Regarding my comments in my previous post
Jan. 15th, 2004 02:35 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
icarusRe: ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
fandom_scruples:
1 - Password protections are simply for the parents' peace of mind and don't work.
2 - Children who 'stumble' on porn hit the back button. Note how quick they are are to get rid that sexy pop-up in LiveJournal. Most kids who read adult content are actively seeking it. And this is nothing new.
3 - Children should either not be allowed to view TV/Access the internet until they're older, or be taught your values and why you feel certain ways about certain materials. They do listen.
4 - It takes a certain hubris to attempt to rewire the world to suityour children yourself. When you force your will on others, for any pallid excuse, you almost always piss people off.
One can either cover the entire surface of the world with leather, or one can wear shoes on ones own feet. ~ Shantideva
The latter is far simpler.
Teach your kids. Because the world will not change to suit you. That isn't how it works.
First, keeping things from kids.
It sounds good in principle, but it doesn't take into account the nature of kids, who are not as innocent or stupid as we'd like to think. We aren't 'protecting the innocent' who might bumble into some porn. We are battling a skilled and determined assault.
These passwords are only there to give adults peace of mind. They don't work, and anyone who thinks they do has forgotten their fake IDs in high school. The strategy of changing the nature of the world around children was impossible when there were only titty magazines.
I always point to those 'child-proof' bottles as evidence as to just how successful that strategy is. Often only the kids can open them. Kids are pretty good at getting around our passwords, etc. When I was a kid there weren't even PCs, and we still got hold of porn magazines (some of them pretty, ugh). The whole concept of innocent children stumbling onto and corrupted by what they see is erroneous.
First, it's rare that a kid 'accidentally' stumbles on internet porn of any kind and keeps reading/looking. If it wasn't what they were looking for, kids - confused, appalled - hit the back button just as fast as everyone else. More often than not, kids actively seek what is 'forbidden' and then it's really hard to keep them out of the gears.
This 'poor little innocent children' theory assumes a couple things:
1 - that kids are blank slates, with no moral compass or intelligence of their own.
2 - that kids are more influenced by these images than they are by their 'real' environment.
I have very clear memories from when I was a kid, and I remember how bright I was. I had my own ideas about my parents' divorce, for example, that was not told to me by others.
It's my opinion that it's best to not let your kids watch any television/media influence until they're older. Let them grow up with less noise.
But that's very difficult to do, mostly because these things act as virtual babysitters. And that's the real problem. Parents don't have time to really keep an eye on and interact with their kids, because people need two incomes these days to survive. I've watched this with all my friends. So they click on the TV or the computer, and then expect these mechanical devices to do as good a job as themselves. That's impossible.
The internet, the library, the television... they're all neutral. They don't have a moral screen really, and you can't automate that.
What's a parent to do? Because kids can and will defeat these flimsy protections, you have to:
1 - do the best you can to supervise. Your kids need as much of your time as you can give them anyway.
2 - teach your kids what is appropriate and what is not. Tell them what your feelings are about that and why. Give them their own moral filter.
You'd be surprised at what kids will self-monitor.
In fact, chances arefandom_scruples is in the 18-22 year old range.
fandom_scruples:1 - Password protections are simply for the parents' peace of mind and don't work.
2 - Children who 'stumble' on porn hit the back button. Note how quick they are are to get rid that sexy pop-up in LiveJournal. Most kids who read adult content are actively seeking it. And this is nothing new.
3 - Children should either not be allowed to view TV/Access the internet until they're older, or be taught your values and why you feel certain ways about certain materials. They do listen.
4 - It takes a certain hubris to attempt to rewire the world to suit
One can either cover the entire surface of the world with leather, or one can wear shoes on ones own feet. ~ Shantideva
The latter is far simpler.
Teach your kids. Because the world will not change to suit you. That isn't how it works.
First, keeping things from kids.
It sounds good in principle, but it doesn't take into account the nature of kids, who are not as innocent or stupid as we'd like to think. We aren't 'protecting the innocent' who might bumble into some porn. We are battling a skilled and determined assault.
These passwords are only there to give adults peace of mind. They don't work, and anyone who thinks they do has forgotten their fake IDs in high school. The strategy of changing the nature of the world around children was impossible when there were only titty magazines.
I always point to those 'child-proof' bottles as evidence as to just how successful that strategy is. Often only the kids can open them. Kids are pretty good at getting around our passwords, etc. When I was a kid there weren't even PCs, and we still got hold of porn magazines (some of them pretty, ugh). The whole concept of innocent children stumbling onto and corrupted by what they see is erroneous.
First, it's rare that a kid 'accidentally' stumbles on internet porn of any kind and keeps reading/looking. If it wasn't what they were looking for, kids - confused, appalled - hit the back button just as fast as everyone else. More often than not, kids actively seek what is 'forbidden' and then it's really hard to keep them out of the gears.
This 'poor little innocent children' theory assumes a couple things:
1 - that kids are blank slates, with no moral compass or intelligence of their own.
2 - that kids are more influenced by these images than they are by their 'real' environment.
I have very clear memories from when I was a kid, and I remember how bright I was. I had my own ideas about my parents' divorce, for example, that was not told to me by others.
It's my opinion that it's best to not let your kids watch any television/media influence until they're older. Let them grow up with less noise.
But that's very difficult to do, mostly because these things act as virtual babysitters. And that's the real problem. Parents don't have time to really keep an eye on and interact with their kids, because people need two incomes these days to survive. I've watched this with all my friends. So they click on the TV or the computer, and then expect these mechanical devices to do as good a job as themselves. That's impossible.
The internet, the library, the television... they're all neutral. They don't have a moral screen really, and you can't automate that.
What's a parent to do? Because kids can and will defeat these flimsy protections, you have to:
1 - do the best you can to supervise. Your kids need as much of your time as you can give them anyway.
2 - teach your kids what is appropriate and what is not. Tell them what your feelings are about that and why. Give them their own moral filter.
You'd be surprised at what kids will self-monitor.
In fact, chances are
fandom_scruples is in the 18-22 year old range.