Although I can't prove they're underage, and they come from a fairly well-known site, I would swear that some of them were very questionably legal. In fact, there were a handful that I only glanced at the thumbnail of, looked at one picture, and felt gross and closed it... they looked to be 14, or MAYBE 15. Now, it is possible that they weren't- after all, i've dated a woman who was 24 (and by my opinion, looked it) and most often assumed to be 18, tops. It stands to reason, then, that there are surely enough nude-picture-taking females that some who ARE 18 would look 13 or 14.

But we all know that there are many mid-teenagers, 13, 14, 15, who have their own digital cameras and/or webcams, and take provocative, somewhat revealing, or fully nude pictures- either for boyfriends, or certain sites where they think it will make them popular, or whatever.

My question for discussion is this: at what point did people stop paying attention to their kids so thoroughly and completely that it's now fairly standard to see self-taken underage porn? This is not like when some pedophile scumbag would coerce a young teen into something lurid... this is young teens shedding their clothing to fit in, be popular, or give something to their (hopefully) equally-young boyfriends.

Second to that, is how do you regulate self-taken pornography? Can you fine or jail a girl who takes a picture of herself and posts it on the internet? Better yet, can we hold the parents responsible in some way? What kind of ramifications can there be? Certainly there will be many cases where some kind of coercion is obvious... but I don't believe it's very many, let alone the majority.

Where were these kids failed, that they are putting themselves out there like this?

Last edited by analog; 09-03-2007 at 05:25 PM..
analog is offline  
Old 09-03-2007, 05:36 PM   #2 (permalink)
Banned
 
Location: Chicago's western burbs
This is one of the many reasons that "my daughters laptop" has to have ME type in a password for her to log in, and her friends are encouraged to come HERE to hang out, and I manage to find an excuse for her not to be out and about with them or staying at their houses. I don't trust anyone, and you bet your butt I don't trust the intellect of a 14 year old to be in possession of something that she could do such things with. Yeah, maybe I'm a little bit nuts about the whole deal - but you damn well better believe my kid isnt roaming the internet alone or unattended with all the wackos out there, and I'd also like to hope she has had the fear of god instilled in her when it comes to the people she can run into on the net. That, and that she has been instructed in right and wrong enough to not be so idiotic as to WANT to do such a thing, let alone do it.

Jail the girl for taking and posting such things? no.. Fine the parents and get the girl into therapy.

Last edited by Midnight; 09-03-2007 at 05:40 PM..
Midnight is offline  
Old 09-03-2007, 06:17 PM   #3 (permalink)
Psycho
 
Jenna's Avatar
 
Location: Wisconsin
Well, I've never had a webcam, but I've taken rather "revealing" pictures of myself at a young age. Nothing naked, and nothing that has been put on the internet. However, the reason my parents never found out is because they just aren't as technologically advanced. My mom barely knows/knew how to turn a damn computer on.

Why would anyone buy their child a webcam? I also think parents need to be informing kids about myspace. I see a lot of girls out there with half naked pictures who aren't 18 yet, and there are a lot of girls who are barely 13 and have them. At least make sure they make their profiles private and leave out any personal contact information.
Jenna is offline  
Old 09-03-2007, 07:21 PM   #4 (permalink)
Huggles, sir?
 
seretogis's Avatar
 
Location: Seattle
This is not a wholly new phenomenon. It is simply another symptom of the absolute lack of parenting that current generations are suffering from. You could replace the underage nude-self-photography with a dozen other things from underage smoking, to underage sex (Clinton-style is still sex, kids), to manners, to work ethic. The parents are at fault and yet will not be held accountable.

How do you fix it? You can't. Instead, worry about raising your own children properly and warn them of behaviors which bad parents ignore or allow.
__________________
seretogis - sieg heil
perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost
no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames
seretogis is offline  
Old 09-03-2007, 07:41 PM   #5 (permalink)
Deja Moo
 
Elphaba's Avatar
 
Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA
Perhaps it is not only the absence of the parents, but the example they give when they post their "self-taken" shots.
__________________
"You can't ignore politics, no matter how much you'd like to." Molly Ivins - 1944-2007
Elphaba is offline  
Old 09-03-2007, 07:43 PM   #6 (permalink)
peekaboo
 
ngdawg's Avatar
 
Location: on the back, bitch
Parents CAN fix it but there's that "NMK syndrome"* that way too many have.
My kids' computer is in the middle of the diningroom and there will never be one in either bedroom.
This is not to say something might happen after the old folks go to bed, but they are aware that at any time, I will ask them to open their MySpace or Facebook and that I will google their various online names. It also makes it a bit harder to get that private when there's another sibling hanging around waiting their turn on the pc and that's how I like it.
There are signs when a girl is underage-shape of breasts, etc., but they're not conclusive. I have found that the younger the kid, the 'dumber' the nickname. "Sexylittlekitty" is probably 15.




*Not My Kid
__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.
ngdawg is offline  
Old 09-03-2007, 08:05 PM   #7 (permalink)
More Than You Expect
 
Manic_Skafe's Avatar
 
Location: Queens
I really don't think it's a matter of bad or neglectful parenting at all. Children will always explore themselves and each other in a sexual manner - we live in a digital age and as a result the sexual exploration has also gone digital.

It's easy to chalk it up to bad parenting but I think it's much more so the result of parents who obsess of their children's sexuality so much so that they produce sexually repressed children that are afraid of their own bodies. Those children are much more likely to make bad decisions.

All in all, it's not the end of the world. Just as always, children need a decent education, stern but fair parenting, room to make mistakes, and environment that allows them to communicate what they feel. Webcams haven't made it all that much different.
__________________
"Porn is a zoo of exotic animals that becomes boring upon ownership." -Nersesian
Manic_Skafe is offline  
Old 09-03-2007, 08:43 PM   #8 (permalink)
Banned
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manic_Skafe
It's easy to chalk it up to bad parenting
That's because it's the root of the issue.

As some have stated here, they take an active part in their children's online access, and monitor what access they do have. Their kids, unless doing it at some friend's house, are not nuding it up online. They are acting like parents, not their kids friends. Being friendly and loving has nothing to do with acting like a parent vs. acting like a friend. My parents are very friendly, but they were never my "friends", they were my parents, and that's an important distinction in whether or not you end up with kids who think it's appropriate to do the things we're discussing here.

Last edited by analog; 09-03-2007 at 08:50 PM..
analog is offline  
Old 09-03-2007, 10:18 PM   #9 (permalink)
Junkie
 
kutulu's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by analog
That's because it's the root of the issue.
Actually, that's because it's the lazy thing to do.

Taking an 'active' role, whether it is just careful placement of the computer or being a total Nazi about controlling them doesn't necessarily do shit to protect them. On the other hand, it If you go to such great lengths to control your kid why not go the extra mile and do a daily hymen check before you lock them in their cage. It wouldn't be any less respectful of your kid.

It's funny how people forget what it was like to be young. Doesn't anyone remember partying with the kid who bragged about how their parents tried so hard to control them and had no idea what they were actually up to? The fact is that parents can't know everything their kids are up to and really can only do so much to GUIDE their children.

"Guide" is bolded because that is our job as parents. We aren't here to dominate them or spy on them. Doing that only teaches them that they can't be trusted to make the better choices. We are here to show them how to live their life through example.
kutulu is offline  
Old 09-03-2007, 11:09 PM   #10 (permalink)
Banned
 
kutulu:

Your hyperbole notwithstanding, you seem to suggest that the simple act of keeping computers out of kids' rooms and having a knowledge of their online activities is comparable to prison. All we're saying is there's a minimum of protection a parent could give, and that easily begins with not giving children unlimited, private internet access.

It's not unreasonable to expect that people actually make some effort to parent, rather than sitting the kids in front of the TV and computer all day without any monitoring/supervision at all.

I suppose you'd give young children access to all the uncensored movie channels because you don't want to make them feel contained. We're not talking about having a death grip, just an actual presence and awareness of what's going on.
analog is offline  
Old 09-04-2007, 12:17 AM   #11 (permalink)
Banned
 
Fast Forward's Avatar
 
Location: Tramtária
I have the same opinion of pornography as I do of prostitution.

First it should be deterrmined whether or not society accepts the two. If not, then the producers and their "models" (employed or free lance) should be hunted down. Leave the shopper alone. If the product is on the shelf it's the responisiblity of the authorities - not of the consumer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by analog
All we're saying is there's a minimum of protection a parent could give, and that easily begins with not giving children unlimited, private internet access.

I suppose you'd give young children access to all the uncensored movie channels because you don't want to make them feel contained.
We're talking about parental control of pornography as if we were speaking about keeping small children away from a hot oven. But it is nowhere near the same thing. The oven we need. The pornogarphy we don't.

We want parental control of pornogaphy and uncensored movie channels? Ban it! It is ridiculous to think that pornography is harmful to under-aged BUT that it is necessary for us adults. Baaa!

Last edited by Fast Forward; 09-04-2007 at 12:27 AM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Fast Forward is offline  
Old 09-04-2007, 02:32 AM   #12 (permalink)
Delicious
 
Reese's Avatar
 
I've ran across some of those very questionable pics when browsing some of those TGP sites that have like 500 thumbnails per page. They say their "USC code ####" or whatever compliant but still.. hard for me to believe that.

I think it's pretty hard to control teenagers though. I mean if you trust someone to babysit a 5 year old for a few hours, surely you can trust them at a computer right? I doubt these are the kind of kids that normally have to be watched like a hawk. My generation of my family is a prime example of how the "good" kids got away with murder while the known trouble makers kept getting in trouble for the smallest things because our parents were paying close attention. It's not bad parenting when kids blindside you after they've already proven time and again that they're trustworthy.
__________________
“It is better to be rich and healthy than poor and sick” - Dave Barry
Reese is offline  
Old 09-04-2007, 02:39 AM   #13 (permalink)
 
abaya's Avatar
 
Location: Iceland
Quote:
Originally Posted by analog
Your hyperbole notwithstanding, you seem to suggest that the simple act of keeping computers out of kids' rooms and having a knowledge of their online activities is comparable to prison. All we're saying is there's a minimum of protection a parent could give, and that easily begins with not giving children unlimited, private internet access.

It's not unreasonable to expect that people actually make some effort to parent, rather than sitting the kids in front of the TV and computer all day without any monitoring/supervision at all.

I suppose you'd give young children access to all the uncensored movie channels because you don't want to make them feel contained. We're not talking about having a death grip, just an actual presence and awareness of what's going on.
Y'know, Analog, I don't often agree with you about children... but you are RIGHT ON with this post.

I have no idea what the technological scene will be like when we finally have children who are old enough that we have to worry about this (in 10-15 years, I suppose)... but I'd like to think that ktspktsp and I will be as conscious and informed about their activities as a few of the parents here.

Midnight and ngdawg, I'm glad to know that some parents DO take their job seriously... I'll keep your precautions in mind for when I have to face the same situations. I don't see it as policing at all... this is the kind of discipline and authority that parents ought to have. Not to create a totalitarian state, but to have a household with guidelines that are adhered to... too many kids are missing that basic thing, these days.
__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.

--Khalil Gibran
abaya is offline  
Old 09-04-2007, 02:47 AM   #14 (permalink)
Upright
 
caterpillar's Avatar
 
weird things...
but I'm not sure 14 yo girls will take those porn self-pics theirselves... It could be for money and they could be much elder, but look young because of body shape...
caterpillar is offline  
Old 09-04-2007, 06:37 AM   #15 (permalink)
More Than You Expect
 
Manic_Skafe's Avatar
 
Location: Queens
Quote:
Originally Posted by analog
That's because it's the root of the issue.

As some have stated here, they take an active part in their children's online access, and monitor what access they do have. Their kids, unless doing it at some friend's house, are not nuding it up online. They are acting like parents, not their kids friends. Being friendly and loving has nothing to do with acting like a parent vs. acting like a friend. My parents are very friendly, but they were never my "friends", they were my parents, and that's an important distinction in whether or not you end up with kids who think it's appropriate to do the things we're discussing here.
And you missed my point completely.

Surely there must be parents out there that happily allow their children to pass out in front of a television or a computer so long as the kids are out of there hair. And I'm sure that there's plenty of parents out there that'd rather be their child's friend than take an authoritative parental role. But I have yet to see substantial proof that this style of parenting is not only rampant in most homes today but is also the source of issues like the one we're discussing today.

While everyone may be more than comfortable stating that they were born in the last generation before all parents turned to shit - the real culprits are the parents who would rather employ methods similar to those of Midnight rather than answer the questions their children will eventually have about sex. These children that are raised not to ask questions and not to explore what they feel are the sort that are much more likely to come into a dangerous sexual awakening.

Just as some have said already, there isn't anything you can do to ensure that your kids will do exactly as you'd like them to. All you can do is answer their questions, do your best to give them a good sense of right and wrong, and hope that when they're away they'll make good decisions.
__________________
"Porn is a zoo of exotic animals that becomes boring upon ownership." -Nersesian
Manic_Skafe is offline  
Old 09-04-2007, 11:14 AM   #16 (permalink)
follower of the child's crusade?
 
unfortunately, as long as there are people who want to look at such things, the market will create the images - somehow or other.
__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas
Strange Famous is offline  
Old 09-04-2007, 11:44 AM   #17 (permalink)
will always be an Alyson Hanniganite
 
Bill O'Rights's Avatar
 
Location: In the dust of the archives
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strange Famous
unfortunately, as long as there are people who want to look at such things, the market will create the images - somehow or other.
Well....true. That's just basic supply and demand. But, I think that what analog was getting at is the teeny boppers taking self-pics, for whatever reason. He wonders why the parents were not more in tune with these goings on.

My simple answer is this; parents try to do thier best. Well, most of us anyway. But, we're not omnipotent. We cannot be everywhere, every second of the day. And occasionally, there is the kid that's going to run counter to every bit of upbringing that they ever had. The "Black Sheep", as it were.

Of course you're going to have "parents" that are more than willing to let the school system, TV, and the internet raise thier children. I think, however, that those are the exception...not the rule. Most of us (parents) want to do a good job.
__________________
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony

"Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus

It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.
Bill O'Rights is offline  
Old 09-04-2007, 12:06 PM   #18 (permalink)
Pissing in the cornflakes
 
Ustwo's Avatar
 
Tech savvy teen.

Non-tech savvy parent.

Absolutely no way to stop it, period.

Digital cameras and internet access are far to ubiquitous these days to even attempt to regulate it. Really all a parent could do is try to raise a kid who won't feel the need to do this but you can't stop it, and while there are parents who should be blamed for this kind of thing, how do you draw the line?
__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.
Ustwo is offline  
Old 09-04-2007, 12:07 PM   #19 (permalink)
follower of the child's crusade?
 
well, my answer was a roundabout way of saying I do not blame the parents... I blame the people who pay to look at such things.

At the age of 14, realistically no one can control a person's actions totally, and attempting to do so will just create a greater rebellion. All any parents can try to do is educate someone to make the right decisions, and protect them and guide them as much as they can.

A 14 year old who is internet pornography may well be in every sense a "victim" - but at the same time it is a person capable of a great deal of control over their own destiny.

My feeling is that the appropriate action is to come down very heavily on sites which host such things, and people that download them - the crime is with them. As for the kids - you can blame the parents, their role models, the exploiters, the mass media, any number of things - for most people adolescence is highly sexualised.
__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas
Strange Famous is offline  
Old 09-04-2007, 12:31 PM   #20 (permalink)
Winter is Coming
 
Frosstbyte's Avatar
 
Location: The North
Edit: If you're bored, read my long incoherent mess of a response. If you're not, read Ustwo's, because he said it much better.

Self-taken underage porn and teens having sex really isn't very different than underage drinking or smoking. Our culture has made it taboo on the one hand and glamorous on the other, and either way, supposedly forbidden for people under 18(21). For whatever reason, these conflicting messages end up with lots of kids thinking it's cool to be sexy and naughty and all the rest, so it's really no surprise in the slightest that those who want to have found ways to get themselves out there. It's a VERY small step from the pictures you're likely to see on most high schooler's mySpace accounts to self-taken amateur porn.

Between the generally confused teenage notions of sexuality and the immense simplicity of accessing digital cameras and places to put it, this is no more surprising (nor disturbing) to me than a few 15 year olds getting a twelve pack of beast to drink in someone's basement. They're acting recklessly and foolishly, and should be taught that it's inappropriate behavior, but I think the "punishment" to both the offender and his protectors should be in line with what we do with alcohol. There's none of the dangerous coercion present that we normally associate with "child pornography" so throwing it into the sex-offender category seems totally inappropriate.

Parents ought to be involved (and I think most of them are) but there are limits to what they can do. I think I first navigated myself to porn websites (good old persian kitty) when I was about 12 years old and my parents were PLENTY observant of what I did. It's not too much of a stretch for someone more exhibition instead of voyeur oriented to find their way to an amateur porn post. Kids are good at getting around their parents, even the most overbearing parents. They should be taught values and perspective on sensitive topics-drugs, sex, etc.-but I think, realistically, screaming about how negligent parents are doesn't address the issue.

This has long since entered the realm of incoherent rant. I think the problem isn't parenting, but the mixed messages we send children about sex and whether it's ok or taboo or great or naughty. Like alcohol, making it both taboo and "unavailable" only makes them want it more and those who enjoy exhibitionism for whatever reason will find ways to do it, no matter what parents try to do-short of locking them in a cell.
Frosstbyte is offline  
Old 09-04-2007, 12:39 PM   #21 (permalink)
Here
 
World's King's Avatar
 
Location: Denver City Denver
Yeah... with the influx of all these "See My Girlfriend" sites...


I've seen a lot of questionable pictures. 16yr old girls taking half naked pics of themselves to send to their boyfriends or guys on they net that are most likely in their late 40s. And in sad twist of fate... they end up all over the net so more sick bastards can gaze upon their little bodies while they come all over themselves.


It's a sick world we live in. And I'm kind of liking it. If you're dumb enough to take naked pics of yourself and send them to a random guy on the net you deserve to have them spread all over the place. And thank you for being that dumb.
__________________
heavy is the head that wears the crown
World's King is offline  
Old 09-04-2007, 12:42 PM   #22 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
Where was the failure? Oh boy.
1) The parent. Yes, yes, it's been said, but it is ultimately the responsibility of the parent to raise a child to be a good and responsible person, which includes not throwing up underage nudie pics of yourself. Not only that, but restricting access to things until you know the child can be responsible with such things is very important. There's a reason you don't let your 12 year old drive your new Porsche.
2) The host. If you have an adult website and you're not doing everything you can to ensure that the subjects of your site are legal, you belong in jail. Choosing to not question or require proof of the age of the subjects make it clear your only concern is money and you don't give a shit about exploiting children.
3) The watcher. If you see underage pornography, report it! the ICAC (internet crimes against children) has representation all over the US in many police stations. Send the site to the police and say "Does she look 18?" You can even do it anonymously.
4) The most important: the child. The child has failed her (or even him)self b y posting these pictures.
Willravel is offline  
Old 09-04-2007, 12:45 PM   #23 (permalink)
has all her shots.
 
mixedmedia's Avatar
 
Location: Florida
I tend to fall on the side of Manic_Skafe and Ustwo on this issue.

It would seem as if it's being purported that kids were not engaging in inappropriate sexual activities before the internet and digital cameras. I can assure you, we were.

And no one 'failed me.' There are as many stories out there as there are photographs. Some kids have good parents, some kids don't, some are manipulated into it, some just like it, some do it for boyfriends, some do it for money, some post the pictures themselves, some are posted without their knowledge.

To blame it all on the parents, then one should logically blame every wrong or inappropriate thing that teenagers have ever done on bad parents. Including drinking. Anyone here drink before you were of age? Do you blame your parents? Do you blame your parents for smoking pot? Looking at Hustler magazine? Swearing? Driving fast? Spitting on the sidewalk?

Parents can only reasonably supervise their children so much. And I don't think denying them private internet access, just in case they take nude pictures of themselves, is the answer. In fact, I don't think there is an answer and there never has been.
__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce
mixedmedia is offline  
Old 09-04-2007, 01:23 PM   #24 (permalink)
will always be an Alyson Hanniganite
 
Bill O'Rights's Avatar
 
Location: In the dust of the archives
Quote:
Originally Posted by mixedmedia

To blame it all on the parents, then one should logically blame every wrong or inappropriate thing that teenagers have ever done on bad parents.
Some do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mixedmedia
Anyone here drink before you were of age? Do you blame your parents? Do you blame your parents for smoking pot? Looking at Hustler magazine? Swearing? Driving fast? Spitting on the sidewalk?
No. See, you've gotten it all wrong. It's always the other guy or girl. The one that's into just a little more naughty than you are...were. It's those kids whose parents that we question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mixedmedia
Parents can only reasonably supervise their children so much. I don't think there is an answer and there never has been.
Exactly.
__________________
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony

"Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus

It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.
Bill O'Rights is offline  
Old 09-04-2007, 03:57 PM   #25 (permalink)
peekaboo
 
ngdawg's Avatar
 
Location: on the back, bitch
Quote:
Originally Posted by mixedmedia
I tend to fall on the side of Manic_Skafe and Ustwo on this issue.

It would seem as if it's being purported that kids were not engaging in inappropriate sexual activities before the internet and digital cameras. I can assure you, we were.
I didn't. I was too afraid of my father's wrath and, well, too ugly any way. But daddy was always in the back of my mind or, sometimes, in the car following me(yes, he really did do that once!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mixedmedia
And no one 'failed me.' There are as many stories out there as there are photographs. Some kids have good parents, some kids don't, some are manipulated into it, some just like it, some do it for boyfriends, some do it for money, some post the pictures themselves, some are posted without their knowledge.

To blame it all on the parents, then one should logically blame every wrong or inappropriate thing that teenagers have ever done on bad parents. Including drinking. Anyone here drink before you were of age? Do you blame your parents? Do you blame your parents for smoking pot? Looking at Hustler magazine? Swearing? Driving fast? Spitting on the sidewalk?

Parents can only reasonably supervise their children so much. And I don't think denying them private internet access, just in case they take nude pictures of themselves, is the answer. In fact, I don't think there is an answer and there never has been.
My dad had this thought: If I'm going to start drinking, I was going to drink at home and not sneak it, so, at age 12, I had my first beer. A little juice glass half-full to wash down the spaghetti, but it was beer. I was allowed wine on holidays. Did I sneak booze? Yea, once. And again, Daddy's image stayed in my mind, so once was enough.
Today, while picking up my daughter, I noticed her friend walking hand in hand with a boy. This girl comes from an uber-religious family(someone from their church told my daughter, who was visiting that, "God does not approve of that Goth stuff" when noticing her being all in black). I have told my daughter no boyfriends until 16, but dating and hanging out is ok. We both made the comment that this friend will probably be sexually active within a year. I say that to say this: Repression and forbidding things makes them that much more enticing. My dad had porno, Playboys, etc. tucked away but never fully hidden. He had his rules, but he wasn't a total prude(mom was).
Now, we have satellite with Showtime and TMC, which show softcore after 10pm. I'm not going to 'forbid' or put on parental controls for my teenagers, (which would probably get arguments from friends) for the same reason my father didn't hide his porn or booze-overfeeding the curiosity monster.
Now, if I ever found out my daughter posted her nude self anywhere, that'd be a different story for a lot of reasons. But I have tried to raise my kids with two caveats: Earned trust(both ways) and consequence of choices. I absolutely refuse to be talked about in some future psychology session as being 'blamed' for something they chose to do.
__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.
ngdawg is offline  
Old 09-04-2007, 08:29 PM   #26 (permalink)
Banned
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mixedmedia
It would seem as if it's being purported that kids were not engaging in inappropriate sexual activities before the internet and digital cameras.
It might seem that way if you read it with a defensive stance, perhaps.

Quote:
To blame it all on the parents, then one should logically blame every wrong or inappropriate thing that teenagers have ever done on bad parents. Including drinking. Anyone here drink before you were of age? Do you blame your parents? Do you blame your parents for smoking pot? Looking at Hustler magazine? Swearing? Driving fast? Spitting on the sidewalk?
I'll have to get out my potato sack, because I just found the biggest and most slippery slope to date. I do enjoy a good slide.

This thread isn't about smoking, or drinking, or sex, or drugs, or rock and roll, or any of the other items in your lengthy systemic hyperbole. It's about underage children posting self-taken pornographic pictures online. My commentary and assertions to that end of course only apply and extend to the topic of discussion at hand, and not to anything you choose tack on later.

I didn't say "don't let your daughter have a computer in her room and she'll never smoke, drink, get laid, party, freebase cocaine naked and catch on fire..." I, and everything else in this thread, are talking about the topic of this thread, not every teen issue in existence.

Quote:
And I don't think denying them private internet access, just in case they take nude pictures of themselves, is the answer.
...denying "private internet access"?... for a teenager? You say that like a computer in the bedroom for private internet access is a basic human right. Yes, teens deserve a level of privacy to live their lives, but that doesn't mean all forms of privacy are paramount to parenting. There's a point at which privacy is sacrificed for parenting. You may as well say a 14 year old should be free to spread for whomever she likes, since she deserves "privacy". "Privacy" does not apply to everything, everywhere- it has a reasonable limitation to responsible parents when safety (such as making sure your child isn't being preyed upon and giving away inappropriate personal information) or other forms of parenting are needed.

If a young teen girl was found to have been sexually assaulted by a pedophile, because their parents let her do whatever she wanted on the computer in the name of privacy, there would be a swift and rightful outcry against said parents for not taking any steps to safeguard their child.

I can't believe I'm the one to have to say this, but... think of the children, everyone.
analog is offline  
Old 09-04-2007, 08:46 PM   #27 (permalink)
Delusional... but in a funny way
 
TotalMILF's Avatar
 
Location: deeee-TROIT!!!
I'm with ngdawg on this. If you properly educate your kids (not just about sex and the internet but also about drinking, drugs, porn, etc.) and give them the freedom to make their own decisions, then they're much less likely to do stupid things behind your back. The thrill of disobedience is gone. Like the dawg said about beer--if they know they can have beer at home watching the football game, then what motivation do they have to sneak beer? It's all about open communication and trust--I want my son to be able to ask me anything about everything.

Now, being that my son isn't even two yet, I can't say I actually have experience putting this plan into action. But it worked for me and my parents, so I have high hopes that it'll work for me and my kids
__________________
"I'm sorry, all I heard was blah blah blah, I'm a dirty tramp."
TotalMILF is offline  
Old 09-04-2007, 09:17 PM   #28 (permalink)
peekaboo
 
ngdawg's Avatar
 
Location: on the back, bitch
Quote:
Originally Posted by TotalMILF
I'm with ngdawg on this. If you properly educate your kids (not just about sex and the internet but also about drinking, drugs, porn, etc.) and give them the freedom to make their own decisions, then they're much less likely to do stupid things behind your back. The thrill of disobedience is gone. Like the dawg said about beer--if they know they can have beer at home watching the football game, then what motivation do they have to sneak beer? It's all about open communication and trust--I want my son to be able to ask me anything about everything.

Now, being that my son isn't even two yet, I can't say I actually have experience putting this plan into action. But it worked for me and my parents, so I have high hopes that it'll work for me and my kids
It may sound weird, but not being two yet is not too early. Kids, babies, instinctly learn action/consequence. They cry, we feed them or change them based on our perception of that cry. They act good, they get rewarded, act bad, get disciplined. It's communication and at some point, too many times, it stops. "Because I said so" may have it's place, but not as a repressive measure-that's when the real trouble starts. Conversely, giving a kid free rein gets the same negative results. I'd be willing to bet that those girls flashing themselves on the internet are about 50/50 repressed/spoiled.
__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.
ngdawg is offline  
Old 09-04-2007, 10:32 PM   #29 (permalink)
Psycho
 
Hyacinthe's Avatar
 
Location: Australia
I guess I look at this from the other side only being a few years older then these kids and growing up in the same environment as many of them.

I don't think the blame can be laid purely on the parents or society or the people that download the pictures. Some of the blame has to go to the children themselves that are doing it. Sure they're 13 - 14 - 15 but does that give them any more of an excuse for making a poor decision in life? The amount of publicity that things like this are given in the media today and in school (least here in Australia) there is no excuse for putting anything up on the net that you wouldn't want people to see, you know that it will certainly be sent around to different sites. Therefore I don't believe in the "he said he wouldn't show anyone" accidental porn leakage excuses of these people.

My own parents have always allowed me and my siblings an almost insane amount of freedom and yet none of us have done anything that I would consider particularly bad. The reasoning behind this was simply that they trusted us, they made sure we were informed of the consequences of our actions and then if we decided to make the decision to go through with it we had to face those consequences. Throughtout highschool I was allowed to spend the night at friends houses with a group of boys even if their parents weren't there, I had a computer in my room with no parental controls over it or what use I made of it (this is with an internet connection) and other such things as that. If I had wanted to make porn of myself via a webcam, videocamera etc I could have done so.

The way I look at it you do something stupid you'll pay for it whether it's being picked up for underage drinking or having porn photoes you took for your boyfriend being leaked over the net. Sure it's a hard lesson but most of those lfielong ones are.
__________________
"I want to be remembered as the girl who always smiles even when her heart is broken... and the one that could brighten up your day even if she couldnt brighten her own"

"Her emotions were clear waters. You could see the scarring and pockmarks at the bottom of the pool, but it was just a part of her landscape – the consequences of others’ actions in which she claimed no part."
Hyacinthe is offline  
Old 09-05-2007, 02:55 AM   #30 (permalink)
has all her shots.
 
mixedmedia's Avatar
 
Location: Florida
Quote:
Originally Posted by analog
It might seem that way if you read it with a defensive stance, perhaps.
ha, oh yeah, yeah...



Quote:
I'll have to get out my potato sack, because I just found the biggest and most slippery slope to date. I do enjoy a good slide.

This thread isn't about smoking, or drinking, or sex, or drugs, or rock and roll, or any of the other items in your lengthy systemic hyperbole. It's about underage children posting self-taken pornographic pictures online. My commentary and assertions to that end of course only apply and extend to the topic of discussion at hand, and not to anything you choose tack on later.

I didn't say "don't let your daughter have a computer in her room and she'll never smoke, drink, get laid, party, freebase cocaine naked and catch on fire..." I, and everything else in this thread, are talking about the topic of this thread, not every teen issue in existence.
Did I say that the thread was about those things? Did I say anything about computers leading to drug use? The comparison was obvious. I deny that parents are always responsible for the things their children do. As well as for the things that they do not do. Parents aren't even always responsible for the good things their children do. Ever hear about good kids coming out of bad homes?

I do believe...yes, you're using some hyperbole right there to argue my point.


Quote:
...denying "private internet access"?... for a teenager? You say that like a computer in the bedroom for private internet access is a basic human right. Yes, teens deserve a level of privacy to live their lives, but that doesn't mean all forms of privacy are paramount to parenting. There's a point at which privacy is sacrificed for parenting. You may as well say a 14 year old should be free to spread for whomever she likes, since she deserves "privacy". "Privacy" does not apply to everything, everywhere- it has a reasonable limitation to responsible parents when safety (such as making sure your child isn't being preyed upon and giving away inappropriate personal information) or other forms of parenting are needed.

If a young teen girl was found to have been sexually assaulted by a pedophile, because their parents let her do whatever she wanted on the computer in the name of privacy, there would be a swift and rightful outcry against said parents for not taking any steps to safeguard their child.

I can't believe I'm the one to have to say this, but... think of the children, everyone.
I didn't say any of those things. My point is that you shouldn't give children the impression that they are to be denied things because you think (as a parent) they will do something wrong with them. Believe me, my kids had every reason in the world to flip out and do all kinds of crazy shit, but they have not. And I don't attribute all of it to me. Some of my nieces and nephews who haven't had it anywhere near as rough have turned out to be very promiscuous and drug addicts. I don't think you can chalk human behavior up to just parenting. Sometimes, yes, but not always.
__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce
mixedmedia is offline  
Old 09-05-2007, 09:42 AM   #31 (permalink)
follower of the child's crusade?
 
It's pretty difficult for people who deliberately seek out and view pornography to make a moral argument that the subject of the pornography is being exploited and that something must be done about it, and if you ask me the parents are to blame, etc etc.
__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas
Strange Famous is offline  
Old 09-05-2007, 10:41 AM   #32 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
there seems to be a few issues at play here.
i cant always tell them apart, post to post, so i'll make a little list.

pornography is what it is because of the way in which it is framed.
the same imagery can be pitched a number of ways depending on the situation into which it is placed--so (a) explorations of one's sexuality using a camera is not necessarily porn but (b) lots of different types of exploration can be understood as pornographic, one way or another, if they are framed that way. if a 15 year old kid explores a camera, what to do with it, and crosses that with exploration of sex there is nothing about this that makes it (a) interesting or (b) provocative.

the interesting is particularly elusive.


but if you put the same imagery in a "barely legal" area, you frame it in terms of norm or taboo violation and THEN it becomes pornographic.

so if that's true, then it follows that the problem is less the making of such imagery than it is the ways in which that imagery gets used.

of course this gets more complicated in that it is entirely possible that kids who play these camera games are emulating porn films.

either way, this stuff crosses with some social neurosis.

personally, i think these sorts of "problems" build on themselves: the horror reinforces the taboo which reinforces all the reasons why breaking it can be fun.

perhaps it'd make sense to talk to your young cameraman about the difference between how the same imagery looks to those involved with making it and how it might look to someone who surfs into it as a function of a more general predelection for those tedious porn narratives involving very young people. but that'd mean you have to confront the simple fact of your child's sexuality.
which i expect isnt something folk want to go charging into. awkwardness.

and then there's the possibility that your young cameraman or burgeoning net starlet or star might like being reduced to a thing for the mastubatory pleasure of invisible strangers.

complex awkward space, that.

========
thinking about this, i can see what i'd prefer to imagine i'd do in the abstract, and then i consider how i'd probably react in real-time.
luckily, i dealt with this matter a while ago by not having kids.

this is one of those unenviable situations for parents.
they seem to have no easy choices about how to proceed.

yanking the laptop, trashing the equipment wont change anything.
the conversation about objectification and self-objectification might entail all kinds of other possible disclosures. i'd like to imagine that i'd be able to force myself into that kind of space, but frankly, in reality, i dunno.

convincing your kids that their "work" is tedious isnt a great idea. stomping on creativity, even low wattage, because you as a parent are afraid of what it might mean isnt good. i'd probably end up trying to convince my young camera-man to make other types of films, or my young net starlet or star to do something else. which of course would position me as one of those icky understanding parents, like dustin hoffman's character in "i heart huckabees"
loud shirt and all.

and such imagery posted to the net tends to float into places structured by adults with all kinds of curious fixations and since any given piece of footage is so open with respect to meanings, that is another problem.




um...


i dont know.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Last edited by roachboy; 09-05-2007 at 10:44 AM..
roachboy is offline  
Old 09-14-2007, 12:30 PM   #33 (permalink)
Psycho
 
Jenna's Avatar
 
Location: Wisconsin
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manic_Skafe
While everyone may be more than comfortable stating that they were born in the last generation before all parents turned to shit - the real culprits are the parents who would rather employ methods similar to those of Midnight rather than answer the questions their children will eventually have about sex. These children that are raised not to ask questions and not to explore what they feel are the sort that are much more likely to come into a dangerous sexual awakening.
So true! I'm the poster child for this. My parents always viewed sex as such a taboo subject, and they never thought their child would get into it. Well, I lost my virginity when I was 13 and was doing a lot more than just having intercourse when I was 12 years old.

I never got "the talk," and bringing up subjects about sex were so awkward. I always had to find out things on my own.
Jenna is offline  
Old 09-14-2007, 01:07 PM   #34 (permalink)
Confused Adult
 
Shauk's Avatar
 
Location: Spokane, WA
Quote:
Originally Posted by jennaboo4u
I also think parents need to be informing kids about myspace. I see a lot of girls out there with half naked pictures who aren't 18 yet, and there are a lot of girls who are barely 13 and have them. At least make sure they make their profiles private and leave out any personal contact information.

well, myspace automatically sets all profiles 18 and under to private, and makes it so you have to know thier 1st and last name to send them a message anyway I believe. didn't used to be this way but it is now.

good move on their part. Cant count on parents to instill decency and morality into each and every person who uses myspace.
Shauk is offline  
Old 09-14-2007, 03:28 PM   #35 (permalink)
The Reverend Side Boob
 
Bear Cub's Avatar
 
Location: Nofe Curolina
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shauk
well, myspace automatically sets all profiles 18 and under to private, and makes it so you have to know thier 1st and last name to send them a message anyway I believe. didn't used to be this way but it is now.

good move on their part. Cant count on parents to instill decency and morality into each and every person who uses myspace.
That's just to cover their asses. Just think of how many 15 and 16 year olds just pick a later year off the dropdown list.
Bear Cub is offline  
Old 09-14-2007, 04:19 PM   #36 (permalink)
Junkie
 
filtherton's Avatar
 
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
I would like to echo mm, ustwo, skafe, etc. It is easy to blame parents for everything that a child does. It's like blaming the president for the economy. Sure, he plays a role, he affects policy, public opinion. What he can't do is magically raise the gdp.

Anyone who thinks that a parent has absolute control over a child is obviously not a parent. Yep, i went there. Anyone who thinks that any possibly undesirable act an underage person might engage in is the result of bad parenting is obviously not a very astute observer of human behavior. Children, especially teenagers do stupid things. You all did stupid things when you were a teenager, or you regret not doing stupid shit when you were a teenager. Playing it safe is boring and taking risk means doing something with uncertain consequences and probably retrospectively stupid. Brinkmanship is what being a teenager is all about. A parent's job is to strongly encourage their child to do right, but also help their child not fuck up their life completely in the process of doing stupid shit.

Children, especially teenagers, aren't automotons. There isn't some predictable combination of discipline, structure, etc that will make them so. They often do what they want to do, and they don't always listen to their parents.
filtherton is offline  
Old 09-14-2007, 09:29 PM   #37 (permalink)
Confused Adult
 
Shauk's Avatar
 
Location: Spokane, WA
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChassisWelder
That's just to cover their asses. Just think of how many 15 and 16 year olds just pick a later year off the dropdown list.
yes but it's absurd to expect more. They can only do so much before they become invasive.
Shauk is offline  
Old 09-22-2007, 04:30 AM   #38 (permalink)
Junkie
 
james t kirk's Avatar
 
Location: Toronto
It's going to happen.

Teenage sex is nothing new, the medium is new, so perhaps it seems shocking.

As someone who doesn't have kids, I marvel at my sister and her friends who all have a passle of children.

If anything, those kids are OVER protected, and OVER regulated. My sister and her soccer mom crew are without a doubt, "MomSters" extraordinaire. They all live in wilds of Burlington in 4000 square foot houses, with an SUV in every driveway and green fencing as far as the eye can see. My niece is 11. She's never walked to school. She gets dropped off (along with her brother who is 7), she gets picked up. She gets driven everywhere, her time is regulated. She's enrolled in so much extracaricular stuff, she has very very little free time. My sister and brother in law are complete slaves to their children's schedules.

I guess my point is, that from what I can see, their lives are way more regulated than mine was. I used to walk to school every day from the age of 6 till I finished. The odd time if it was pouring rain, I might get a ride depending on what shift my dad was on. We rode bikes without helmets, we went to the construction sites after school and threw "dirt bombs" at each other's heads, we went to scout camp and engaged in survival games that would make the Michigan Militia knod thier heads in approval. We used to climb 8 foot fences into the drive in theatre, and we took the bus downtown to play pin ball and go to Wendys at age 12. Oh, and we tried to kiss the girls but they would never let us. By 16, we managed to convince the girls to take their pants off.

Hey wait, some things are still the same! There may be hope after all.

I think what shocks us older folks is that we ARE older and a girl of 14 or 15 seems so young (and she is). We know AT OUR AGE that they don't know jack about what's involved with what they are doing and they don't have the ability to cope with the repercussions of what they are doing (Not that some of my friends my age even do.) But when you are 14 or 15, you think you know everything. (I certainly did.) Truth is, you know fuck all, but you won't know that till you are 30 plus years old yourself.

Last edited by james t kirk; 09-22-2007 at 04:36 AM..
james t kirk is offline  
Old 09-22-2007, 05:20 AM   #39 (permalink)
Let's put a smile on that face
 
blahblah454's Avatar
 
Location: On the road...
Well said james t kirk. Well said indeed.
blahblah454 is offline  
Old 09-22-2007, 11:45 AM   #40 (permalink)
Banned
 
It's interesting that this thread kept meandering towards discussing teenage sex, when that's not at all what it's about. It's predictable, though, because the premise of the thread was calling out the practices of bad parents.

Parents are quick to squelch discussion about proper parenting... because when logic says "doing x, y, and z makes you an idiot of a parent" and they, themselves, do x, y, or z, they have to ignore that logic and try to change the subject.

It's like bringing up the idiocy of smoking in front of kids. Everyone in the room is ok with someone saying, "smoking in front of your kids is not only terribly bad for their health, but makes it look acceptable for them to do" until you get the one parent who DOES smoke in front of their kids, and then you're an asshole for "telling someone how to raise their kids". lol

Considering the entire negative point of the opening post was parents giving their kids unrestricted, unsupervised, limitless internet access on a personal computer, I'm curious how anyone can justify to themselves that "doing what you can" would not include keeping all computer access to central areas of the home where they can't be doing shit like this.
analog is offline  
 

Tags
amateur, children, pornographers, selfpic, underage

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:56 AM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360