Forums > Social Discussion > Sexualisation of children.
Login/Join to ParticipateBRONZE Member
old hand
1,107 posts
Location: In a test pit, Mackay, Australia
old hand
1,107 posts
Location: In a test pit, Mackay, Australia
Posted:
Is anyone else disturbed by this trend that has emerged for dressing small children in clothes bearing suggestive messages? A tour around the kid's section in any store will turn up t-shirts reading "So many boys, so little time..." or "I'm wild, tame me." I have even seen ones with "4 Play" and the ilk, coming in sizes designed for five year olds.
The implications are probably beyond all but the most precocious child, but really, do the parents think it's cute to have this kind of stuff on their child?
Some shoe shops sell platform and heeled shoes for tiny feet, I've seen butt floss/g-strings/thongs (not the foot sort, Australians note) for ages 7-10. Make-up now comes endorsed by pre-teen idols to sell it to children.
Whether it's by what they see on TV and their pester-power, or sadly misguided adults, it seems that the age when a child becomes something else is becoming younger and younger.
Is anyone else disturbed by this trend that has emerged for dressing small children in clothes bearing suggestive messages? A tour around the kid's section in any store will turn up t-shirts reading "So many boys, so little time..." or "I'm wild, tame me." I have even seen ones with "4 Play" and the ilk, coming in sizes designed for five year olds.
The implications are probably beyond all but the most precocious child, but really, do the parents think it's cute to have this kind of stuff on their child?
Some shoe shops sell platform and heeled shoes for tiny feet, I've seen butt floss/g-strings/thongs (not the foot sort, Australians note) for ages 7-10. Make-up now comes endorsed by pre-teen idols to sell it to children.
Whether it's by what they see on TV and their pester-power, or sadly misguided adults, it seems that the age when a child becomes something else is becoming younger and younger.
There is a slight possibility that I am not actually right all of the time.
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
6,942 posts
Location: London, UK
Carpal \'Tunnel
6,942 posts
Location: London, UK
Posted:
i dont go with you on that joe
id say a LARGE amount of people have had the threat of a spank.. i rarely had it because i knew it hurt and i didnt want hurt..
im not violent and most people who had that threat weren't
yes parents who use it regularly are abusing their child but the threat when the kid misbehaves from a young age and maybe once or twice a year at most will help the child learn disapline
i think a lot of the 'invincible complex' comes from kids not getting hurt by others when they're young, we all hate the idea of pain. but if i child doesnt realise that others can hurt it and it can hurt others it may not realise until too late - that is more to blaim than violent games IMHO
most kids who have been hurt can play a violent game and thing - i wont do this it hurts. id say its the ones who are wrapped in cotton wool that do the most damage because they dont know they can hurt or kill another.
as for kids being worse i still disagree with that
society just lets them get away with more
i wasnt allowed to stay out late but if i could get away with it i would have
and im sure kids 100 years ago would have done the same
but there are less restraints on kids and they grow up quicker so they push them further faster
its mainly the society i think rather than parents - all kids grow up quick no matter what their up-bringing is like. its because kids are more aware. any child now can look around the net or TV and find out whats going on in the world - and kids will they will pick up in it from parents and others sub consiously and it worries them
they feel they have to grow up quicker to cope. i mean ive been worrying about having enough money from the age of 14 because of advertising and because of news etc. thats getting younger as children feel they have to be adults to cope with the world.
we wrap them in cotton wool from each other and expose them to the world at large at the same time.
i dont go with you on that joe
id say a LARGE amount of people have had the threat of a spank.. i rarely had it because i knew it hurt and i didnt want hurt..
im not violent and most people who had that threat weren't
yes parents who use it regularly are abusing their child but the threat when the kid misbehaves from a young age and maybe once or twice a year at most will help the child learn disapline
i think a lot of the 'invincible complex' comes from kids not getting hurt by others when they're young, we all hate the idea of pain. but if i child doesnt realise that others can hurt it and it can hurt others it may not realise until too late - that is more to blaim than violent games IMHO
most kids who have been hurt can play a violent game and thing - i wont do this it hurts. id say its the ones who are wrapped in cotton wool that do the most damage because they dont know they can hurt or kill another.
as for kids being worse i still disagree with that
society just lets them get away with more
i wasnt allowed to stay out late but if i could get away with it i would have
and im sure kids 100 years ago would have done the same
but there are less restraints on kids and they grow up quicker so they push them further faster
its mainly the society i think rather than parents - all kids grow up quick no matter what their up-bringing is like. its because kids are more aware. any child now can look around the net or TV and find out whats going on in the world - and kids will they will pick up in it from parents and others sub consiously and it worries them
they feel they have to grow up quicker to cope. i mean ive been worrying about having enough money from the age of 14 because of advertising and because of news etc. thats getting younger as children feel they have to be adults to cope with the world.
we wrap them in cotton wool from each other and expose them to the world at large at the same time.
back
GOLD Member
Pooh-Bah
2,109 posts
Location: Philadelphia, PA - USA
Pooh-Bah
2,109 posts
Location: Philadelphia, PA - USA
Posted:
I dunno... I think its kinda hot
I dunno... I think its kinda hot
Let's turn those old bridges we crossed into ashes.
We'll blaze a new trail,
and torch the rough patches.
-Me
BRONZE Member
1 + 1 = 3
3,540 posts
Location: Bristol UK
1 + 1 = 3
3,540 posts
Location: Bristol UK
Posted:
Dude! Careful what you say. You may be joking, and if you are, make it known. That sort of thing is highly illegal and not the sort of thing to joke about on the internet.
Dude! Careful what you say. You may be joking, and if you are, make it known. That sort of thing is highly illegal and not the sort of thing to joke about on the internet.
Empty your mind. Be formless, Shapeless, like Water.
Put Water into a cup, it becomes the cup, put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle, put water into a teapot, it becomes the teapot.
Water can flow, or it can Crash.
Be Water My Friend.
Internet Hate Machine
10,530 posts
Location: They seek him here, they seek him there...
10,530 posts
Location: They seek him here, they seek him there...
Posted:
*Especially* on the Internet.
*Especially* on the Internet.
The existance of flamethrowers says that someone, somewhere, at sometime said "I need to set that thing on fire, but it's too far away."
small member
116 posts
Location: Hastings
116 posts
Location: Hastings
Posted:
I must be talking to some people of the older generation that have had rare experiences then. It sounded rough as f**k back in those days. And I'd expect the media has alot to do with why we hear about alot of the crap that goes on.
I got whoopped BAD as a kid. My family never broke a bone or made me bleed. I was probably misguided all the way up untill my mid to late teens. I never shyed away from violence as a result.
Now I abhore violence and bullys(a year ago I cryed myself to sleep after I kicked the crap out of a big worthless thug). I'm like this regardless of being disciplined as a youngin. I will always take the place of the softer more gentle persons when it comes to violence. Theres a martyr in everyone.
Sayin that I don't think I'd ever have to smack my kids if I have any. There are other (better)ways to deal with misbehaviour.
And they sure as hell ain't getting thongs when they're 10! Its the chavs, I know it. thats the difference between the 40s and the youth of today.
Edit: I just remebered a conversation I had with an old boy once. Essentially when he was a kid there was NO youth culture. in those days you went from a child to an adult. no teenager. I think he even said that that word din't even exist when he was a boy. It was the advent of rock n' roll music in the 50s that changed all that.
EDITED_BY: Colin J (1126996645)
Written by:
Doc, I have to disagree with you there. As far as I'm aware (from reading books from the time) schoolchildren did NOT go around knifing each other and mouthing off at 6th formers during the 1940s. I'm sure every generation has complained about the "Youth of today" since time immemorial, but as far as I'm aware, the last time gangs of teens patrolled the streets looking to beat people up, it was at the collapse of the Roman Empire (Or possibly the 80s
AS far as I'm aware, things have grown progressively worse since the 1980s.
I must be talking to some people of the older generation that have had rare experiences then. It sounded rough as f**k back in those days. And I'd expect the media has alot to do with why we hear about alot of the crap that goes on.
I got whoopped BAD as a kid. My family never broke a bone or made me bleed. I was probably misguided all the way up untill my mid to late teens. I never shyed away from violence as a result.
Now I abhore violence and bullys(a year ago I cryed myself to sleep after I kicked the crap out of a big worthless thug). I'm like this regardless of being disciplined as a youngin. I will always take the place of the softer more gentle persons when it comes to violence. Theres a martyr in everyone.
Sayin that I don't think I'd ever have to smack my kids if I have any. There are other (better)ways to deal with misbehaviour.
And they sure as hell ain't getting thongs when they're 10! Its the chavs, I know it. thats the difference between the 40s and the youth of today.
Edit: I just remebered a conversation I had with an old boy once. Essentially when he was a kid there was NO youth culture. in those days you went from a child to an adult. no teenager. I think he even said that that word din't even exist when he was a boy. It was the advent of rock n' roll music in the 50s that changed all that.
EDITED_BY: Colin J (1126996645)
GOLD Member
Pooh-Bah
2,109 posts
Location: Philadelphia, PA - USA
Pooh-Bah
2,109 posts
Location: Philadelphia, PA - USA
Posted:
Heh, yeah... Was a joke... But it wouldnt be as funny if I didnt make people think it wasnt... At least for 3 posts
Heh, yeah... Was a joke... But it wouldnt be as funny if I didnt make people think it wasnt... At least for 3 posts
Let's turn those old bridges we crossed into ashes.
We'll blaze a new trail,
and torch the rough patches.
-Me
GOLD Member
Pooh-Bah
2,109 posts
Location: Philadelphia, PA - USA
Pooh-Bah
2,109 posts
Location: Philadelphia, PA - USA
Posted:
And for the record, saying such things are not illegal... Especially on the internet. Now, perhaps if I had some child pornography and I went bragging about it on a public forum there could be some repercussions but joking about kids wearing sexy clothes is hardly gonna put me in jail.
And for the record, saying such things are not illegal... Especially on the internet. Now, perhaps if I had some child pornography and I went bragging about it on a public forum there could be some repercussions but joking about kids wearing sexy clothes is hardly gonna put me in jail.
Let's turn those old bridges we crossed into ashes.
We'll blaze a new trail,
and torch the rough patches.
-Me
Check ya later
500 posts
Location: Lower Shaw Farm
500 posts
Location: Lower Shaw Farm
Posted:
no, it wont put you in jail, but i think its sick to joke about that kind of stuff, and i dont even know who you are but anyone who makes matters like this into a cheap laugh makes all my non-violent values fly straight out the window. ya get me?
anyway, i live in a town that has the highest teen pregnancy rate in britain (or did have) and i have to say, i agree with all of you on the point of sexualisation of children. thongs, ´sexy t-shirts´, make-up, it is all so very wrong. the government in britain is supposedly putting all this effort into stopping ´kiddy porn´ but they are missing the key point: stop all the commercial bullstuff that is aimed at kids. its just not on!
also, i dont think people can say it has got worse in this generation, and in the same post say that it is the parents fault. i mean, where the hell did their parents get it from? and as for discipline, i was never hit as a kid and i would never hit my kid (when i have one). and, loves the circus, you dont need a degree in child psycology to know that hitting another human being (child or not) is simply wrong. if from a young age you teach your child that violence is wrong, then that is the way they will live their life. if you are a good parent, your child will have respect, trust, belief, and agreement with what you teach them. this way, if you tell them violence is wrong, they will trust, believe, and agree with that, whereas if you hit them, just once, that will be planted in their mind, and even if it disciplines them, they will then think violence is ok. in my opinion, (probably just because this is what my parents taught me) the punishment should fit the crime. i.e. if i come home late i have to come home earlier the next night.
sorry about that, its meant to be about sexualisation of kids, not discipline
no, it wont put you in jail, but i think its sick to joke about that kind of stuff, and i dont even know who you are but anyone who makes matters like this into a cheap laugh makes all my non-violent values fly straight out the window. ya get me?
anyway, i live in a town that has the highest teen pregnancy rate in britain (or did have) and i have to say, i agree with all of you on the point of sexualisation of children. thongs, ´sexy t-shirts´, make-up, it is all so very wrong. the government in britain is supposedly putting all this effort into stopping ´kiddy porn´ but they are missing the key point: stop all the commercial bullstuff that is aimed at kids. its just not on!
also, i dont think people can say it has got worse in this generation, and in the same post say that it is the parents fault. i mean, where the hell did their parents get it from? and as for discipline, i was never hit as a kid and i would never hit my kid (when i have one). and, loves the circus, you dont need a degree in child psycology to know that hitting another human being (child or not) is simply wrong. if from a young age you teach your child that violence is wrong, then that is the way they will live their life. if you are a good parent, your child will have respect, trust, belief, and agreement with what you teach them. this way, if you tell them violence is wrong, they will trust, believe, and agree with that, whereas if you hit them, just once, that will be planted in their mind, and even if it disciplines them, they will then think violence is ok. in my opinion, (probably just because this is what my parents taught me) the punishment should fit the crime. i.e. if i come home late i have to come home earlier the next night.
sorry about that, its meant to be about sexualisation of kids, not discipline
Jake the Juggler
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
My dad grew up in the '30's and guess what?
Yes they did. I have no idea what a 6th-former is, but my dad's friends' idea of fun was to lean full garbage cans against people's front doors and ring the bell. And they were the good kids.
According to my father, who would be 84 now (died at 81), the only thing that really ever changed was drugs, which appeared in the '60's.
Read the Decameron. It's hundreds of years old. Really, those same 46 chromosomes are hundreds of thousands of years old. They've been up to the same nonsense all that time.
*edit* Oh, know what else they had then that they don't really have nowadays? Brass knuckles. That's a f*ing brutal weapon. One of my dad's friends face was messed up forever because of brass knuckles.
EDITED_BY: Doc Lightning (1127023391)
Written by: Sethis
Doc, I have to disagree with you there. As far as I'm aware (from reading books from the time) schoolchildren did NOT go around knifing each other and mouthing off at 6th formers during the 1940s.
My dad grew up in the '30's and guess what?
Yes they did. I have no idea what a 6th-former is, but my dad's friends' idea of fun was to lean full garbage cans against people's front doors and ring the bell. And they were the good kids.
According to my father, who would be 84 now (died at 81), the only thing that really ever changed was drugs, which appeared in the '60's.
Read the Decameron. It's hundreds of years old. Really, those same 46 chromosomes are hundreds of thousands of years old. They've been up to the same nonsense all that time.
*edit* Oh, know what else they had then that they don't really have nowadays? Brass knuckles. That's a f*ing brutal weapon. One of my dad's friends face was messed up forever because of brass knuckles.
EDITED_BY: Doc Lightning (1127023391)
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
GOLD Member
Self-Flagellation Expert
3,414 posts
Location: Bogged at CG, Australia
Self-Flagellation Expert
3,414 posts
Location: Bogged at CG, Australia
Posted:
I take your point there, lightning. There's always been kids running amok.
Personally, i think that the seriousness of the running amok is getting worse. There's a serious difference between leaning a can of garbage on someone's door, and ringing the bell, and ringing the bell then belting the daylights out of them. I don't remember ever hearing any cases of the former, but there's plenty of the latter going on nowadays.
I think it might be a case of layering, as you might call it. What we do as kids is seen by the younger generation, who take it a little further, who's kids take it a little further etc etc.
As for the sexualisation of children, i'm in two minds. Part of me thinks 'that is definitely wrong, no 12 year old should be wearing a miniskirt and heels', and another part of me thinks 'well, if that's how you look at yourself, then go for it. but don't complain about the consequences.' I know the second opinion is a whole lot less right than the first, but sometimes, people need to make mistakes to learn from.
I take your point there, lightning. There's always been kids running amok.
Personally, i think that the seriousness of the running amok is getting worse. There's a serious difference between leaning a can of garbage on someone's door, and ringing the bell, and ringing the bell then belting the daylights out of them. I don't remember ever hearing any cases of the former, but there's plenty of the latter going on nowadays.
I think it might be a case of layering, as you might call it. What we do as kids is seen by the younger generation, who take it a little further, who's kids take it a little further etc etc.
As for the sexualisation of children, i'm in two minds. Part of me thinks 'that is definitely wrong, no 12 year old should be wearing a miniskirt and heels', and another part of me thinks 'well, if that's how you look at yourself, then go for it. but don't complain about the consequences.' I know the second opinion is a whole lot less right than the first, but sometimes, people need to make mistakes to learn from.
"beg beg grovel beg grovel"
"master"
--FSA
"There was an arse there, i couldn't help myself"
--Rougie
SILVER Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
2,666 posts
Location: Preston, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
2,666 posts
Location: Preston, United Kingdom
Posted:
I dont mean to sound like im picking on your posts circus, but would you raise your hand to a partner? The answers probably no, so why is it ok to raise your hand to your child?
Written by: Loves the Circus
IMO, I don't agree with you there joe. If that is the case, I was abused as a child. I don't see myself as abused, I see myself as disciplined.
What that 'Super Nanny' does, is involve child psychology. Not many parents have a degree in child psychology...
Most of my generation and older were brought up fearing a smack/spanking/whatever you want to call it if we were misbehaving. It's what kept me and my brothers in check. I'm glad it was there, cos if it wasn't there, I wouldn't be the person I am today.
I dont mean to sound like im picking on your posts circus, but would you raise your hand to a partner? The answers probably no, so why is it ok to raise your hand to your child?
Chief adviser to the Pharaoh, in one very snazzy mutli-coloured coat
'Time goes by so slowly for those who wait...' - Whatever Happend To Baby Madonna?
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
Because your partner is a rational adult, and you can talk to him/her in an adult fashion. You can't really do that to kids under 3. I've only ever been slapped once by my mother, and that's when I was so upset I threw my plate on the floor. I got a slap, which shocked me, and basically meant that I never threw that much of a tantrum again.
And I don't agree with hitting children if they're crying. I mean, how is that going to help?
Doc, I assume you're talking about America? The impression I get from my grandparents who lived in England was a lot different to that.
10 years ago? I was in primary school then (age 4-10). The most anti-social thing I think we (my gang of friends) ever did was to move someone's horse to the other side of the hill on the village green. I imagine the people who owned the horse weren't happy about not being able to see it when they woke up in the morning. Apart from that, and a couple of fights with other guys, we generally played "Tag", "Blockie", "Stuck in the Mud", had water fights, snow fights, leaf fights, grass fights, had apple fights. Oh, and we built dens and treehouses. We didn't smoke weed or carry knives (or knuckles). We didn't do that in Secondary school either (age 11-16).
In Sixth Form (17-18) we were supposed to be the most senior people in the school (We even had a Prefect system... can you believe that?) but we got a hell of a lot more lip from the Secondry schoolers than we would ever have dreamed of giving to the 6th Formers when we were 11-16.
*shrugs* And I thought ICoN was talking about the cotton wool thing.
Took me a while to catch on to that. 
EDITED_BY: Sethis (1127051136)
Because your partner is a rational adult, and you can talk to him/her in an adult fashion. You can't really do that to kids under 3. I've only ever been slapped once by my mother, and that's when I was so upset I threw my plate on the floor. I got a slap, which shocked me, and basically meant that I never threw that much of a tantrum again.
And I don't agree with hitting children if they're crying. I mean, how is that going to help?
Doc, I assume you're talking about America? The impression I get from my grandparents who lived in England was a lot different to that.
10 years ago? I was in primary school then (age 4-10). The most anti-social thing I think we (my gang of friends) ever did was to move someone's horse to the other side of the hill on the village green. I imagine the people who owned the horse weren't happy about not being able to see it when they woke up in the morning. Apart from that, and a couple of fights with other guys, we generally played "Tag", "Blockie", "Stuck in the Mud", had water fights, snow fights, leaf fights, grass fights, had apple fights. Oh, and we built dens and treehouses. We didn't smoke weed or carry knives (or knuckles). We didn't do that in Secondary school either (age 11-16).
In Sixth Form (17-18) we were supposed to be the most senior people in the school (We even had a Prefect system... can you believe that?) but we got a hell of a lot more lip from the Secondry schoolers than we would ever have dreamed of giving to the 6th Formers when we were 11-16.
*shrugs* And I thought ICoN was talking about the cotton wool thing.
Took me a while to catch on to that. EDITED_BY: Sethis (1127051136)
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
BRONZE Member
1 + 1 = 3
3,540 posts
Location: Bristol UK
1 + 1 = 3
3,540 posts
Location: Bristol UK
Posted:
What Sethis said.
There's no need to discipline my girlfriend in that way. She's an adult, and therefore understands what it is I'm trying to say, and has an idea of rationalality, responsibility, etc.
We're not saying that you should beat children on a regular basis, because that is child cruelty, but that there is nothing wrong with a smack as a punishment. It's the quickest way of teaching them right from wrong, IMO.
Example - you cut yourself accidentally with a knife. You learn to be more careful with knives. You pick up something hot, you drop it. You learn to use gloves so that you don't drop it or burn yourself again. You misbehave as a child. you get a smack. you learn that to not get smacked, you behave. If you accidentally burn yourself, or pierce your skin, the immediate reaction is to get away from whatever hurt you, fast. It's exactly the same. if you knew you were going to get hurt by doing something, you wouldn't do it. I believe it's best to use this strategy with young children. because they learn from it more, and don't always think: 'how can I get away with this...?', they are more likely to accept that certain thing end up in a smack. They will then do their best to avoid that smacking.
The human Brain doesn't like pain or bad experiences. It learns to take necessary measures to prevent them.
My nephew is an example of good parenting IMO. When he falls over, he doesn't cry for ages like most toddlers. He used to, for the attention. Instead he falls over, and doesn't think a thing about it (unless he's bleeding or broken) and carries on. My sister taught him that attention seeking gets him nowhere, so he doesn't do it. If he's misbehaving, my sister looks at him as if she's disappointed with him, and threatens the smack. 99 times out of 100, this is enough. The disappointment of the mother, along with the threat of a smack, is a HUGE deterrant in little kids. Now and again, they will think 'hang on, it's just a threat' and push their luck. This is when you need to show them that it's not just a threat, and then they behave.
I really shouldn't try to go into more details, because I don't have a degree in psychology.
What Sethis said.
There's no need to discipline my girlfriend in that way. She's an adult, and therefore understands what it is I'm trying to say, and has an idea of rationalality, responsibility, etc.
We're not saying that you should beat children on a regular basis, because that is child cruelty, but that there is nothing wrong with a smack as a punishment. It's the quickest way of teaching them right from wrong, IMO.
Example - you cut yourself accidentally with a knife. You learn to be more careful with knives. You pick up something hot, you drop it. You learn to use gloves so that you don't drop it or burn yourself again. You misbehave as a child. you get a smack. you learn that to not get smacked, you behave. If you accidentally burn yourself, or pierce your skin, the immediate reaction is to get away from whatever hurt you, fast. It's exactly the same. if you knew you were going to get hurt by doing something, you wouldn't do it. I believe it's best to use this strategy with young children. because they learn from it more, and don't always think: 'how can I get away with this...?', they are more likely to accept that certain thing end up in a smack. They will then do their best to avoid that smacking.
The human Brain doesn't like pain or bad experiences. It learns to take necessary measures to prevent them.
My nephew is an example of good parenting IMO. When he falls over, he doesn't cry for ages like most toddlers. He used to, for the attention. Instead he falls over, and doesn't think a thing about it (unless he's bleeding or broken) and carries on. My sister taught him that attention seeking gets him nowhere, so he doesn't do it. If he's misbehaving, my sister looks at him as if she's disappointed with him, and threatens the smack. 99 times out of 100, this is enough. The disappointment of the mother, along with the threat of a smack, is a HUGE deterrant in little kids. Now and again, they will think 'hang on, it's just a threat' and push their luck. This is when you need to show them that it's not just a threat, and then they behave.
I really shouldn't try to go into more details, because I don't have a degree in psychology.
Empty your mind. Be formless, Shapeless, like Water.
Put Water into a cup, it becomes the cup, put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle, put water into a teapot, it becomes the teapot.
Water can flow, or it can Crash.
Be Water My Friend.
Check ya later
500 posts
Location: Lower Shaw Farm
500 posts
Location: Lower Shaw Farm
Posted:
hang on a minute sethis! you are saying its ok to hit 3yr olds? if a 3yr old misbehaves, so what? they are too young to know any different. you are right, you cannot talk to them as a rational adult, but if you hit them, how can you expect that to create a rational adult. i just cannot see how hitting anybody can help anything. i mean, yeah sure, it will discipline the child, but who want to discipline their child using fear. surely if you are trying to teach your kid morals, hitting them isnt the way to go about it.
"The human Brain doesn't like pain or bad experiences. It learns to take necessary measures to prevent them."
why not give the kid a bad experience that doesnt involve pain then? dissapointment of parent is a great one, but why up the ante to a smack, there is no need.
basically, i reckon that any parent who cant discipline their child without violent means, should NOT have children. it makes me sick, it makes children sick, it makes their children sick, and i think anyone who condones any type of violence, whether it be a war, or hitting a child, is also sick.
get some
education before you have kids, or dont have kids at all.
hang on a minute sethis! you are saying its ok to hit 3yr olds? if a 3yr old misbehaves, so what? they are too young to know any different. you are right, you cannot talk to them as a rational adult, but if you hit them, how can you expect that to create a rational adult. i just cannot see how hitting anybody can help anything. i mean, yeah sure, it will discipline the child, but who want to discipline their child using fear. surely if you are trying to teach your kid morals, hitting them isnt the way to go about it.
"The human Brain doesn't like pain or bad experiences. It learns to take necessary measures to prevent them."
why not give the kid a bad experience that doesnt involve pain then? dissapointment of parent is a great one, but why up the ante to a smack, there is no need.
basically, i reckon that any parent who cant discipline their child without violent means, should NOT have children. it makes me sick, it makes children sick, it makes their children sick, and i think anyone who condones any type of violence, whether it be a war, or hitting a child, is also sick.
get some
education before you have kids, or dont have kids at all. Jake the Juggler
Check ya later
500 posts
Location: Lower Shaw Farm
500 posts
Location: Lower Shaw Farm
Posted:
ok, sorry about that, we have completely left the topic with this whole hitting kids thing, maybe it should have its own thread...?
to be honest though ive had enough ranting for one day,
check ya later
ok, sorry about that, we have completely left the topic with this whole hitting kids thing, maybe it should have its own thread...?
to be honest though ive had enough ranting for one day,
check ya later
Jake the Juggler
BRONZE Member
old hand
1,107 posts
Location: In a test pit, Mackay, Australia
old hand
1,107 posts
Location: In a test pit, Mackay, Australia
Posted:
And another thing...
When I was in the beauticians the other day there was a child having her ears pierced, all the time saying "No, mummy, I don't want to do this, it will hurt..." While her mother basically pinned her in place.
Abuse. What else can you call it?
To go off topic slightly: I'm scared of the gangs of 12 year olds who hang around shopping centres. I'm sure they were no better when I was that age but when you see them from your own age perspective they don't seem as bad. Maybe that's where the "back in my day..." stuff comes from.
And another thing...
When I was in the beauticians the other day there was a child having her ears pierced, all the time saying "No, mummy, I don't want to do this, it will hurt..." While her mother basically pinned her in place.
Abuse. What else can you call it?
To go off topic slightly: I'm scared of the gangs of 12 year olds who hang around shopping centres. I'm sure they were no better when I was that age but when you see them from your own age perspective they don't seem as bad. Maybe that's where the "back in my day..." stuff comes from.
There is a slight possibility that I am not actually right all of the time.
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
I've got a worse one. Apparently in the last year, some father FORCED his 13-year-old son to be circumcised. It was done under general anesthesia but I'm amazed ANY surgeon would agree to do it.
In my opinion, circumcision should be illegal after one year of age until age 18 unless medically indicated. Really, if I had my way, circumcision would be illegal period unless medically indicated.
Written by: Eera
And another thing...
When I was in the beauticians the other day there was a child having her ears pierced, all the time saying "No, mummy, I don't want to do this, it will hurt..." While her mother basically pinned her in place.
Abuse. What else can you call it?
I've got a worse one. Apparently in the last year, some father FORCED his 13-year-old son to be circumcised. It was done under general anesthesia but I'm amazed ANY surgeon would agree to do it.
In my opinion, circumcision should be illegal after one year of age until age 18 unless medically indicated. Really, if I had my way, circumcision would be illegal period unless medically indicated.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
Forget puppy power, Scrappy's just gay
632 posts
Location: Southampton Uni
632 posts
Location: Southampton Uni
Posted:
If I misbehaved as a child, I knew I was going to be in for punishment, and depending on the severity of my crime, there would be a corresponding punishment. I hate to sound big headed, but I'm one of the most solid people I know. I have an absolute hatred for violence, and a strong sense of right and wrong. I'm well balanced and yet I was slapped if I did something wrong. I had very good parents, and physical punishment was only used as a last resort. The threat of it was enough to stop me misbehaving 9 times out of 10.
How else are you supposed to discipline a child, who has little or no understanding of how to construct a rational argument? How do you keep discipline without a punishment? You can't. If you have the same punishment (e.g. sending to your room) for every crime, how can you develop a moral system? In an adult world, it'd be the same as having the same punishment for murder as for stealing a loaf of bread!
Having the worst crimes punished by the worst punishments is easy to understand, for a 3 year old, for a 30 year old, for all.
I understand that you may abhor violence Jake, and beating a child is without doubt wrong, but a spank, a clip round the ear, it hurts, it shocks, but it does not damage. There will always be broken people in the world, even if we lived in a utopian society, there would still be broken people, and there's nothing that's going to change that. Having a clip round the ear if you do something wrong is not going to break someone!
But with a break down in discipline there comes a worse society, with a media culture that shows that the best thing you can be is an adult (which means having sex, wearing make up, being aggresive, straight, drinking and smoking) then of course we're going to have children wanting to be sexually aware!
Things do get blown out of proportion, as we never hear about the good things children do. We always here about the bad things, but in 20 years, I have only had one bad experience with society! That was a group of drunken chavs outside of a punk gig decided my face was a punch bag and had a go at me. I've been insulted, and I've been threatened, but I've only seen one incident ever!
Things may be bad, but I think that we've come out of an era where things were hidden, and into another where things that go wrong are shown to the world. That's good. Bu along the way, we've lost the belief that good things happen to. They happen, and far more often than the bad things. Children have always had sex as soon as they can, always. My friend John lost his virginity when he was 9 ffs! Children have always been violent, parents have always sucked, murders have always happened, suckage has always happened.
The only thing we can do is to try and be an example, to live our lives as we see fit, to try and be the light in the darkness (to coin a phrase), to teach our children to be good and strong and to carry on what we believe to be right. That sex is something special, that violence is wrong, that wrongdoing will be punished, that the world is a beautiful place, and we should all do our bit to help our fellow man.
Thanks for reading, I'll be here all week, try the veal!
Written by: JtJ
basically, i reckon that any parent who cant discipline their child without violent means, should NOT have children. it makes me sick, it makes children sick, it makes their children sick, and i think anyone who condones any type of violence, whether it be a war, or hitting a child, is also sick.
If I misbehaved as a child, I knew I was going to be in for punishment, and depending on the severity of my crime, there would be a corresponding punishment. I hate to sound big headed, but I'm one of the most solid people I know. I have an absolute hatred for violence, and a strong sense of right and wrong. I'm well balanced and yet I was slapped if I did something wrong. I had very good parents, and physical punishment was only used as a last resort. The threat of it was enough to stop me misbehaving 9 times out of 10.
How else are you supposed to discipline a child, who has little or no understanding of how to construct a rational argument? How do you keep discipline without a punishment? You can't. If you have the same punishment (e.g. sending to your room) for every crime, how can you develop a moral system? In an adult world, it'd be the same as having the same punishment for murder as for stealing a loaf of bread!
Having the worst crimes punished by the worst punishments is easy to understand, for a 3 year old, for a 30 year old, for all.
I understand that you may abhor violence Jake, and beating a child is without doubt wrong, but a spank, a clip round the ear, it hurts, it shocks, but it does not damage. There will always be broken people in the world, even if we lived in a utopian society, there would still be broken people, and there's nothing that's going to change that. Having a clip round the ear if you do something wrong is not going to break someone!
But with a break down in discipline there comes a worse society, with a media culture that shows that the best thing you can be is an adult (which means having sex, wearing make up, being aggresive, straight, drinking and smoking) then of course we're going to have children wanting to be sexually aware!
Things do get blown out of proportion, as we never hear about the good things children do. We always here about the bad things, but in 20 years, I have only had one bad experience with society! That was a group of drunken chavs outside of a punk gig decided my face was a punch bag and had a go at me. I've been insulted, and I've been threatened, but I've only seen one incident ever!
Things may be bad, but I think that we've come out of an era where things were hidden, and into another where things that go wrong are shown to the world. That's good. Bu along the way, we've lost the belief that good things happen to. They happen, and far more often than the bad things. Children have always had sex as soon as they can, always. My friend John lost his virginity when he was 9 ffs! Children have always been violent, parents have always sucked, murders have always happened, suckage has always happened.
The only thing we can do is to try and be an example, to live our lives as we see fit, to try and be the light in the darkness (to coin a phrase), to teach our children to be good and strong and to carry on what we believe to be right. That sex is something special, that violence is wrong, that wrongdoing will be punished, that the world is a beautiful place, and we should all do our bit to help our fellow man.
Thanks for reading, I'll be here all week, try the veal!
Spin, bounce, be one with the world, because it is yours to enjoy...
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
No, children have not always had sex as soon as they can. Admittedly, most people don't wait till they're 18, but the majority of my friends waited until they were at least 16 (including myself). I think you have serious problems if you have sex before 16. You don't appreciate the consequences, you don't understand the emotional subtleties, and it's also against the law. If a 16 yr old has sex with a 15 yr old then it's either rape or paedophilia, and can be prosecuted as such.
It's absolutely pathetic the way some children want to lose their virginity *just so they can boast about it*. Is that a good thing? Does that show emotional involvement with your boy/girlfriend? Does it show how much you love someone? Jesus. I doubt that you could even HAVE sex at 9.
The majority of girls I speak to either waited for the right person, or they regretted it. Simple as that.
And children haven't always been violent. OK, so we had playfights, and a couple of real fights when I was at school, but we didn't attack random people, didn't swear at random people. And if we did fight, then it was until one person had the other pinned down and was slapping their face. Not stamping on their heads, kicking them in the crotch, and maybe knifing them into the bargain.
I am the light in the darkness...
I'm a flamethrower.
No, children have not always had sex as soon as they can. Admittedly, most people don't wait till they're 18, but the majority of my friends waited until they were at least 16 (including myself). I think you have serious problems if you have sex before 16. You don't appreciate the consequences, you don't understand the emotional subtleties, and it's also against the law. If a 16 yr old has sex with a 15 yr old then it's either rape or paedophilia, and can be prosecuted as such.
It's absolutely pathetic the way some children want to lose their virginity *just so they can boast about it*. Is that a good thing? Does that show emotional involvement with your boy/girlfriend? Does it show how much you love someone? Jesus. I doubt that you could even HAVE sex at 9.
The majority of girls I speak to either waited for the right person, or they regretted it. Simple as that.
And children haven't always been violent. OK, so we had playfights, and a couple of real fights when I was at school, but we didn't attack random people, didn't swear at random people. And if we did fight, then it was until one person had the other pinned down and was slapping their face. Not stamping on their heads, kicking them in the crotch, and maybe knifing them into the bargain.
I am the light in the darkness...
I'm a flamethrower.
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
Forget puppy power, Scrappy's just gay
632 posts
Location: Southampton Uni
632 posts
Location: Southampton Uni
Posted:
Always in that case meant looking back over the history of the human race. As some one said a while ago, it wasn't that long ago that marriage at 12 or 13 wasn't unheard of! Yes, I disagree with it, and even though I lost my virginity when I was 17, I still wish I'd have waited for the right guy. And it's only a very small minority who have sex early, who are aggresive etc. A very small minority.
Looking back at my primary school, there were 1 or 2 (out of hundreds) who swore, who were nasty and started fights. But because they stood up to people who have authority, they made life harder for all. But it was a tiny percentage. Like I said, we don't hear about the normal children, we just hear about the evil little b*stards, and so we (not all of us, admittedly) make the assumption that all children are like that now, because that's all we hear about!
I still feel as safe walking through the streets now as I always have. That's not to say they're friendly and I can say hello to everyone and bounce, but it's to say I'm just as aware of who's around me, what could happen and so on. The same goes for terrorism, I haven't changed, I'm still as wary now as then.
But now I'm rambling, so I'll end it...
Woof!
Always in that case meant looking back over the history of the human race. As some one said a while ago, it wasn't that long ago that marriage at 12 or 13 wasn't unheard of! Yes, I disagree with it, and even though I lost my virginity when I was 17, I still wish I'd have waited for the right guy. And it's only a very small minority who have sex early, who are aggresive etc. A very small minority.
Looking back at my primary school, there were 1 or 2 (out of hundreds) who swore, who were nasty and started fights. But because they stood up to people who have authority, they made life harder for all. But it was a tiny percentage. Like I said, we don't hear about the normal children, we just hear about the evil little b*stards, and so we (not all of us, admittedly) make the assumption that all children are like that now, because that's all we hear about!
I still feel as safe walking through the streets now as I always have. That's not to say they're friendly and I can say hello to everyone and bounce, but it's to say I'm just as aware of who's around me, what could happen and so on. The same goes for terrorism, I haven't changed, I'm still as wary now as then.
But now I'm rambling, so I'll end it...
Woof!
Spin, bounce, be one with the world, because it is yours to enjoy...
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
heh heh heh... Come work at my hospital.
Not according to older people I've talked to. I mean, I can't vouch for the 1800's, but as far back as the 1910's children have been known to kill.
Written by: Sethis
Jesus. I doubt that you could even HAVE sex at 9.
heh heh heh... Come work at my hospital.
Written by:
And children haven't always been violent. OK, so we had playfights, and a couple of real fights when I was at school, but we didn't attack random people, didn't swear at random people. And if we did fight, then it was until one person had the other pinned down and was slapping their face. Not stamping on their heads, kicking them in the crotch, and maybe knifing them into the bargain.
Not according to older people I've talked to. I mean, I can't vouch for the 1800's, but as far back as the 1910's children have been known to kill.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
GOLD Member
Self-Flagellation Expert
3,414 posts
Location: Bogged at CG, Australia
Self-Flagellation Expert
3,414 posts
Location: Bogged at CG, Australia
Posted:
Another one of those grey lines is the ages that people allow/condone sex. Why is it illegal to have sex with a person on the eve of their 16th birthday, yet they can go have orgies a day later? i'm not too keen on either age, but the point remains.
Another one of those grey lines is the ages that people allow/condone sex. Why is it illegal to have sex with a person on the eve of their 16th birthday, yet they can go have orgies a day later? i'm not too keen on either age, but the point remains.
"beg beg grovel beg grovel"
"master"
--FSA
"There was an arse there, i couldn't help myself"
--Rougie
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
6,942 posts
Location: London, UK
Carpal \'Tunnel
6,942 posts
Location: London, UK
Posted:
MiG the law has issues with grey - its black or white
its very hard to punish a 'semi' crime with out being unfiar to others
either people who have been fully punished for the same thing or let go...
Im with Doc on the kids, kids are like adults in their diversity 99.9999% are nice and good - you will always find one who is willing it hurt you for no other reason than to hear you scream. sad but true
as for sexualisation of kids (getting back more on topic
) i think it has got out of hand
and parents getting their kids ears pierced is messed up - even if the kdis want it if their under age its messed up because the child has no real appreciation of what their doing
ive seen parents with kids the age of about 6 dressed up like them with hoop earings (clipon ones mainly) but high heels and short skirts
its wrong if for no other reason than it makes the kids more of a sex icon that encourages peado.s and just removes so much of their innocene
MiG the law has issues with grey - its black or white
its very hard to punish a 'semi' crime with out being unfiar to others
either people who have been fully punished for the same thing or let go...
Im with Doc on the kids, kids are like adults in their diversity 99.9999% are nice and good - you will always find one who is willing it hurt you for no other reason than to hear you scream. sad but true
as for sexualisation of kids (getting back more on topic
) i think it has got out of handand parents getting their kids ears pierced is messed up - even if the kdis want it if their under age its messed up because the child has no real appreciation of what their doing
ive seen parents with kids the age of about 6 dressed up like them with hoop earings (clipon ones mainly) but high heels and short skirts
its wrong if for no other reason than it makes the kids more of a sex icon that encourages peado.s and just removes so much of their innocene
back
member
59 posts
Location: Eugene, Oregon
59 posts
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Posted:
Just a little note here. I was 5 yrs old when I had my first girlfriend. We made out and had sex before I moved out of the state. So don't think kids don't know. Some do some don't, but most do. Look To many parents don't want to have "that talk" with their kids. Bad idea. It is something kids should be talked with in an open and honest manner. My last girlfriends daughter had a guy friend who kept mastubating and humping the floor. These kids were 7 yrs old. She finnally realised that she needed to talk with her daughter. She also bought a book "Thats gross!" that deals with sexuality. I think the sexy kids stuff is dumb. But that is the parents not the kid. A kids sexuallity isn't that subtle. They don't use double entondras, puns, and stuff like that.
Just a little note here. I was 5 yrs old when I had my first girlfriend. We made out and had sex before I moved out of the state. So don't think kids don't know. Some do some don't, but most do. Look To many parents don't want to have "that talk" with their kids. Bad idea. It is something kids should be talked with in an open and honest manner. My last girlfriends daughter had a guy friend who kept mastubating and humping the floor. These kids were 7 yrs old. She finnally realised that she needed to talk with her daughter. She also bought a book "Thats gross!" that deals with sexuality. I think the sexy kids stuff is dumb. But that is the parents not the kid. A kids sexuallity isn't that subtle. They don't use double entondras, puns, and stuff like that.
I thought I waz just dreammin'?!!??!!??!! Dis place can't really be real.
Dreamer
4,308 posts
Location: York, England
4,308 posts
Location: York, England
Posted:
Yeah, lightning said it well, things really havn't changed much. *mostly*
The one thing I see as different is little children dressing sexily... but it think they arn't dressing more sexy than society as a whole, i think thats actually the change. Not positive, but in general.
Yes, he's american and so am i. But the violence was still there in britain, if not as publicized. The sex, might be a bit different. I now digress to anecdotes. I'm not getting involved in the violence discussion... I can't say anything constructive. I would just like people to realize that they are not the same as everyone else, and that you can teach some pretty f*cked up lessons to people.....
So. Typhical in my culture growing up (midwestern american) you kissed someone in about middle school (thats our years 6-8, britains 7-9). A little variable.... some people did it years 3-5 (brits, add one for the rest of the post!) some actually didn't until high school but they were "weird..."
Sex was generally had by or in the year you turned 16. A lot of people seemed to do it in, but being a 16yo virgin was still considered uncool and weird...
this isn't just my school district, or even just my year and the ones nearby. This seems fairly consistent. And people started dating in year 3. And it still seems to be about the same... I mean, there's a slight trend towards more people doing things earlier, but the age doesn't actually seem to have dropped...
I can even correlate across states some... except other states/areas (less wealthy) have a lot more pregnancy for the sex it seems...
Consider, also, the movie 13... i think its very acurate, and not just of big cities. Not of everywhere, but of many places....
Then consider a friend of mine from britain, about my age. Almost no-one had kissed people until about age 14 (whats that year 10 there? so year nine in america....) 16 yo's having sex was unusual.... for his school... and also in california i met a lot of people who were virgins at 18, whereas their parents were not so much.... (60's berkely hippies, the lot, or at least from that age group...)
So, different things in different places. But I also know of places in britain where its normal to have sex at 14... and earlier...
Now, it might be cool if kids could spend some more time being kids, altho, this is a very modern thing we invented, and yes going away again quickly. But... does anyone know how we'd accomplish that?
And whats really wrong with people having sex when their bodies are ready for it? I mean, yes, not with 30yo men, but, why are we fighting it so much? yes culture overemphasizes it, but you think no-one would feel it otherwise?
Yeah, lightning said it well, things really havn't changed much. *mostly*
The one thing I see as different is little children dressing sexily... but it think they arn't dressing more sexy than society as a whole, i think thats actually the change. Not positive, but in general.
Yes, he's american and so am i. But the violence was still there in britain, if not as publicized. The sex, might be a bit different. I now digress to anecdotes. I'm not getting involved in the violence discussion... I can't say anything constructive. I would just like people to realize that they are not the same as everyone else, and that you can teach some pretty f*cked up lessons to people.....
So. Typhical in my culture growing up (midwestern american) you kissed someone in about middle school (thats our years 6-8, britains 7-9). A little variable.... some people did it years 3-5 (brits, add one for the rest of the post!) some actually didn't until high school but they were "weird..."
Sex was generally had by or in the year you turned 16. A lot of people seemed to do it in, but being a 16yo virgin was still considered uncool and weird...
this isn't just my school district, or even just my year and the ones nearby. This seems fairly consistent. And people started dating in year 3. And it still seems to be about the same... I mean, there's a slight trend towards more people doing things earlier, but the age doesn't actually seem to have dropped...
I can even correlate across states some... except other states/areas (less wealthy) have a lot more pregnancy for the sex it seems...
Consider, also, the movie 13... i think its very acurate, and not just of big cities. Not of everywhere, but of many places....
Then consider a friend of mine from britain, about my age. Almost no-one had kissed people until about age 14 (whats that year 10 there? so year nine in america....) 16 yo's having sex was unusual.... for his school... and also in california i met a lot of people who were virgins at 18, whereas their parents were not so much.... (60's berkely hippies, the lot, or at least from that age group...)
So, different things in different places. But I also know of places in britain where its normal to have sex at 14... and earlier...
Now, it might be cool if kids could spend some more time being kids, altho, this is a very modern thing we invented, and yes going away again quickly. But... does anyone know how we'd accomplish that?
And whats really wrong with people having sex when their bodies are ready for it? I mean, yes, not with 30yo men, but, why are we fighting it so much? yes culture overemphasizes it, but you think no-one would feel it otherwise?
Keep your dream alive
Dreamin is still how the strong survive
Shalom VeAhavah
New Hampshire has a point....
GOLD Member
Self-Flagellation Expert
3,414 posts
Location: Bogged at CG, Australia
Self-Flagellation Expert
3,414 posts
Location: Bogged at CG, Australia
Posted:
and i read an article in time today, saying people are staying at home longer, job and partner bouncing, and basically being adolescents for a much longer time.
Kinda weird, really. Want to grow up too fast, then get there and put the brakes on.
and i read an article in time today, saying people are staying at home longer, job and partner bouncing, and basically being adolescents for a much longer time.
Kinda weird, really. Want to grow up too fast, then get there and put the brakes on.
"beg beg grovel beg grovel"
"master"
--FSA
"There was an arse there, i couldn't help myself"
--Rougie
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
6,942 posts
Location: London, UK
Carpal \'Tunnel
6,942 posts
Location: London, UK
Posted:
murdasmurf - i agree with you that a lot of kids are sexual beings
i look after kids and we have atraining weekend and out of the most intense sessions is on child protection and one of the things they tell you about is archytypes which are certain in built triggers. like straddling someone
kids at the age of 4 may not be able to have kids but they enjoy a lot of the sensations to do with sex. (after all the nerves are there)
its not so much the age at which kids have sex that bothers me (though often it is too young and certain too young to have kids - recent news sotry about kids over here wanting kids of their own at 12 14 year old)
its more that adults treat them as sex icons almost from teh age of about 5 .. thats wrong
and Mig there was a report published recently here that i read about and one of the predictions was that due to prices and society most people will still be living at home when they're 40 in 25 years time because of the house preices
adolesance does last longer now i think because humans in general are lasting longer
murdasmurf - i agree with you that a lot of kids are sexual beings
i look after kids and we have atraining weekend and out of the most intense sessions is on child protection and one of the things they tell you about is archytypes which are certain in built triggers. like straddling someone
kids at the age of 4 may not be able to have kids but they enjoy a lot of the sensations to do with sex. (after all the nerves are there)
its not so much the age at which kids have sex that bothers me (though often it is too young and certain too young to have kids - recent news sotry about kids over here wanting kids of their own at 12 14 year old)
its more that adults treat them as sex icons almost from teh age of about 5 .. thats wrong
and Mig there was a report published recently here that i read about and one of the predictions was that due to prices and society most people will still be living at home when they're 40 in 25 years time because of the house preices
adolesance does last longer now i think because humans in general are lasting longer
back
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
People shouldn't just have sex "Whenever they're physically ready". In fact I'd advocate that that's the WORST time to have sex. Puberty (especially early on) means raging hormones, mood swings, unpredictability. The social "scene" reflects this. People in yrs 6-9 "Go out" for anywhere from 2 days to 3 months.
IMO sex should be something that you only really do in a long term relationship. I have yet to hear a good account of a one night stand. Ever. Now, would you call going out with a lass (who in all probability, you only asked out cos your mates dared you too) for about a fortnight the best environment to lose your virginity in?
Children do not, until they're about 15-18 become experienced enough with their own emotions and those of other people to be able to deal properly with the involvement that making love entails.
Don't get me wrong, I think sex is a great thing, that's wonderful, fun and happy with the right person, and everyone should be able to experience it. However I think that it has feelings attached to it that are best dealt with by (relatively) mature people. 9 yr olds aren't mature. No exceptions.
Also sex is being trivialised, which goes hand in hand with the premature sexualisation of children. Now don't get me wrong, it should be talked about, discussed and whatever. It shouldn't under any circumstances be kept behind closed doors (I still owe my Dad a huge debt for buying "The Guide to getting it on", which dispelled many ideas I had in my head at the age of 14 ). But somewhere along the line it has become something that isn't taken seriously. It should be.
It's someone's most intimate embrace, and should be respected as such. If anyone offers sex, then you should bear in mind that they are giving you everything they possess.
It can have consequences. 18 years of responsibility is one, relationship issues is another.
Basically, I think that sex should be when two people decide that they are steady and comfortable with each other enough to take their relationship to a deeper stage, about the same time when they realise they love each other. Call me a prude, or a romantic, but that's my opinion. Children can't be expected to have the stability or experience required for the sex to be good.
People shouldn't just have sex "Whenever they're physically ready". In fact I'd advocate that that's the WORST time to have sex. Puberty (especially early on) means raging hormones, mood swings, unpredictability. The social "scene" reflects this. People in yrs 6-9 "Go out" for anywhere from 2 days to 3 months.
IMO sex should be something that you only really do in a long term relationship. I have yet to hear a good account of a one night stand. Ever. Now, would you call going out with a lass (who in all probability, you only asked out cos your mates dared you too) for about a fortnight the best environment to lose your virginity in?
Children do not, until they're about 15-18 become experienced enough with their own emotions and those of other people to be able to deal properly with the involvement that making love entails.
Don't get me wrong, I think sex is a great thing, that's wonderful, fun and happy with the right person, and everyone should be able to experience it. However I think that it has feelings attached to it that are best dealt with by (relatively) mature people. 9 yr olds aren't mature. No exceptions.
Also sex is being trivialised, which goes hand in hand with the premature sexualisation of children. Now don't get me wrong, it should be talked about, discussed and whatever. It shouldn't under any circumstances be kept behind closed doors (I still owe my Dad a huge debt for buying "The Guide to getting it on", which dispelled many ideas I had in my head at the age of 14
). But somewhere along the line it has become something that isn't taken seriously. It should be.It's someone's most intimate embrace, and should be respected as such. If anyone offers sex, then you should bear in mind that they are giving you everything they possess.
It can have consequences. 18 years of responsibility is one, relationship issues is another.
Basically, I think that sex should be when two people decide that they are steady and comfortable with each other enough to take their relationship to a deeper stage, about the same time when they realise they love each other. Call me a prude, or a romantic, but that's my opinion. Children can't be expected to have the stability or experience required for the sex to be good.
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
BRONZE Member
Disco Inferno
160 posts
Location: Remote Western Australia Karratha
Disco Inferno
160 posts
Location: Remote Western Australia Karratha
Posted:
As a member of "this generation" I dislike the generalisations being made here. Not all 11-15 yr olds are like this. I for one and many of my close friends, do not do anything liek this. Id be lying if i said that it doesnt happen period, and it would be a dumb lie to say. But the fact is you have to look at the broad spectrum, not all of this generation are looking to expel their childhood, in fact I myself am a modern day peter pan, I refuse to have birthdays and am going to stay a kid forever...A kid with facial hair and a voice deeper than that of Barry White But in all seriousness, it is a problem, and these days it is encouraged by pretty much every aspect of todays society. Not much can be done about it though, conditioning people for as long as the media and other mediums for conditioning have has taken a toll. One that friendly encouragement, is no longer a decided force. Things do need to change I think everyone can agree on that though.
Written by: roarfire
Don't get me started on this topic!
There are year 7's, YEAR 7'S, that's 12-13 year olds...having sex with boys and having mobile phones. Getting drunk and smoking, wearing revealing clothing and getting brazillian waxes.
It absolutely disgusts me. Call me old fashioned, but I was never like this when I was 13...
The fact that a lot of them have the confidence to mouth off to a year 12 student about what they're wearing (year 12's are out of uniform at our school, never happened to me but to a close friend). We were NEVER like that. We wouldn't dare even look at a big year 12 student twice back then...
Ugh....I hate this generation!
As a member of "this generation" I dislike the generalisations being made here. Not all 11-15 yr olds are like this. I for one and many of my close friends, do not do anything liek this. Id be lying if i said that it doesnt happen period, and it would be a dumb lie to say. But the fact is you have to look at the broad spectrum, not all of this generation are looking to expel their childhood, in fact I myself am a modern day peter pan, I refuse to have birthdays and am going to stay a kid forever...A kid with facial hair and a voice deeper than that of Barry White
But in all seriousness, it is a problem, and these days it is encouraged by pretty much every aspect of todays society. Not much can be done about it though, conditioning people for as long as the media and other mediums for conditioning have has taken a toll. One that friendly encouragement, is no longer a decided force. Things do need to change I think everyone can agree on that though. "Only fools are positive! are you sure? Im POSITIVE"
Dreamer
4,308 posts
Location: York, England
4,308 posts
Location: York, England
Posted:
A lot of the emotional issues are caused by society tho... even, some anthropological research suggests, a lot of the moodinesss and such is caused or made worse by it.
I wasn't advocating sex with someone you'd been going out with a fortnight (I wouldn't do that!!!) But I can give you multiple good accounts of one night stands. In fact, much better accounts of one night stands than sex within relationships in many cases....
I think the difference in some cases is random person you meet at party/in bar vs someone you already know....
people are ready for different things at different ages in any event. and in different situations. and please don't generalize about sex.... its not always someones most intimate anything. definetly has consequenes, definetly needs more respect.... but it doesn't have to have the slightest intimacy, people aren't nesc giving anything at all, in fact sometimes they're taking....
sorry, i like your romantic view in many ways, but, its not entirely reality.
A lot of the emotional issues are caused by society tho... even, some anthropological research suggests, a lot of the moodinesss and such is caused or made worse by it.
I wasn't advocating sex with someone you'd been going out with a fortnight (I wouldn't do that!!!) But I can give you multiple good accounts of one night stands. In fact, much better accounts of one night stands than sex within relationships in many cases....
I think the difference in some cases is random person you meet at party/in bar vs someone you already know....
people are ready for different things at different ages in any event. and in different situations. and please don't generalize about sex.... its not always someones most intimate anything. definetly has consequenes, definetly needs more respect.... but it doesn't have to have the slightest intimacy, people aren't nesc giving anything at all, in fact sometimes they're taking....
sorry, i like your romantic view in many ways, but, its not entirely reality.
Keep your dream alive
Dreamin is still how the strong survive
Shalom VeAhavah
New Hampshire has a point....
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com