Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (49611)	6/8/2002 11:12:08 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

These emails usually say free, or thirty days free. I get some of those emails, too. I'm very careful not to open them, although I still get them so maybe that doesn't help much. Anyway, since I don't read them, I missed the thirty days free bit. Don't you still have to provide a credit card number, though, to get access, even though the charge is deferred? Mom and dad will find out if you give out their credit card number. You may get your thirty free days, but there will be consequences. But Karen, if there are two or three sites out there, the URLs will be passed around among children just as the little comic book was passed around when I was a child. You're probably right. I hadn't thought of that. How about two young women naked except for the bows on their pig tails doing sexual things to an obese old woman? LOL. I'd like to see that one. But what would you think of as "fairly tame," and therefore as okay for children to have access to? Is missionary position sexual intercourse one-on-one showing genitals from close up what you have in mind? Yes, I'd consider that pretty tame. I would not give something like that to children, but I don't see much harm in their finding it. You know, the pictures I download are all pretty small. If you try to save and blow them up, you loose a lot of resolution. I don't know how much detail there would be. In any event, I don't see a big problem, as I mentioned earlier, with kids seeing what goes where and what the "what" and the "where" look like. I don't mean to deny that there the risk to kids from porn on the net, only to suggest that it shouldn't be on the top ten list of things for parents to worry about. There are some natural safeguards that mitigate the risk somewhat. And, of course, kids who are intent on getting into trouble will find a way to do so regardless of the venue.

To: E who wrote (49611)	6/8/2002 12:55:43 PM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

When my mother and I were cleaning out the basement of the family home before her death, we came across a stash of Playboy magazines from the 60s. My father's? My brother's? As I wondered if I should show them to her, or if the shock would cause her to keel over, she came over. "Those were your brother's," said my mother. "You knew he had them?" My mother? Strict, New England Catholic had allowed her 16 year old son to have these in her home? "Of course," she said. "And you let them stay?" She gave me a look. "He was a teenage boy. That was normal." Raising two teenage boys of my own, I occasionally thought about that when confronted with which battles to fight. Since each boy had his own computer, easy access to porn was a concern and I did run a search to see what they could find. I was horrified at what was available on line-- free. Playboy bunnies are one thing; sex that involves urination, defecation, strange objects, and teenage sluts another thing entirely. By the teen years there is not a great deal of control a parent can have over the computer or their movies, and it's silly to think you can do very much, so all we did was talk to the boys about the issues and hope for the best. I am sure they and their friends explored, and I am sad not that they might have seen some lovely naked women,which would have been fine, but that they probably saw some of the truly sick and degrading things that are out there-- simulation or not, these were not "normal" in my view. That this could be available to preteens and younger appalls me. They have no context, no perspective, no way of handling things that are so alien and out of their framework, and, like you, if I saw some very young children looking at porn in the library, I would call the librarian's attention to it, and ask if she would at least mention it the parent. I don't see objecting to porn in this way as either a crusade, or a negative form of interfering, nor as a parent do I believe that having someone call attention to something my child is doing out of my sight is interfering with my rights to parent as I see fit. It is just one of the issues that face parents that should be considered and dealt with in one way or another. It doesn't mean you give less time to other issues, or even that you place it high on your list of priority issues. I don't get the objections to your objections.