Autochthon 2.0?

operations said:
might start questions earlier than I'd like. I got a few more years of innocence and Polly Pocket. I'd like those to last as long as they can.
Click to expand...
So it's more about maintaing your own fantasy of "innocence", and avoiding subjects you find uncomfortable to discuss than anything that might actually harm your kids?


I have serious doubts that they'd even see anything "sexual" in any of the pictures in the Exalted books. Their brains haven't been chemically altered by sex hormones yet. They perceive that kind of stuff TOTALLY differently than you or I do.


What you are teaching them, however indirectly, is that such things are, for some reason, inappropriate, which will carry over into their lives once they ARE sexually aware. I'd guess you had the same experiece as a child, which is probably why you a have a mental hangup about it.

operations said:
It's a violent world. They may at some point in their lives be forced to defend themselves.
Click to expand...
It's also a world full of sex and nipples. What's the fundamental difference?


-S
 
Operations--I think that at some point in their lives, they may see naked people.  If it's not a big deal, not made to be forbidden or tabboo, then it's a lot less charged.


Our kids are going to be sexual beings, probably before we're ready to deal with it ourselves, but as responsible parents, we can at least take the mystique out of things.


I'm glad that my father taught me to fight.  It has served me well over the years.  He also taught me to think for myself.  He taught me to make my own decisions, and he gave me a strong moral core--and he gave me plenty of good an piss poor examples and the ability to discern between the two.  For that, I can thank him.  


In the same way you teach your kids to defend themselves, you have to give them the same tools to make their own decisions.  Give them plenty of good examples, certainly.  The best training possible there, but the same way that you can't leave your kid without exposure to everyday germs--so that they can build a normal immune response--you can't shield them from "inappropriate" thought or behaviors.  Keep them safe, certainly, the same way you don't go feeding your kids raw chicken you don't leave them to play in traffic or sign up for a NAMBLA mailing list, you have to give them a basis for being able to exercise their judgement, and if you graduate it in steps, naturally, they'll learn to do the right thing.  Not as a huge lesson, but a natural outgrowth of just being a kid, and being smart.  You've got to, at some point, trust them to make their own decisions, and while they might not make the right ones all the time, you have to give them some room to make mistakes, and to learn from them.  


A life without any mistakes is a life where nothing has been learned.  A life that has no challenges isn't really much of a life either.  The greatest sin that we can committ is making our kids' lives too easy.  They never know what they're made of then, and if confronted with a real problem, they are ill prepared.  


Yes, you want to protect your kids.  But you can go too far, and really hinder them down the road.


Being a father is a passport to worry.  That's the price for all the smiles and giggles, and kids falling asleep on your chest, and that clean baby smell that made your heart just about burst the first time you held that little bundle up tight against you.  There's not a thing in the world wrong with wanting to do everything in your power to protect your kids--but part of that is also realizing when it is appropriate and to let them make their own mistakes, and be there to pick them up after they take a tumble.  


First time I heard my child make an honest-to-goodness scared cry, I was half way across a room, with an arm cocked back before I knew what was going on.  My little girl was getting her eyes checked because she'd been on oxygen for a good while because she was a preemie.  Infants can't be coerced to hold still, and they don't understand the process, and when someone slips clamps onto your baby's eyelids, it's fuckign scary as shit.  Pure 100% instinct drove that rush when I heard that cry for the first time.  


But I checked myself, got a handle on it, because it was neccessary.  Gabe has never been shielded from falling down.  She takes a tumble, she picks herself back up, maybe gets a little mad at the swing that just threw her, or the rock that just tripped her, and she rolls on.  When you make a big deal about each and every little bump or scrape, kids learn from that.  I've got friends whose kids are just the sorriest little Nancys you've ever seen, because they've been taught that they're not supposed to feel any discomfort, and their every whim is supposed to be indulged.   An inconvienence is high drama for these kids--and I'm of the opinon, that sort of treatment is pretty damn close to abuse, because these kids are ill prepared for the world.  


Just be careful in how you protect your kids.  They're a lot tougher than you think.  And they live up to your expectations--so you have to put the bar up there a bit.  You expect them to be weak and wailley, they will be.  You expect them to be brave, and give them the encouragement to do so, and they will be.  You correct behavior, and don't hold a grudge, they learn that's normal, and won't be angry little snots when they don't get their way.  You're calm and assertive, they learn that's normal too.  You have to set the example for them, and they are watching you all the time, even when you think they aren't and they're absorbing that.  How you treat the wife.  How you treat other people.  How you act.  How you move even.  That's how they learn.  And if you treat nipples like they're radioactive material...they learn that too.  


Just be careful, Chief.  It's easy as a Dad to go overboard.  It's a lot easier than letting to a bit.  But sometimes it's neccessary.  And if you want to avoid the pitfalls that your parents made--and all our parents made some mistakes, so it's no hoo hoo there--you've just got to be a little aware, and maybe make some decisions on how to correct them, and stick to them.  


If you are scared to make mistakes, that's normal, but don't be so scared that it transfers to your kids...
 
Jukashi said:
operations said:
I got a few more years of innocence and Polly Pocket. I'd like those to last as long as they can.
Click to expand...
No offense intended, but don't you think that's a little dangerous? Where, precisely, do you stop? Or start, as the case may be.
Click to expand...
As soon as they ask questions. That's when I know they've been exposed. My kids ask me a question, I answer. Problem is, dad being like a walking encyclopedia of useless knowledge, I often don't stop answering till they get bored and walk away.


I'm not stupid, I know I can't keep em unexposed till they are 30 (and that would be dumb and dangerous), but the only way I know they have been is to make sure they know that they can ask me questions. Which is quite clear.
 
operations said:
As soon as they ask questions.
Click to expand...
Baaaad idea. I never asked my parents anything on that subject. Seriously, I knew the mechanics, several deviancies, and a whooole lot of swear-words before I ever went for advice from anyone. And I know that other kids didn't either.


Kids do not like to talk about their parents about that sort of stuff. It is embarassing. Everything I learned about sex, I learned from biology books and the internet. The internet, man.


And look what happened to meeeeeee!
 
Actually I too think that the logic that your children will come ask you about something you carefully shield them from is pretty flawed.
 
Safim said:
Actually I too think that the logic that your children will come ask you about something you carefully shield them from is pretty flawed.
Click to expand...
It's not carefully shield. They've seen nudity in artwork like museum peices and the like. But as mentioned, it's hard to know the line between art and porn. And any way you look at it, Lady of Darkness in Blodstained Boobies is fan cheesecake. She there to draw in that percentage of gamers who may very well never see boobies in the flesh until they move out of their parents basement in their mid-30's.


There is a difference between your kids knowing about boobies, and them knowing about BSDM. It's that hazy line here that concerns me.


I finally got a short 10 minute look at the physical book recently. It's not as bad on the cover as the PDF of Return makes it look on my screen, and it's the only case of it on the cover. I discuseed it with my wife and showed her. Her opinion was such,"Yeah, it's porn. Low rank, badly drawn porn, cause no real woman's boobs resist gravity like that. But your kids have no interest in your game books, so it's not like they'll activly look thru it. Get it if you want."


She also mentioned stuff about how can I be like that in the bedroom, but so worrysome outside of it. She blames my mother.


Lots of people blame my mother. For a lot.


But at any rate, I've decided to take the nudity on the cover issue off the table for the pros/cons on if I ever get the new edition. Now the issues are content, and I'm still having a problem finding enough to convince me to switch over until well after the other Exalt fatsplats are out.
 
operations said:
There is a difference between your kids knowing about boobies, and them knowing about BSDM. It's that hazy line here that concerns me.
Click to expand...
I think its actually BDSM, Bondage/Domination and Sado/Masochism, but that's semantics.

I discuseed it with my wife and showed her. Her opinion was such,"Yeah, it's porn. Low rank, badly drawn porn, cause no real woman's boobs resist gravity like that. But your kids have no interest in your game books, so it's not like they'll activly look thru it. Get it if you want."
Click to expand...
Has she ever really seen porn? Like, beyond the fake titties in Playboy? Maybe the real difference here is that Still and I don't see "cheesecake" as being porn. Just like violence isn't considered serious unless there's blood, there generally has to be more than cheap tits to make something really porn, at least a pose, but a chick holding a big sword with her gravity defying tits out is like a guy getting shot in an old movie.

She also mentioned stuff about how can I be like that in the bedroom, but so worrysome outside of it. She blames my mother.
Click to expand...
Was your mother a dominatrix-nun?
 
My mother just... was. Crazy.


Let's just say that had it not been for a great set of grandparents, I'd be sub-human. We'll leave it at that.
 
I find it odd that people object to gravity-defying boobs, but not to over-large "anime" eyes (As they call them). Eyes are, after all, also of significance in sexual attraction.


Personally, I find porn to be of little consequence. Sex, to me, is regarded similarly to eating; they are both biological functions which hold instinctual attraction, both will cause health problems if done too much or too little (with the amount varying from person to person), they're both dangerous without forethought and preparation, they're both regulated by many religions in various ways, they can both range between chore and romantic encounter depending on how they're done, and everyone has different tastes in both for what appears to be no discernable reason.


And yet, people give no objection to, say, a picture of a mouth-wateringly delicious-looking burger. Is that not equally pandering to base, possibly unhealthy desires?


I just don't get it. Really.
 
Jukashi said:
I find it odd that people object to gravity-defying boobs, but not to over-large "anime" eyes (As they call them). Eyes are, after all, also of significance in sexual attraction.
Click to expand...
Yes, but they are not as overt a marker as breasts are. And seeing them in their full nude glory does not habitually lead to thoughts flirtation and/or sex in the male half of the population. We can go deeper into why that is so if you really want, but it is (to me at least) pretty obvious why.

Jukashi said:
And yet, people give no objection to, say, a picture of a mouth-wateringly delicious-looking burger. Is that not equally pandering to base, possibly unhealthy desires?
Click to expand...
Yes, it is. But there's a couple of important distinctions... Food are not people. Food cannot (vegans can keep their mouths shut, thank you very much) be exploited. Food does not overtly change how we behave towards one another.
 
Solfi said:
Yes, but they are not as overt a marker as breasts are. And seeing them in their full nude glory does not habitually lead to thoughts flirtation and/or sex in the male half of the population. We can go deeper into why that is so if you really want, but it is (to me at least) pretty obvious why.
Click to expand...
Seeing nude breasts only engenders sexual thoughts and feelings in males because of upbringing. In cultures where toplessness is common amongst women, men don't give boobs a second glance.

Solfi said:
Yes, it is. But there's a couple of important distinctions... Food are not people. Food cannot (vegans can keep their mouths shut, thank you very much) be exploited. Food does not overtly change how we behave towards one another.
Click to expand...
Cannibals.


No, seriously, I admit the point there. That still doesn't seem to me, however, to warrant such a high level of objection.
 
There is a matter of context.  And in operations defense, the slight BD/SM themes that often accompany WW material--and sometimes questionable angle issues--means that parents need to be aware of such things.


World of difference between pictures of nude people and bukkake...
 
There is a matter of context.  And in operations defense, the slight BD/SM themes that often accompany WW material--and sometimes questionable angle issues--means that parents need to be aware of such things.
World of difference between pictures of nude people and bukkake...
Click to expand...
Thanks. Glad someone here can see where I'm coming from.
 
I think that maybe you're over-reacting a bit, but I'm a Poppa too, and all Daddy's think their way is best.  Part of being a Dad...


Because I said so!
 
True.


I think parents of girls have it worse. Espically when it comes to sexual issues. Add to that that current popular culture seems to want to dress up girls as a target for pedophiles and rapists, and it makes for a very paranoid daddy.


I remember my grandpa in one of the family debates over the way girls clothing was getting risky (this was mid-80's), and my aunt said, "Girls should not have to dress like a nun cause they fear rapists!"


Grandpa said, "No, in a perfect world, men and women would have the best of respct for each other. Men would take outthe garbage without being asked, women would no berate their men behind their backs over tea with their girlfriends. There wouldbe no rape, and nosleeping around on spouses. But we don't live in a perfect world, and you damn well don't throw blood on a sheep when you know wolves are around."


It kinda stuck in my mind over the years.
 
Has there ever been a scientific study linking the way women dress to the likelihood that they'll geet raped?


It seems to be a common assumption. I'm curious if it's been proven.


-S
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Back
Top