DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Rant >> Americans are sure uptight
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 50 of 172, (reverse)
AuthorThread
10/15/2008 01:30:57 PM · #26
Originally posted by AP:

I actually almost always fall left-of-center on most issues but here I have to agree with, for example, the City of Philadelphia's refusal to have posters at bus stops. I know it's a comedy, its not sexual, etc..., but it doesn't matter how innocuous the actual movie is, I wouldn't want my kid looking at it and asking me what a 'porno' was.

Sexual ads that show skin are everywhere, sure, but the word porno has not yet been accepted into our society free of stigma.

I'm sure they can get someone else to fill the advertising space quite easily and forego answering endless phone calls/letters complaining about their placement.


Why wouldn't you want your kid asking? Who would you prefer inform them?

My kids ask me about and comment on things they see/read/hear all the time. Sometimes it's stuff I might have some difficulty framing in a context that a 5 and 7 year olds can understand, but that's part of the responsibility of being a parent. There really isn't much to explain about what "porno" is. It's a lot easier than explaining why 12 year old girls are dressed like hookers on CD's and books.

The real question is who will step in and fill that void if you, as a parent, abdicate?
10/15/2008 01:34:46 PM · #27
These points are all well taken and the more I think about it I'm starting to feel undecided, but, I do think there is a distinction b/w private and public space, like the smut we see inside of stores or in magazines vs. on the street.

Also, government agencies have a duty to remain neutral and unoffensive, so def not on city bus stops.

And I'm not a fan of shielding your kids from the ugly sides of life, but some things are still off limits until a certain age, namely the topic of videotaping people have sex for money.
10/15/2008 01:35:16 PM · #28
Originally posted by glad2badad:

Sound crazy? Maybe. Ask that parent/grandparent, etc...that's been taken in for having film developed with baby in the bath tub.

And what do you think leads to such crazed Puritanism?
10/15/2008 01:37:09 PM · #29
Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by Marc923:

No, I'm not a parent. But if I were and my kid asked what porno meant. I'd simply explain it's a movie for adults. That's all you need.

<The following day at school...talking to his/her friend..."I know what porno means, do you? My dad told me about them.">
.
.
<Teacher overhears...>
.
.
<Dad to police officer showing up at his work..."What porno movies?! NO - I did NOT show my kid any porno's...what are you TALKING about">
<Fellow workers...rumors spread...you're now trafficking in child pornography>

Sound crazy? Maybe. Ask that parent/grandparent, etc...that's been taken in for having film developed with baby in the bath tub.


So, I assume that in the interest of serving your paranoia, you'll skip the sex talk and the drug talk and discussing why girls grow breasts and boys don't and leave it to them to figure such things out. Discussing any such topic with your child plays into your scenario of fear.
10/15/2008 01:39:23 PM · #30
Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Originally posted by AP:

I actually almost always fall left-of-center on most issues but here I have to agree with, for example, the City of Philadelphia's refusal to have posters at bus stops. I know it's a comedy, its not sexual, etc..., but it doesn't matter how innocuous the actual movie is, I wouldn't want my kid looking at it and asking me what a 'porno' was.

Sexual ads that show skin are everywhere, sure, but the word porno has not yet been accepted into our society free of stigma.

I'm sure they can get someone else to fill the advertising space quite easily and forego answering endless phone calls/letters complaining about their placement.


Why wouldn't you want your kid asking? Who would you prefer inform them?

My kids ask me about and comment on things they see/read/hear all the time. Sometimes it's stuff I might have some difficulty framing in a context that a 5 and 7 year olds can understand, but that's part of the responsibility of being a parent. There really isn't much to explain about what "porno" is. It's a lot easier than explaining why 12 year old girls are dressed like hookers on CD's and books.

The real question is who will step in and fill that void if you, as a parent, abdicate?


I'm not saying I would sit there and draw a blank or be a bad parent or let someone else explain it to them, that was not my point at all, my point is that in a perfect world it would be better if they didn't have clue what pornography for as long as possible. That is not the reality, but having posters like this at bus stops does not help the cause.

If the topic comes up early, then of course, a parent should respond with tact and wisdom, obviously.
10/15/2008 01:42:42 PM · #31
Originally posted by AP:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Originally posted by AP:

I actually almost always fall left-of-center on most issues but here I have to agree with, for example, the City of Philadelphia's refusal to have posters at bus stops. I know it's a comedy, its not sexual, etc..., but it doesn't matter how innocuous the actual movie is, I wouldn't want my kid looking at it and asking me what a 'porno' was.

Sexual ads that show skin are everywhere, sure, but the word porno has not yet been accepted into our society free of stigma.

I'm sure they can get someone else to fill the advertising space quite easily and forego answering endless phone calls/letters complaining about their placement.


Why wouldn't you want your kid asking? Who would you prefer inform them?

My kids ask me about and comment on things they see/read/hear all the time. Sometimes it's stuff I might have some difficulty framing in a context that a 5 and 7 year olds can understand, but that's part of the responsibility of being a parent. There really isn't much to explain about what "porno" is. It's a lot easier than explaining why 12 year old girls are dressed like hookers on CD's and books.

The real question is who will step in and fill that void if you, as a parent, abdicate?


I'm not saying I would sit there and draw a blank or be a bad parent or let someone else explain it to them, that was not my point at all, my point is that in a perfect world it would be better if they didn't have clue what pornography for as long as possible. That is not the reality, but having posters like this at bus stops does not help the cause.

If the topic comes up early, then of course, a parent should respond with tact and wisdom, obviously.


This is a far from "perfect" world, assuming that such a thing is even definable, but there are far worse and more complex issues that my kids inquire about on a semi-regular basis than "porno".
10/15/2008 01:44:49 PM · #32
Originally posted by AP:

I'm not saying I would sit there and draw a blank or be a bad parent or let someone else explain it to them, that was not my point at all, my point is that in a perfect world it would be better if they didn't have clue what pornography for as long as possible. That is not the reality, but having posters like this at bus stops does not help the cause.

If the topic comes up early, then of course, a parent should respond with tact and wisdom, obviously.

Well said.
10/15/2008 01:46:19 PM · #33
Originally posted by Spazmo99:



So, I assume that in the interest of serving your paranoia, you'll skip the sex talk and the drug talk and discussing why girls grow breasts and boys don't and leave it to them to figure such things out. Discussing any such topic with your child plays into your scenario of fear.


I think you're being unreasonable in addressing what we're saying.

My point is only that there is a time an place for everything. You don't discuss the Holocaust at age 3, you don't discuss venereal disease at age 5.

There is a reasonable, moderate position in between shielding kids from all the ills of the world forever, and talking candidly about them at all times. It just requires judgment as to what is appropriate and when.
10/15/2008 01:47:42 PM · #34
Originally posted by Marc923:

Back to the original topic. The movie is a comedy about 2 people who make a porno. It's not really a porno. Yes, the title is controversial, but people getting upset about the ads because of the word porno. I just think people are looking for things to complain about. I don't see anything wrong with it. People are just a bit uptight nowadays.

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Not a parent, are you.

I am, and I'd way rather my daughter saw a slapstick comedy/romance movie about the bumbling antics of wannabe movie-makers than some of the violence and hate that's the status quo.

Oh.....and I also don't make judgements off the cuff on a movie based solely on the title.

My kid's going to grow up a realist, and know to actually investigate things rather than making snap judgements.

Of course, now you're going to tell me I'm a rotten, overly liberal father, no doubt.

Oh, and BTW, IMDB gives it an 8.4 out of 10.......Out of Africa, which won seven Oscars, got 6.9 out of 10.
10/15/2008 01:48:36 PM · #35
Originally posted by AP:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Originally posted by AP:

I actually almost always fall left-of-center on most issues but here I have to agree with, for example, the City of Philadelphia's refusal to have posters at bus stops. I know it's a comedy, its not sexual, etc..., but it doesn't matter how innocuous the actual movie is, I wouldn't want my kid looking at it and asking me what a 'porno' was.

Sexual ads that show skin are everywhere, sure, but the word porno has not yet been accepted into our society free of stigma.

I'm sure they can get someone else to fill the advertising space quite easily and forego answering endless phone calls/letters complaining about their placement.


Why wouldn't you want your kid asking? Who would you prefer inform them?

My kids ask me about and comment on things they see/read/hear all the time. Sometimes it's stuff I might have some difficulty framing in a context that a 5 and 7 year olds can understand, but that's part of the responsibility of being a parent. There really isn't much to explain about what "porno" is. It's a lot easier than explaining why 12 year old girls are dressed like hookers on CD's and books.

The real question is who will step in and fill that void if you, as a parent, abdicate?


I'm not saying I would sit there and draw a blank or be a bad parent or let someone else explain it to them, that was not my point at all, my point is that in a perfect world it would be better if they didn't have clue what pornography for as long as possible. That is not the reality, but having posters like this at bus stops does not help the cause.

If the topic comes up early, then of course, a parent should respond with tact and wisdom, obviously.


I would think that the earlier kids ask about these things, the better... because after a certain age, they might not feel as comfortable asking you about these things if they have other sources (friends.. tv ..internet etc.). It might be harder to 'undo' what they found out themselves then.

That still doesnt mean that they should be exposed to things prematurely.

IMO the most important thing then would be a channel of communication that developed over the years and not just when they need to ask you something or when you need to preach on something... because you cannot time when and where they see something they dont understand and how they find out more about it.

Disclaimer: I am not a parent 'yet'.
10/15/2008 01:50:53 PM · #36
Originally posted by AP:

I actually almost always fall left-of-center on most issues but here I have to agree with, for example, the City of Philadelphia's refusal to have posters at bus stops. I know it's a comedy, its not sexual, etc..., but it doesn't matter how innocuous the actual movie is, I wouldn't want my kid looking at it and asking me what a 'porno' was.

Why?

I'd way rather explain that when my daughter sees it on a sign at a bus stop than have her peers give her their version in 5th grade.

Kids grow up whether you want them to or not.

My daughter knows she can ask me ANYTHING and I'll try to explain it, or I'll find out.

That way she gets my influence and take on a subject rather than someone else's.

Isn't that what you want for your children?

Why would you not want to answer your child's questions?
10/15/2008 01:52:31 PM · #37
Originally posted by Marc923:

No, I'm not a parent. But if I were and my kid asked what porno meant. I'd simply explain it's a movie for adults. That's all you need.

Originally posted by glad2badad:

<The following day at school...talking to his/her friend..."I know what porno means, do you? My dad told me about them.">
.
.
<Teacher overhears...>
.
.
<Dad to police officer showing up at his work..."What porno movies?! NO - I did NOT show my kid any porno's...what are you TALKING about">
<Fellow workers...rumors spread...you're now trafficking in child pornography>

Sound crazy? Maybe. Ask that parent/grandparent, etc...that's been taken in for having film developed with baby in the bath tub.

That's an isolated incident and you know it......and I'd move if the town I lived in was that narrow-minded and subject to baseless rumor and innuendo.
10/15/2008 01:54:59 PM · #38
I saw the trailers for it, and thought it looked pretty funny. Kinda like the Run Fat Boy, Run movie.

Mind you , I guess you could get all excited about that title too!!
10/15/2008 01:55:52 PM · #39
Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by AP:

I actually almost always fall left-of-center on most issues but here I have to agree with, for example, the City of Philadelphia's refusal to have posters at bus stops. I know it's a comedy, its not sexual, etc..., but it doesn't matter how innocuous the actual movie is, I wouldn't want my kid looking at it and asking me what a 'porno' was.

Why?

I'd way rather explain that when my daughter sees it on a sign at a bus stop than have her peers give her their version in 5th grade.

Kids grow up whether you want them to or not.

My daughter knows she can ask me ANYTHING and I'll try to explain it, or I'll find out.

That way she gets my influence and take on a subject rather than someone else's.

Isn't that what you want for your children?

Why would you not want to answer your child's questions?


Good arguments.

I would rather work on my communication and accessibility to my kid(s) rather than trying to cover up all that she gets exposed to when I am not with her. I think I will have better chances of keeping her out of confusions that way:-)
10/15/2008 01:58:03 PM · #40
I can't stay here long because this whole thing is completely overdone here in TX!
It's a HUGE topic of discussion, often and you are either in the "group" or it totally gets all over you!

My mom gave me the birds and bees talk in second grade...I didn't ask for it. My parents did NOT indulge our every whim, we got spanked, grounded etc. for not following rules and being bad...and back then the first question asked if the school called was "what did you do", not (to the school) "What have you done to my child?!) We attended church every Sunday and had a darn good upbringing and a pretty cool childhood.

An observation around here: Looking backwards, the younger the parents get (and because of the nature of reproduction, there are exponentially more), the more indulged they were as children and the less they parent and expect everyone else to do it for them. (They have actually published articles on credit card debt telling how the newly married couple had to have $5,000 drapes for their NEWLY BUILT home and mom and dad were paying for them as the kids' credit cards were maxed out! WTH!!)

Take control of your children, teach them, love them, but do NOT shield them from the world and expect everyone else to act according to your plan. The children will suffer for your wanting to protect them. The intention is grand, but it isn't realistic. Maybe in your neighborhood, but not mine.

10/15/2008 01:58:59 PM · #41
Originally posted by AP:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:



So, I assume that in the interest of serving your paranoia, you'll skip the sex talk and the drug talk and discussing why girls grow breasts and boys don't and leave it to them to figure such things out. Discussing any such topic with your child plays into your scenario of fear.


I think you're being unreasonable in addressing what we're saying.

My point is only that there is a time an place for everything. You don't discuss the Holocaust at age 3, you don't discuss venereal disease at age 5.

There is a reasonable, moderate position in between shielding kids from all the ills of the world forever, and talking candidly about them at all times. It just requires judgment as to what is appropriate and when.


I think it's unreasonable to expect the world to be "kid-safe". Topics will arise regardless of whether you, as a parent feel the time and place are right.

You might not like to discuss the Holocaust, venereal disease, birth control, abortion or any of a great number of sensitive topics with your youngster, but will you avoid discussing it if they bring it up or put it in a context they can understand and process?

Message edited by author 2008-10-15 14:00:13.
10/15/2008 02:07:34 PM · #42
Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by AP:

I actually almost always fall left-of-center on most issues but here I have to agree with, for example, the City of Philadelphia's refusal to have posters at bus stops. I know it's a comedy, its not sexual, etc..., but it doesn't matter how innocuous the actual movie is, I wouldn't want my kid looking at it and asking me what a 'porno' was.

Why?

I'd way rather explain that when my daughter sees it on a sign at a bus stop than have her peers give her their version in 5th grade.

Kids grow up whether you want them to or not.

My daughter knows she can ask me ANYTHING and I'll try to explain it, or I'll find out.

That way she gets my influence and take on a subject rather than someone else's.

Isn't that what you want for your children?

Why would you not want to answer your child's questions?


You're clearly not seeing my point.

As I wrote below, I'm not advocating abstaining from talking to your kids, or shielding them, or anything of the sort. And I am not naive enough to think kids don't grow up by themselves.

I'm only saying that we don't need to take steps to make them grow up quicker, such as allowing potentially inappropriate language to be printed on places where they frequent.

If you want to be sure your kids get your influence on all topics, why not teach them about STDs at age 5? You won't, because that's speeding up the learning process of life, and that's my point, no need to expedite their maturity.
10/15/2008 02:12:18 PM · #43
I have to agree that children today aren't allowed to be children and innocent as long as we were. Society and the world in general has hit the bullet train of life and the things they are exposed to (far too young) are everywhere. TV, Movies, Celebrities...other kids...they really don't have a fair chance at being an innocent child with few worries anymore. It's kind of sad...(but I live in the city and might have a very different view.) When I went back to small town South Dakota a couple of years ago for a class reunion...the kids were extremely well adjusted and happy, but they still had the same influences, just far less stress and the parents still take control without expecting everyone else to do it for them.
10/15/2008 02:13:41 PM · #44
Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Originally posted by AP:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:



So, I assume that in the interest of serving your paranoia, you'll skip the sex talk and the drug talk and discussing why girls grow breasts and boys don't and leave it to them to figure such things out. Discussing any such topic with your child plays into your scenario of fear.


I think you're being unreasonable in addressing what we're saying.

My point is only that there is a time an place for everything. You don't discuss the Holocaust at age 3, you don't discuss venereal disease at age 5.

There is a reasonable, moderate position in between shielding kids from all the ills of the world forever, and talking candidly about them at all times. It just requires judgment as to what is appropriate and when.


I think it's unreasonable to expect the world to be "kid-safe". Topics will arise regardless of whether you, as a parent feel the time and place are right.

You might not like to discuss the Holocaust, venereal disease, birth control, abortion or any of a great number of sensitive topics with your youngster, but will you avoid discussing it if they bring it up or put it in a context they can understand and process?


I KNOW it's not 'kid-safe', but we don't need to make it more-so.

Again, because it seems like this hasn't sunken in, it's not that would feel uncomfortable or that I wouldn't discuss the things with my kid or avoid it or not put it in context or whatever, it's that I would RATHER that the topic did not come up until later, until my kid has developed the mental faculties to contemplate these complex and mature issues.

If it comes up before then, so be it, I would act as any responsible parent would. My point is only that we, as a society, don't need to make that happen any sooner, and back to the narrow point - having the word "Porno" on government property where kids hang out does, to some extent, make that topic come up earlier than it otherwise would.
10/15/2008 02:17:15 PM · #45
Originally posted by AP:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Originally posted by AP:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:



So, I assume that in the interest of serving your paranoia, you'll skip the sex talk and the drug talk and discussing why girls grow breasts and boys don't and leave it to them to figure such things out. Discussing any such topic with your child plays into your scenario of fear.


I think you're being unreasonable in addressing what we're saying.

My point is only that there is a time an place for everything. You don't discuss the Holocaust at age 3, you don't discuss venereal disease at age 5.

There is a reasonable, moderate position in between shielding kids from all the ills of the world forever, and talking candidly about them at all times. It just requires judgment as to what is appropriate and when.


I think it's unreasonable to expect the world to be "kid-safe". Topics will arise regardless of whether you, as a parent feel the time and place are right.

You might not like to discuss the Holocaust, venereal disease, birth control, abortion or any of a great number of sensitive topics with your youngster, but will you avoid discussing it if they bring it up or put it in a context they can understand and process?


I KNOW it's not 'kid-safe', but we don't need to make it more-so.

Again, because it seems like this hasn't sunken in, it's not that would feel uncomfortable or that I wouldn't discuss the things with my kid or avoid it or not put it in context or whatever, it's that I would RATHER that the topic did not come up until later, until my kid has developed the mental faculties to contemplate these complex and mature issues.

If it comes up before then, so be it, I would act as any responsible parent would. My point is only that we, as a society, don't need to make that happen any sooner, and back to the narrow point - having the word "Porno" on government property where kids hang out does, to some extent, make that topic come up earlier than it otherwise would.
]
It pissed me off a lot more when some @$$hole kid in 2nd grade told my kid there was no Santa Claus than having to deal with the inevitable lessons of real life as they came along.
10/15/2008 02:18:20 PM · #46
That's just mean...but shows how you cannot shield your kids no matter how hard we try.
Bummer!
10/15/2008 02:24:12 PM · #47
Originally posted by AP:


I'm only saying that we don't need to take steps to make them grow up quicker, such as allowing potentially inappropriate language to be printed on places where they frequent.

If you want to be sure your kids get your influence on all topics, why not teach them about STDs at age 5? You won't, because that's speeding up the learning process of life, and that's my point, no need to expedite their maturity.


Potentially inappropriate? WTF is that? There are billboards, CD covers, kid-oriented TV shows, books, ads, TV commercials and the like that are full of content that could be termed "potentially inappropriate". If you're worried about things that are "potentially inappropriate", the word porno should be near the bottom of the list.

As for explaining STD's or any other topic, the burden is on you, as a parent, to place such topics into a context that they can understand and process. You simply can't expect such topics to arise at a time and place of your choosing.
10/15/2008 02:25:57 PM · #48
Shielding the inevitable is one thing (it is bad), expediting the inevitable is another (also bad).

I think that sums up my point so I'll end on that note!

Horray for rants :D

I think this was my first real one! I didn't know what I was getting into, haha
10/15/2008 02:27:36 PM · #49
Originally posted by bergiekat:

That's just mean...but shows how you cannot shield your kids no matter how hard we try.
Bummer!

Yeah, but there's also a lot of things that my kid has done and seen that most won't, and to a certain point, she's seen things and been places that some people won't in their whole lives.

She's watched a rocket launch, played in the black sand in Hawaii, mailed a letter from the smallest post office in the US, spent the day shopping in the Big Apple, seen Jimmy Buffett live......the list goes on.

It was inevitable that along the way she was going to experience things that I would rather that she not have, and some of those things were my fault.....but I also got the chance to explain how and why they went wrong, and because of that as well as the fact that my daughter loves me, flaws and all, she TRUSTS me.

That counts.

And she is decidedly wise and well-adjusted beyond her years.

Message edited by author 2008-10-15 14:28:55.
10/15/2008 02:27:56 PM · #50
Originally posted by AP:

Again, because it seems like this hasn't sunken in, it's not that would feel uncomfortable or that I wouldn't discuss the things with my kid or avoid it or not put it in context or whatever, it's that I would RATHER that the topic did not come up until later, until my kid has developed the mental faculties to contemplate these complex and mature issues.


Again, the burden is on the parent to place such things into a context that they can deal with them. If you feel that a topic requires a certain level of development to address, you simply haven't done the work to make the topic understandable to them.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/23/2021 05:40:05 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2021 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 09/23/2021 05:40:05 PM EDT.