Topic awaiting preservation: dating rituals

How far is too far when parents want to control their children's love life? My sister's conservative friend cannot go on a date with her new boyfriend without a chaperone. I think some involvment of parents isn't bad, but is that going too far.

A date with a chaperone ? How old is she ... 12yo ?

I believe it is wrong for parents to let their children date at a very young age like leaving them at the mall or dropping them off at the movies as young as twelve years old. If you have been to the cinemas on a Friday nite its full of young teens checking every one out.. There is holding hands and kissing. Honestly, there is so much time for that when the kids grow up...Its like the parents are letting them grow up too early by taking their dolls or tinker toys away....A lot has to do with maturity.
I know its a good oulet for socializing and it may be innocent but for the parents to take them like on a date and drop them off seems like its going a little to far..

Back in the 70s in my culture it was traditional for my sisters and myself when we started dating to take another sibling along.. But when my younger sisters were out it was ok for them to go out alone but they were not under age....I do not think anything is wrong with a chaparones..if it warrents...

A lot depends on how old, and what is meant by chaperone (older brother, her parents, etc..) - answer that and we can move on.

(Edited by DL-44 on 02-16-2006 20:53)

Maturity has alot to do with responsibilities, risks and social standards. But the effects of the changes in appearance, and voice are not to be overlooked. Still in cultures where boys and girls come of age (and are given more responsibilities) sooner they also mature sooner. In most modern cultures young people mature as they start worrying about their independent future. This is around the age of 16 to 21.

In countries (or cultures) where teenagers are kept well informed about the responsibilities and risks that they will have to face in not so distant future teens also act more responsibly. But teenagers must be given freedom in order for that information to have any effect. At least a sense of freedom does just as well because in one way or another irresponsible behaviour must be followed by consequences. But kids must be told about them before there's actually any for them to be applied.

My opinion is that taking away freedom from kids will only make them rebell more and make them act irresponsibly. Kids must take that freedom from themselves by themselves and they must be taught how to do that and why. Of course this is only possible when the person in question is intellectually and physically sufficiently developed. Kids should be able to make alot of important and difficult decisions by themselves at the age of 14 if they are properly educated.

Parents should think about the social standards before they actually force them on their kids. Are really all of those rules there for a reason? Are some of them just traditions? What are the connections between those rules and their religion. Does the religion state those rules or have the religious leaders done so? Should your child have freedom to choose? Or do you think of yourself as the allknowing and wise?

But then ... where reason ends, religion takes over.

edit: typo typo typo ...

(Edited by Arthurio on 02-16-2006 23:35)

quote:

---

Kids should be able to make alot of important and difficult decisions by themselves at the age of 14 if they are properly educated.

---

I find this hard to believe.....14???? Why

Here in the US, laws force parents to be the responsible party, for their children up until the age of 18.

Until they reach that age, ALL parents should be involved in ALL aspects of "rearing" their child.

Without question.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
" The noblest pleasure is the joy of understanding, and being understood. "

If parents do their job correctly up until the point when their children start dating, then the chances something not good will happen are incredibly low.

Let's see.

I started dating when I was about 10 years old, I would meet my girlfriend in town or the park, probably with her friend and holding hands would probably happen, I would eventually want to leave and play with my friends and if things got really crazy I might have kissed her on the lips.

I was 13 when I kissed a girl properly, this was after school yet still on the school grounds, it was incredible.

The rest as they say is history, I won't get into the juicy bits but suffice to say at the end of my teenage years I was experienced enough to enjoy my 20's and look a girl in the eye and I've never been chaperoned!

i believe what you guys mean is a chaperon. (without the 'e' cause chaperone is something different. )

http://www.answers.com/chaperone&r=67

either spelling appears to be acceptable.

The title "Dating Rituals" also intrigues me. I will wait till James02 answers the questions of age etc' before I add my two penneth on the subject.
"Dating rituals" makes me think of dancing 'round fires naked, body painting and some token sacrifice to the moon, Aphrodite or Baccus.

::tao:::: ::cell::

Great link btw DL. I've just downloaded the Firefox extension. Thanks for that

::tao:::: ::cell::

quote:

---

jade said:
I find this hard to believe.....14???? Why

---

Maybe you should ask yourself: why not? Assuming that you have a teenager daughter. Try to put yourself in her situation. Does telling her that "she is not old enough to decide for herself", "she is not wise enough" etc make her confident about herself? Will it help her learn to make difficult decisions? Maturity is all about being able to make the right decisions. By restricting her life unreasonably she won't remember you as the one who didn't take her toys away. - This part was all hypothetical please don't take it personally.

I don't know about the US but around here teenagers at the age of 14 or above can be held responsible for their crimes. However the charges are somewhat milder.

reisio: exactly my point

Good one Blaise. It's like that around here as well. 10-year olds don't have sex in the bushes ... they might just hold hands and in the extremest of cases one of them might kiss the other on a cheek. And guess what they are completely satisfied by that.
At the age of 14 kissing becomes a bit more common.
Some have had sex before they reach 17. I'm not really sure if I should approve that. But this is their decision.

In IT communities someone who tries to control all aspects of something or everything is called a "control freak".

Bring back bundeling! But make sure there are no knot-holes in that board.

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

What is "bundeling" ?

::tao:::: ::cell::

quote:

---

Tao said:

What is "bundeling" ?

---

"back in the day" (think 1800's and earlier perhaps), it was common for a suitor to come visit an available young woman. In areas where the trip would be far, it was common for the man to spend the night. For a variety of possible reasons, he would spend the night in the young woman's bed with her.
To avoid any uncouth behavior, the man would be wrapped - his whole body more or less bound in sheets, so he would be unabkle to violate the wholesome young lady. There would also usually be a borad dropped between them, fitting into the head and foot of the bed so as to remain secure, dividing them from each other (think cheap family restaurants...the boards they use to divide booths from each other).



(Edited by DL-44 on 02-17-2006 19:02)

I thought you meant the activity where young kids used to jump on top of each other shouting 'BUNDLE!'

LOL brilliant discription. Thank you DL, I have never heard that term before, or the very bizarre behaviour it describes.

::tao:::: ::cell::

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundling_(tradition)

didn't even work

To answer some questions:
My sister's friend is a sophamore in highschool.
The chaperon is my sister (also sophamore, approved by the friend's parents).

Excellent ideas all. I think you hit the nail on the head, Resio, that if parents do the hard work of bringing their child up right when they are young, they will hopefully stick to that course through their dating life. Fortunately my parents are strong believers that everyone has their own choices and their own path to walk. Unfortunately, I think some parents can't allow their children the chance to make choices and make mistakes. They want to live their child's lives for them.

I have heard recently that this protectiveness of watching children like hawks is a "generational" thing. That this generation's parents are trying to make up for their own childhood through the lives of their children. Any thoughts?

quote:

---

James02 said:

My sister's friend is a sophamore in highschool.
The chaperon is my sister (also sophamore, approved by the friend's parents).

---

This is not in any possible way "going too far" or being a control freak. This is responsible parenting.
This is a perfectly acceptable arrangement, IMO.

I think far too many parents opt *not* to take such steps.
Parents having "done their job correctly" is an awfully vague thing. I feel I have behaved in such a way, as a father, as to allow my daughter (11 years old now) to have learned from both her good and bad decisions, and to live responsibly. But responsibility is a relative term. The level of responsibility that can be expected of a 14-15 year old is far different from the responsibility expected of an adult.
Having raised your child "correctly" cannot account for the other person - leaving a teenage girl unsupervised with a new boyfriend is the type of situation that can turn ugly really easily (yeah, maybe I can be a little paranoid...but do you read the news often???).

To suggest that sending an older sibling as a chaperon for a highschool sophomore and her new boyfriend on a date is in any way overly controlling is plain silly, IMO. To *not* do so would be careless and irresponsible.

Some clarification required again please.
At what age is a person referred to as a sophomore (I think this is the correct spelling, as opposed to "sophamore")? I realise this must be linked to schooling, so it may be a term used for a particular age range.
I think if "bundeling" referred to earlier had been spelt properly "Bundling" I would have found the meaning myself also

::tao:::: ::cell::

Sophomore = 2nd year of highschool - usually around 15 years old.

Thank you once again Mr DL. It may be just me, but I have a hard time understanding some American terms like this. I suppose this is why some software actually gives us the option to install "English (UK) or English (American)".

::tao:::: ::cell::

I know a hopeless cause when I see one
This is one of those threads where noone actually listens to what others have to say. Incl. me because I know I'm right and I'm sure you feel the same way about your opinion. So I'll just stop here.

Arthurio: I don't see where you've actually addressed the question anywhere in your posts

How can you "just stop here" when you haven't actually adressed the point of the post?

I should say here at the start that I do not have any children of my own, but I have faced this question many times in the past when I was working in childrens homes. I know this is a completely different senario than yours James02 but these are my thoughts.
Kids are pressurised from a very early age by the constant bombardment of the specialised media advertising, devoted to selling "stuff" to children. As is the case with the advertising "creatives" of such media companies, who will use any means that their legal department will clear to gain a bigger slice of the market.
The slogan "sex sells" applies here and you can find examples of it in music, fashion and "teen magazines" in fact most advertising uses it to a greater or lesser extent.
This I feel, puts pressure on children to conform to the medias idea of normal through the most powerful of channels, peer pressure, and this in turn challenges parents who are made to feel overbearing if they attempt to restrict their childrens activities.
Now to be more specific to James02 and his question, well, as specific as I can be without all the relevent details.
A fifteen year old supervising another fifteen year old, I don't think so. If it matters enough for you to be concerned about a fifteen year olds behaviour then don't entrust it to another fifteen year old.

quote:

---

James02 said:

How far is too far when parents want to control their children's love life?

---

That claws at my throat, "children's love life". Children do feel love of course and as we all know, love is a powerful emotion, but the emotional maturity of children leaves them very vunerable and we as adults need to be there to guide and protect.

I wanted to add more but I am getting called away, so I will post this as is and come back to it later if needed.

::tao:::: ::cell::

Sex is one of the most powerful forces in our lives.

Where sex is not demonized by the religious, sex crimes are less seldom seen.

In societies where sex is seen as 'dirty' or 'evil' or 'wrong' society puts a great deal or pressure on young people who are wondering why anything that feels so good, should be considered wrong.

So you get people feeling bad and or guilty about sex and this can lead to abuse or other malfunctions of the psyche.

The US is a good example of such a society, sex everywhere you turn and at the same time, the bible-thumpers screaming about how wrong it is. Lots of guilt down there. Canadians are a bit less repressed, but lately more of the xian nitbars are coming up here to try to screw us up as well.

I don't know how old my daughter was when she first started enjoying sex, but I hope it was fairly early and always a great pleasure for her. I certainly never did anything to inhibit her sexual drive or curiosity.

But I kinda like the idea of a chaperone for a young couple, could lead to a nice menage a trois.

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

... lol ... seems that I can't give up on this forum yet

(Edited by Arthurio on 02-19-2006 19:00)

quote:

---

Where sex is not demonized by the religious, sex crimes are less seldom seen

---

.

Diogenes.


I will have to disagree...Here in the DA office for Harris county in Houston...There are so many sex crimes that it is just unbelievable how many are committed by juveniles.

In fact when I go down the elevator I have to pass the bulletin board where they list daily cases...Many are child sexual abuse, sexual aggravated assault and murder. But the most involve sexual assualt.. This is on a daily basis. Many are sex with a minor by teenage boys...So how does religion play a factor in these many cases. Why is religion always the scapegoat in the regard to repression that make people act against the law. This is so outer limits.


I bet if you did a study on these criminals you would see most never went to church or embraced any religion... Religion does not view sex in a negative way. The masses of media outlets(TV, Movies, Girly Magazines, Videos, Music, Paris Hilton) us the body as a degration of the human spirit for instant gratification becasue its make money. This is not the reason the human body was created for...only for sexual pleasure.. There are other more important means that the human body was created for.

(Edited by jade on 02-20-2006 16:41)

Well thanks Jade, Texas is one of the most sexually repressed areas on the face of the earth, rivalled only by Georgia, a few other states and the Islamic countries.

Hell, you are living proof.

Why not bring back the chastity belt?

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

quote:

---

Well thanks Jade, Texas is one of the most sexually repressed areas on the face of the earth, rivalled only by Georgia, a few other states and the Islamic countries.

---

That does not anwser my comment. What about all the rapes and un consentual sex between persons expecially young teenagers as young as 14 yrs old? What is your answer??? Give the young on the threshold of purberty condoms to encourage sex or chaperones...

quote:

---

Hell, you are living proof.

---

Proof of what ...that I encourage abstinence for many reasons?

(Edited by jade on 02-20-2006 22:02)

Ok, let's take a GIANT step back for a moment -

We are not talking, even remotely, about whether or not people should enjoy a healthy sex-life. We are talking about sending a young girl out, for all intents and purposes with strangers, on her own.

Sexual repression, the true nature of sex, healthy views of sex, proper age for the start of sexual relationships, etc, are WELL beyond the scope of this discussion.

Before running off and huge tangents, can we at least address the actual question posed by the original poster here?

Now, first of all, at 14/15, I certainly would not be prepared to accept graciously that my daughter was having a sexual relationship at all. However, more importantly, the kind of sexual activity that worries me is the non-consentual kind.

The vast majority of reported rape victims are teenage girls.
The vast majority of reported rapes are perpetrated by someone the victim knows.
The vast majority of rapists are males age 14-25.

Rape by persons who are described as someone who "would never hurt a person" are very common.
It is not uncommon for rape to end in murder.

My daughter is intelligent.
My daughter is a black-belt in Taekwondo.
My daughter is allowed a fair amount of leeway and personal freedom.

My daughter will not be going on dates alone with a 'new boyfriend' in the foreseeable future.

And nothing you guys have posted even addresses the actual issue - if you have something to add that is an actual response to the question posed, or to my comments, I am all ears.

---------------------------------------

As for the 'menage a trois' -
http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/02/08/teen.dismembered.ap/
Yeah, gotta love those teen threesomes......





(Edited by DL-44 on 02-20-2006 23:06)

Ok, this is one of those really dangerous converstaions. This is a time when everyone will be wrong in someones eyes, and everyone will be right.
So "Little Suzies" conservative parents are afraid that if she goes out on a date she is going to end up rutting like a wild dog in the back of her boyfriends Hemi-Cuda. Then she's gonna get pregnant, drop out of school, get hooked on drugs, and really just flush her life away. All because "Little Suzie" had SEX. (I could be wrong here, but I think this is the fear.) Now there are a lot of ways that you can make sex dirty, but not so many make it look ugly like this. If "Little Suzies" parents were to take the "3Rule" approach to sex, "Little Suzie" (IMHO) would be just fine.
Rule 1: Sex should be consensual.
At any time anyone can say "NO" and everyone goes to a neutral corner. If your not at all sure, say no. If you are sure, move to rule two.
Rule 2: Sex Should be safe.
I don't mean just condoms, dental dams, gloves and the like. Those are the mainstays of Rule number two. I also mean having sex on a motorcycle going 95mph, is not safe. If things are not safe go back to rule one. If things are safe, move to rule three.
Rule 3: Sex should be fun.
Sex can be a whole lot more than ripping each others clothes off and playing at hide the sausage. If you are not having any fun before the clothes are even undone, go back to rule one. Sex should be fun and enjoyable, if your not having fun or are scared, rule numero uno should go in effect. However, if you have reach this point, you should be having fun, because the basic criteria are met.
Now I know someone is going to tell me "wait until marriage" or "wait until older". Notice, I'm not putting any dates or times on this. It's up to each persons values, and beliefs on when they should have sex. And even after 40 years of marriage, the "3Rules" still apply.

Now as an aside, I really believe sex would not be such a big issue if the United States, as a whole, didn't try to make sex immoral, nasty, and icky. If the U.S. were to treat sex like many other countries do, as a wonderful beautiful act, then there would be fewer issues over it. And we could spend quality time education all the young people in the U.S. about sex, instead of blushing about it, speaking in whispers, and generally being puritanical about the issue.

One of my favorite lines I like to use when educating about being more open about talking about sex is; Sex is hereditary, chances are if your parents didn't have sex, neither will you.

Disclaimer: These days I'm a bit of a smut peddler, so telling me I'm dirty or nasty is moot at best.



F1_edit: DL's right, and made that reply as I was typing. Sex isn't the issue, but like everyone else, I got off track.

(Edited by F1_error on 02-20-2006 23:13)

For sure this is why there is always a need for chaperons..not only to supervise the children but anyone who would want to harm your children on an innocent date...by taking advantage of them since they are under age
if that be the case.

My son is 18 and very mature and I trust him... I would never presume to send him out with a chaperone... Then again I was not the kind of mother who would drop him off at the movies or mall or at a person house that I did not know very well when he was younger. I was protective and cautious...Most of the time my house was grand central station with all my children's friends for parties. I guess you could say I or my husband were the chapereons most of the time.

DL got me thinking. And I believe that 14/15 is an ok age to start dating, as long as they are given the same rules I was at that time. You go "out" some where (ie. school dance, run for a slice, movie, etc..) then you come right home. After a while of doing this "out & back", if they want to deviate from the plan (ie. slice then decide to go to a movie) you have to call home, and give an update, and an exact time to be home. In these days of everyone has a cell phone, this is alot easier. Now if I were to deviate from said plan, I was grounded, and not allowed to continue to date that person. That seemed to work for me, up until I left home.
Now this whole "chaperone" issue is up to the parents value system. I'm pretty sure that if my Mom had been able to, I would have had a chaperone when I began dating (I'm still introduced as her "baby boy"). But if you are going to have a chaperone, it should not be someone from the same age group. That IMHO is asking for trouble. You could have someone you trust from church or scouts or a neighbor you trust, do the chaperoning. Maybe even do a "double date", Mom & Dad go out with "Little Suzie", but sit at a different table. But it's up to the values the parents have and hold dear, that is what is most important (even if it's values I don't agree with). If they were parents without values, then I would think them to be unfit parents.

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

And nothing you guys have posted even addresses the actual issue - if you have something to add that is an actual response to the question posed, or to my comments, I am all ears.

---

Sorry DL-44, I thought I had, in part at least.

Question:
"My sister's conservative friend cannot go on a date with her new boyfriend without a chaperone. I think some involvment of parents isn't bad, but is that going too far."
Answer:
"Now to be more specific to James02 and his question, well, as specific as I can be without all the relevent details.
A fifteen year old supervising another fifteen year old, I don't think so. If it matters enough for you to be concerned about a fifteen year olds behaviour then don't entrust it to another fifteen year old."

Perhaps this was not specific enough to the instance that James 02 was talking about, but I did say I was getting called away at that time. The only other thing that I wanted to add to my initial post is this.
The emotional maturity of children leaves them very vunerable and we as adults need to be there to guide and protect. How this is done will vary from family to family, but it should be a natural part of the structure of family life. Not seen as some arbitrary rules to control the lives of our young ones.
Specifics, well you have me there, I can't give specifics to such a generalised question as "How far is too far?" Unless you want an example of locking them up in thier room untill they reach the legal age of consent. That is too far.
Diogenes, nearly all of the posts I have read of yours seem to spit hate. You seem to delight in the thought of mocking religious people. Now it seems the whole state of Texas has your considered displeasure. Is this attitude of deliberately mocking and trying perhaps to enrage not called Flaming?
It most certainly does not help towards a balanced and meaningfull discussion. Also anything of worth you might have to offer is lost in these diatribes.

::tao:::: ::cell::

(Edited by Tao on 02-21-2006 13:15)

quote:

---

Diogenes, nearly all of the posts I have read of yours seem to spit hate. You seem to delight in the thought of mocking religious people. Now it seems the whole state of Texas has your considered displeasure. Is this attitude of deliberately mocking and trying perhaps to enrage not called Flaming?
It most certainly does not help towards a balanced and meaningfull discussion. Also anything of worth you might have to offer is lost in these diatribes.

---

I totally agree...I know there is a different side of Diogenes if he would allow us to see it..
Maybe his negative outlook on life issues stems from something experienced by a religious. But that is another post discussion

Sorry, Tao, I should have been more clear - my comment was directed at Dio and Arthurio, and not meant as a general comment.

I have been witness many times to teens who are attracted to each other in how very cute and pleasant it looks when they are first aware of each other. Its such cute adolescence flirting. Especially when young teens start to approach the opposite sex and they are not too sure of themselves... Its part of the cycle of life in its very young stages of forming partnerships. Its human nature to want to form parterships...but when its based on a sexual activity at a very young age it clouds the view of what a real partnership commitment is. You can do very little once your child or older teen starts to discover and experiment out in the real world when your not with them. All you can do is give them the necessary information and send them on their way. I would lthink if you practiced good parenting skills for them hopefully they will make the right decisions. If they are pressured from their dates because one is more experienced sexually than the other, that is something you cannot control if your not there. When the human sexual nature starts flowing thru kissing and then petting, etc, it hard to stop for someone who has is sexually active as oppose to the virgin who has never experienced sexual activity.

Diogenes:

I spent my teenage years in and around Atlanta, GA and I don't seem to recall anything even approaching sexual repression. I do remember quit a bit of hypocrisy by members of certain religous groups, but just about everyone was sexually active (or at least trying to be!).

Thanks for the clarificaton DL-44.
I thought I must be having one of my intermittent brain-farts again

::tao:::: ::cell::

http://www.woodstocksentinelreview.com/story.php?id=214639

http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news/legislature/13914369.htm

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-02/iu-tse022006.php

This last one should not be read by Jade. It contains hard facts and trh=uths which she will be unable to assimilate and just con-incidentally supports my view of Texas.

http://www.alternet.org/rights/32367/

I find it amusing that we who are not afraid to stand up and criticize religion are usually characterized as "hate-filled".

It is always easy to demonize such people when one is unable to shoot them.

"Power corrupts and absolute power, corrupts absolutely".

Religion in general, has not been something the criticizing of which has been politically correct for some hundreds of years.

But it deserves a great deal of criticism in general and in most cases, specifically.

One of the best examples of this is the current issue of pedophiles in the various faiths and how they have been sheltered, hidden and protected with absolutely no consideration what-so-ever for the victims.

So when I tell you the biggest problem with teen dating and prgnancy in the world is the demonizing of sex by the religious, I am pointing out a hard fact, not spewing hate.

I understand if one is religious and unable to refute the facts I present, it is much easier just to grab the verbal shotgun and fire away.

I don't care.

The facts remain after the smoke has cleared.

Here is a fact; kids are going to have sex regardless of what your desire as a parent is.

Yor responsibility as a parent is to make sure they are damn good a ready for it. If you don't and someone gets pregnant...it is your fault not theirs, they merely responded to nature's clarion call.

I'd far rather have a child growing up in Sweden than in the hypocritical, moral morass called the USA.

Have a nice day.

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

quote:

---

Diogenes said:

I find it amusing that we who are not afraid to stand up and criticize religion are usually characterized as "hate-filled".

---

I find it amusing (well, not really, but we'll keep this on the same track...) that you consistently pick traits that you have in common with many people here as the reason people single you out.

quote:

---

Diogenes said:

I understand if one is religious and unable to refute the facts I present,

---

Yes...that's my problem - I am too religious...

I have yet to see you post anything even remotely relevant to the topic
Where are all these facts that you speak of?

And I must say, I am at a complete loss as to what it is you think your links provide

The links provided some interesting and topical info on teen-age sex, which I believe is germane to the topic.

The final link also provided interesting and topical information on how the xian right is screwing up your kids in regards to sex, which, I believe, is germane to the topic.

Your great grandmother and mine, were very likely mothers before the age of 16, possibly more than once, possibly younger than that.

In societies where the life span is relatively short, women enter menarche at a much younger age than in North America and Europe. Therefore they tend to become mothers at an early age...it is not unheard of for 11 or 12 year olds to be bearing children and successfully at that.

Simple fact of the matter is, (he repeates) your kids are going to have sex, like it or not.

Do you want them to feel guilty, ugly, bad, evil, sinful or just plain bad about it?

Or would you, like the Swedes, prefer to accept reality and do all you can to prepare your young people for a safe and joyful sex life?

From what I am reading here, many of you would be far happier knowing your kids are having sex and feeling real bad about it.

Suggests something about their parents, don't you think?

quote:

---

I find it amusing (well, not really, but we'll keep this on the same track...) that you consistently pick traits that you have in common with many people here as the reason people single you out.

---

That you recognize these traits in others, but fail or refuse to realize I don't share them but rather am merely not afraid to tred on your shibboleths without a care in the world about how you feel about that fact or think about me is telling in itself.

The messanger is never popular when he brings bad news or truth, or both.

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

Dio:

quote:

---

Or would you, like the Swedes, prefer to accept reality and do all you can to prepare your young people for a safe and joyful sex life?

---

Now exactly where did Sweden as a nation get involved here???
As a non religious father of 3 and a Swede to boot I must say that I'm 100% sure that my nationality has absolutely zip zero nada to do with my whishes that my children should grow up safely in all respects.
As for sex, my view is that children should not have sex, plain and simply because they are children, that's not because I'm swedish... Come on, how ridicilous is that?

Now do note that there are a lot of ppl in sweden with exactly the same view as you dio are placing on the US population. Nationality has nothing to do with it, religion however imposes views on ppl so that has a larger impact than nationality, still in catholic countries kids still experiment, most probably more ashamed and less openly but still...

All living beeings are however sexual by nature, that together with eating & sleeping is fuelled by the most basic need there is, survivability of the speices. As humans we do have the possibillity of adding choice to instincts.

This means that as parents it is our responsibility to keep guiding and protecting our young so they don't have to repeat the known big mistakes in life. Now, we cannot and should not shelter them from all mistakes, after all if you never f*ck up, how will you learn???

Currently in Sweden there is a discussion on whether it is right to have sex-ed in school to 12-13 yrs old, showing them how condoms etc works (legal age in sweden is 15 yrs), a lot feels that this is too early since they aren't allowed, others feel it's better to know ahead of time. Personally I tend to lean towards the second alternative, in part because if you hide things from kids they will actively try to find it... And believe me, sooner or later they will find out...

On the chaperoning part, I'm both for and against it.
I'm for it because things can easily get out of hand with two kids of different experience-levels that llikes each other. I'm against it because it goes against my personal belief that you need your private space and personal experiences to learn.

When it's time for my kids... I'm not sure but I don't think I'll chaperone them on dates...
I'm actually more concerned of the predators and imposters on the net nowadays, kids are getting verbally raped and goaded into webcams etc on a daily basis which is just as bad imho.

On a side note, those of you that are for chaperoning, are that primarily for girls or... I'm kind of getting the feeling of young boys are painted as the sexual predators here...

One thing I really dislike as chaperoning comes up is that in all instances where I have seen families that use it, it is to preserve a girls virginity while the boy is encouraged to "go out there and become a man", that is to me an extremly dangerous point of view. After all, if the girls are supposed to stay virgins and the boys are supposed to become men, exactly where are the boys supposed to get "it"???
From someone elses daughter I suppose...

Ah the wonders of double standards and humans...
/D

{cell 260} {Blog}
-{"Theories without facts are just religions...?}-

Didja read the article?

http://www.alternet.org/rights/32367/

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

Dio - all your other blather aside....you still have not actually answered the question posed.

I must reiterate: the topic is not "what's your view of sex?", and it is not "how has christianity affected our view of sex?"

While sex is obviously part of the issue, it is hardly the whole issue. Religion, on the other hand, is not part of the issue at all. Abortion rights have even less to do with it.

I know you just can't wait to turn every topic into an all out religion bash, and then rail on everyone for how unaffected you are by any one else's views....

But once in awhile addressing the *actual* topic of a thread would probably be a good idea.

Ok, I'll directly respond to the first post.

I believe, since we don't know how old the kids are, but assuming 14 or so, that this is paranoia personified.

If you live in an area where you have to be worried about bad guys raping and murdering your sons, daughters or self, then move or get self-defence and firarms training.

I suspect, the incidence rape and or murder in such circunstances is vanishingly small, but is blown way out of proportion by media and panic-stricken parents who are likely not capable of cogent reasoning.

My daughter never had a chaperone on a date and never got raped or murdered.

But then we live in Canada, a kinder, gentler society outside of Toronoto, Montreal and Vacouver all of which have developed the "American Syndrome".

There, not one reference to religion.

Happy?

Since most discussions evolve, the religious aspect of this (recall that James and jade are both heavily infected) seems to me to be a natural step. I know you don't like having your faith attacked, especially when the facts are imnpossible to refute, but it is reality.

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

I'm sorry about this little digression folks.
Diogenes, this:

quote:

---

Diogenes said:

This last one should not be read by Jade. It contains hard facts and trh=uths which she will be unable to assimilate and just con-incidentally supports my view of Texas.

---

Is the kind of snide aside remarks that does your cause no good.

quote:

---

Diogenes said:

I find it amusing that we who are not afraid to stand up and criticize religion are usually characterized as "hate-filled".

---

Honestly Load of rhubarb. I doubt if anyone here is "afraid" of criticising religion.

quote:

---

Diogenes said:

It is always easy to demonize such people when one is unable to shoot them.

"Power corrupts and absolute power, corrupts absolutely".

---

What! Shoot?

quote:

---

Diogenes said:

That you recognize these traits in others, but fail or refuse to realize I don't share them but rather am merely not afraid to tred on your shibboleths without a care in the world about how you feel about that fact or think about me is telling in itself.

The messanger is never popular when he brings bad news or truth, or both.

---

Come on fella, get a grip. Where are you going with all this?

"WordNet (r) 2.0"
shibboleth
n 1: a favorite saying of a sect or political group [syn: motto,
slogan, catchword]
2: a manner of speaking that is distinctive of a particular
group of people

I, of course, had to look it up.

Why did you feel the need to write this?

quote:

---

Diogenes said:

From what I am reading here, many of you would be far happier knowing your kids are having sex and feeling real bad about it.

Suggests something about their parents, don't you think?

---

This is another example for me, of a barbed comment that only hinders communication and understanding.
I realise that I may be viewed as oversensitive in these matters, but I also believe that the best way to understanding and (yes, the big ol' hippie in me makes me say) peace, in this world is through honest and considered dialogue.

I do apologise for going off topic but I felt this to be important, I'm hoping you'll understand

::tao:::: ::cell::

quote:

---

Diogenes said:

I know you don't like having your faith attacked

---

Are we on the same planet here? Have we not engaged in countless discussions in which my atheism and others has been well documented?
Of course, once again you mention "facts" without actually providing any.

However, back to the point:

quote:

---

Diogenes said:

My daughter never had a chaperone on a date and never got raped or murdered.

---

That's a very comforting statistic...

quote:

---

Diogenes said:

If you live in an area where you have to be worried about bad guys raping and murdering your sons, daughters or self, then move or get self-defence and firarms training.

---

Any area can be such an area. These actions are not by any stretch confined to urban centers, and are certainly not confined to the U.S.

"Bad guys" are everywhere, and can be anyone - quite often the seemingly "normal" people around you.

I agree wholeheartedly that a parent needs to focus on raising a child in such a manner that they will be able to protect themselves, to make good choices, etc.
However, as has been discussed, the emotional maturity of a 15 year old is very often quite lacking in one way or another. This is unavoidable - it is the nature of the age.

You can't raise your kid in a bubble, but it is as much a parent's job to help ensure a safe environment as it is to provide a good education, ie "doing their job properly".

IMO



(Edited by DL-44 on 02-24-2006 01:28)

Gentlebeings: I thought about the last two posts overnight, with the following results;

Tao: your observations are interesting, but again you are focussing on the messenger, not the message.

That you are distressed because I have a tendency to speak clearly and perhaps in your view a bit roughly, instead of couching things in velvet-coated verbiage, is not something with which I am concerned.

If my style gets in the way of what I am saying for you, then perhaps you must consider examining or re-examining something in your own conceptions/perceptions?

I have found, over the years, that saying what I think in as plain language as possible leads to much less confusion as to what I mean. I mean to leave as little room for doubt about my position as possible.

If this does not lead to peace, the weight of that falls not upon me, but upon those who choose to take umbrage.

Yes, in my view, you and several others here are oversensitive.

Oops-you are right, misused 'shibboleth' should have said something like "slaughtering sacred cows".

DL; In fact I would argue you do have a faith and that faith is xianity. As an avowed aetheist you are denying the existance of god, perhaps all gods, but considering where you livce and all, especially the xian god.

To my way of thinking, this is an admission there is something in which not to believe.

For myself, there is nothing in which not to believe. One cannot disbelieve in that which does not exist.

As for "facts", I have provided a plethora, in which area do you find those facts deficient?

In any event, you have been so dedicated to criticising what and how I have been saying things, I have seen little to rebut any of the stats and articles I have posted.

I agree with your opinion about 'raising a child properly'.

However, this definition changes with each individual parent.

I feel fairly confident Jade for instance, would strongly disagree with the Swedish approach as explained in the link I provided, while you might embrace certain aspects of it and reject others. I, on the other hand, embrace it wholeheartedly.

I repeat what I wrote above;

quote:

---

From what I am reading here, many of you would be far happier knowing your kids are having sex and feeling real bad about it.

---

This refers of course, to the Swedish approach, which sure seems to put the health, welfare and happiness of their children above petty considerations predicated upon archaic, outmoded and totally unrealistic attitudes as are seen in other parts of the world and which have been expressed on these pages by certain individuals.

Back to facts: with very few exceptions kids are going to have sex, some as young as 10 years old in this poart of the world.

Think back, you were all kids, you were-wirth some likely exceptions-fascinated with sex.

Kids have not changed, except for the fact they have sex thrust at them more than we ever did every time they turn on a TV or look at a billboard.

If anything they are more polarized and less afraid of sex than many of us were.

Perhaps your own behaviour as teens is a factor in the fears your are expressing now for your own kids?

Perhaps, if you had not been brainwashed by church and society as a teen, you would not be trying to do the same job on your own kids?

If you love them, let them go.

But, let them go well-armed with information, love and reassurance they will not be going to some mythological hell if they have sex outside of matrimoney.

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

quote:

---

Diogenes said:

I have seen little to rebut any of the stats and articles I have posted.

---

And as I have said, the articles you posted, along with the vast majority of the words you have posted, have nothing to do with what we are talking about - other than the fact that you wish to turn every discussion into a religion bash.

There is nothing for me to refute, and I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your point in regard to the articles. They simply don't apply to the topic at hand.

Again I'll say - as for the rest of your blather - whatever makes you feel better I guess....



(Edited by DL-44 on 02-24-2006 18:10)

quote:

---

Diogenes said:

But, let them go well-armed with information, love and reassurance they will not be going to some mythological hell if they have sex outside of matrimoney.

---

And again..you're "preaching to the choir" so to speak...

You continue to assume that sex (and the effect of religion on sex) is the only concern that I would have as a parent.

Perhaps this is simply an overcompensation for *your* experience as a teen?

My view is certainly not based on any religious brainwashing, or any sexual repression.

So you say.

In any event, the commentary was directed as much at everyone who reads these pages as you.

I might be overcompensating, could never get enough of it as a kid and even now, once a day and twice each day on weekends seems barely enough.

Which is one of the reasons I hope my daughter is enjoying an active and satisfying sex life.

Thee is such joy in the act, it is totally irrational to want to deny it to another, especially someone we love.

Whether one os religious or not, one is still affected by the effect religion has had on society.

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

Missed your first rejoinder; we shall have to disagree, I believe the two are intimately connected and that my links were very germane to furthering and expanding the discussion.

One cannot do very much without encountering the stifling attempts of religion.

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

quote:

---

Diogenes said:

Tao: your observations are interesting, but again you are focussing on the messenger, not the message.

---

In case it was not clear to you. It?s the messenger that I wanted to focus on in the last post, not the message, whatever that was supposed to be.

quote:

---

Diogenes said:

That you are distressed because I have a tendency to speak clearly and perhaps in your view a bit roughly, instead of couching things in velvet-coated verbiage, is not something with which I am concerned.

If my style gets in the way of what I am saying for you, then perhaps you must consider examining or re-examining something in your own conceptions/perceptions?

I have found, over the years, that saying what I think in as plain language as possible leads to much less confusion as to what I mean. I mean to leave as little room for doubt about my position as possible.

---

Diogenes, you don't "have a tendency to speak clearly".

quote:

---

Diogenes said:

That you recognize these traits in others, but fail or refuse to realize I don't share them but rather am merely not afraid to tred on your shibboleths without a care in the world about how you feel about that fact or think about me is telling in itself.

---

I would not call ^that "a tendency to speak clearly".

So you don't care what other people here think, is that right?

Your style does get in the way, yes. As for the message HA! Who do you think you are? I'm tempted to say some kind of prophet because that is what all this "My Message" malarchy sounds very much like.
I constantly reassess my perceptions thank you.
Also it is gross stupidity to think that you can say what you like, insult who you like, in the full knowledge of what you are doing, and then to say:

quote:

---

Diogenes said:

If this does not lead to peace, the weight of that falls not upon me, but upon those who choose to take umbrage.

---

If you can not see how wrong this is then you really are, a foolish man.

Diogenese, I believe one should conduct oneself in an honorable manner in life, be it at work at home ar even online.
You, it appears do not.

::tao:::: ::cell::

[ed] spelling [/ed]

(Edited by Tao on 02-25-2006 14:03)

You are right Tao. I don't care what other people think. I am a whatyuseeiswhatyouget sort of fella.

I insult no one. But some people are so willing and ready to be insulted, they will be so at any given opportunity and if no opportunity presents itself, they will invent one.

Honourable? It has been my experience in a long life that those who bark the most about honour are those with the least amount of it.

Prophet? Me? Thanks but it smacks too much of religion, so Imust decline the post.

Have you considerd the possibility you take youself a little too seriously? Life's a laugh pal, get and giggle and enjoy it.

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

I should correct myself, I meant to say:
I believe one should try to conduct oneself in an honorable manner in life, be it at work at home ar even online.
Yes you are right Diogenes, I think I do, at times "take youself a little too seriously?"

I thank you for pointing it out.

::tao:::: ::cell::

I don't get insulted on account of things like this, but I do read what's on the screen and sometimes I cannot restrain myself from commenting.

Dio.
These lines:

quote:

---

I don't care what other people think. I am a whatyuseeiswhatyouget sort of fella.
I insult no one. But some people are so willing and ready to be insulted, they will be so at any given opportunity and if no opportunity presents itself, they will invent one.

---

Now, what I'm wondering here is whether you can see the following in your statement above:
That through saying this, you are stating loud and clearly that you and your opinions are all that counts, and that you can do and say whatever you feel since other people choose to be hurt from it, it's not you and your actions that carry responsibility.

Now I'm going to be very very blunt here and you are free to take it as you whish.
This type of reasoning is very common with people suffering from a total lack of compassion which unfortunatley happens to be one of the most prominent sides of people with psychopathic disorders.

I'm not saying you are psychopathic, I'm not a doctor and I do not know you.

I'm just wondering if you really want to project this type of image of yourself to other people? If nothing else I'm afraid you might be heading for a very lonely life.
Personally I don't know a lot of people that would spend enough energy over time to stick around a person who believes that people choose to hurt themselves and that he had no part in it whatever he did or said.

/D

{cell 260} {Blog}
-{"Theories without facts are just religions...?}-

I really wasn't going to bother but...
When you said:

quote:

---

I insult no one.

---

I had to laugh.
I remember reading your other thread for a request for help with your computer. After a few attempts at help from other people here, with the problem still persisting, your comments were:

quote:

---

I'll get the company pencil-necked geeks in to see what they can do to exorcise the thing.

---

No insult there then? Perhaps the thought did not even occur to you that said "pencil-necked geeks" could actually be Asylumites, reading the thread, about to help you?

I apologise once again for not keeping to topic my friends I know I am guilty of meandering away from the theme I shall desist forthwith
We outta here


(Edited by Tao on 02-25-2006 22:45)

DL your opinion has been read and digested.

I find nothing offensive in it, but then trying to insult me (which I do not think was your intent) is a waste of time because I simply do not take umbrage at people's opinions regardless of the fact they may be of me and negative.

I have ample compassion, but I don't cry at Lassie Movies.

Tao you are right, the pencil-neck comment was without thought, but if you are not pencil-necked, geek or not, how could one take offense? The chaps I was speaking of refer to themselves as geeks as well.

In any event, I was grateful for the assistance offered and said so many times.

As I am impossible to insult, I must confess I find it hard to understand those who find insult anywhere. Therefore, I must conclude the insult is within them.

Perhaps that is psychotic of me not to allow the words and comments of others to find a home in my hide?

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

Ok you bunch of Aslum persona's, I have a question, which DOES affect my fellow co-worker. First disregard any pre-disposed anti-establishment teenager reactions. That being sad, I ask you all;

A parent finds provacative pictures, of his daughter, and her boyfriend. They show lewd and la-sive-e-ous images, with alcohol in the background. Half of the pics are in the boyfriends bedroom, the other half are at a hotel room. Now as bad as that sounds, I'd like to hear responses from those who can separate themselves from the disgust a FATHER would have.

Now here's the kicker. The Boyfriend is 18, and the daughter is 16.

Here are his known options.
1) CPS services
2) The Police
3) The parents of the boyfriend


So what does the father of the daughter do?


I would appreciate ANY response/help on this issue!

Thanks Z!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
" Overhead the albatross, hangs motionless upon the air "

quote:

---

Zynx said:

Here are his known options.
1) CPS services
2) The Police
3) The parents of the boyfriend


So what does the father of the daughter do?

---

I don't see 'baseball bat' on that list

I'll possibly be back with a more serious reply, not enough time for that at the moment...

As a father:

1. Confront Daughter & Boyfriend - Imagine how ashamed they will be when caught.
2. Boyfriends parents - The parents should take responsibility for their childrens actions, then again 18 might be legally old enough to take the full heat...

Is 16 a non-legal age?, if so:
If any indication of repeat, Police.

None the less, if started it will continue if the will is there, no matter what you do, that's just in the nature of teens...
/D

{cell 260} {Blog}
-{"Theories without facts are just religions...?}-

In my state of Michigan, 18 is an adult, and 16 is a minor, so it is illegal for them both to have sex, as well as taking pictures of minor is also illegal. The boy did try to give the parent, the idea that he was a responsible person, who was trying to steer his daughter away from the bad road she was on. She is not dumb by school standards, but she has flunked the last 2 years of school. Mostly from simply not showing up.

Your responses are appreciated.

So far the decision that has been made, is to take the pictures directly to the police, do not tell the 2 parties involved, nor the parents of the boy, and let them do their research, based on the law. He decided not to confront the parents, as he would most likely have gotten angry, and end up being arrested, so for now he is doing the police thing. Pictures were i the daughters possession, in her room, in his house.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
" Overhead the albatross, hangs motionless upon the air "

quote:

---

Zynx said:

In my state of Michigan, 18 is an adult, and 16 is a minor, so it is illegal for them both to have sex, as well as taking pictures of minor is also illegal. The boy did try to give the parent, the idea that he was a responsible person, who was trying to steer his daughter away from the bad road she was on. She is not dumb by school standards, but she has flunked the last 2 years of school. Mostly from simply not showing up. Your responses are appreciated. So far the decision that has been made, is to take the pictures directly to the police, do not tell the 2 parties involved, nor the parents of the boy, and let them do their research, based on the law. He decided not to confront the parents, as he would most likely have gotten angry, and end up being arrested, so for now he is doing the police thing. Pictures were i the daughters possession, in her room, in his house.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~" Overhead the albatross, hangs motionless upon the air "

---

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
" Overhead the albatross, hangs motionless upon the air "

quote:

---

Zynx said:In my state of Michigan, 18 is an adult, and 16 is a minor, so it is illegal for them both to have sex,

---

This is an error on my part. Age of consent is 16 in Michigan.

This parent is going to the police first. He has also found out that his daughter has her own web-site on the net. He's looked at that, but no naked pics to be found. Lotsa partying and smoking and drinking pics, but nothing ris-kay.

He's not happy to say the least. He's just going to show the police what he found, and what he knows, and then let them investigate. Being 18, and taking nude pictures of your 16 -yr old girlfriend, is still what I believe is illegal, but the laws have many mitigating issues, and are not as easily enforced.

He already has plans to have her evicted at the age of 17. His information is that based on her track record, no judge would force him to allow her to stay in his house, until she is 18. According to him, the record speaks for itself, and this latest phase for him is the key to having her removed.

Even if by force.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
" Overhead the albatross, hangs motionless upon the air "