Daughters And Disney - Merge

[formergothardite]

FFS, oh knowledgable supposed lawyer-type person, it's DISSEMINATE!!!!!!!!

Are you serious?? Mentally ill because people on here have different views and reactions to you, the one who said that because a young girl sent a topless photo, she'll probably be pregnant by 15??

Shaming kids and embarrassing them is NOT the right way to go about things, particularly when they are teens.

Thank you! I am not a lawyer and I don't play one on the internet but even I knew that it was "disseminate" and not "discriminate".

So FreeFundie joined less than two weeks ago, flooded the Duggar forum with threads that were not needed, was fairly oblivious that the new rule of having 75 posts to start threads was meant for posters like her, ignored the rule about not starting unnecessary threads when she finally did get to 75 posts, bragged about hitting an elderly person and is now lecturing us on the subject on child pornography. Damn that is a lot to accomplish in a short amount of time!

[Palimpsest]

Free fundies has a lot of neighbours. One for just about every issue ...... Handy!

But she's a degreed law professional! She's edumacating us properly about a very important topic.

Show some respect, OKTBT. :naughty:

FreeFundies:

Out of the kindness of my heart -- read more and get to know us before you start typing new posts. And stop starting new topics!

[formergothardite]

But she's a degreed law professional! She's edumacating us properly about a very important topic.

Show some respect, OKTBT. :naughty:

FreeFundies:

Out of the kindness of my heart -- read more and get to know us before you start typing new posts. And stop starting new topics!

You know what every forum loves? A new member who is oblivious to the rules and forum culture and then proceeds to try and "educate" the other members.

I'm been trying to figure out the neighbor story. So on Saturday FreeFundies' neighbor told her that she monitors her son's phone and he has been talking to a 13 year old girl. The 13 year old sent him a topless picture and she is already developed(I'm not sure the relevance of that.) The neighbor told FreeFundies that she blocked her son's phone and that he went to school and told the 13 year old that she had been blocked.

But then the story changed. The 13 year old has been talking to a girl in school. The neighbor checks her son's phone 2-3 times a month. She noticed a 13 year old had sent a topless photo and she was already developed(again, why is the state of her breast development relevant?!). She wanted a photo of the 13 year old boy back, but the boy told his mom that he had blocked the girl already. And all this had happened on Friday of last week?

[nelliebelle1197]

Free fundies has a lot of neighbours. One for just about every issue ...... Handy!

She is also now a degreed law professional - I am not sure what that means, especially since degreed isn't a word.

[2xx1xy1JD]

But she's a degreed law professional! She's edumacating us properly about a very important topic.

Show some respect, OKTBT. :naughty:

FreeFundies:

Out of the kindness of my heart -- read more and get to know us before you start typing new posts. And stop starting new topics!

Is a "degreed law professional" something other than a lawyer?

As a lawyer, one of the constant reminders that we get from our insurer and our licensing body is to avoid practicing law over the internet. This is one reason that I'll often include some sort of disclaimer like "do not rely on this for legal advice, please seek advice from a local lawyer for your particular situation." Another reason for the disclaimer is that laws vary from place to place, and the internet is almost everywhere. Canada has its own set of laws. Each state has its own laws. Those laws are something similar, but they are rarely identical.

As for the topic itself: Something can be a theoretical possibility, even if it is rarely prosecuted. So, teens may send nude selfies all the time and it doesn't mean that government officials are paying attention each time and knocking on doors to arrest people. It can mean, though, that if someone receives a nude teen selfie and decides to forward it to others to be mean, and the teen attempts suicide as a result and confesses about the selfie issue, it's possible for irate parents to go to the police and trace where the photo was sent. Those involved in passing it around could very well find themselves in legal hot water.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scot ... -1.1320435

The Rehteah Parsons cases is tragic and extreme. Yes, it did lead to child porn charges against minors - but the circumstances went well beyond the scenario described by the OP.

Now, occasionally you also find people caught up in legal problems because they hung around the wrong people and got too close to an existing police investigation (my heart goes out to the very ill dry cleaner who is being railroaded because police were investigating Rob Ford), or because they pissed on someone (like an ex) who decide to make life miserable.

Another point to ponder is that lots of people are stupid about the risks of technology and don't really understand privacy concerns. For example, iCloud can share texts and photos across devices if the family shares an account. I found this out when a client showed me explicit texts between his wife and her boyfriend, which got transmitted to their kid's iPad.

[nelliebelle1197]

Daffy, I am not scaremongering but informing what is true especially when I see another poster in denial about what their own kid is producing.

As to the Dark web, yes I get it. You believe you can go their for a free voice but I don't believe that exist anymore. Even Angela Merkel couldn't have a private conversation in her own country without several countries monitoring her business. I know that Echelon exist but frankly I'm not lying to myself thinking the Dark Web isn't monitored. JMO on that subject.

However, maybe you should start a separate thread on that issue to see how others feel.

Can someone translate this into normal person speak?

[FundieFarmer]

You can say pretty much whatever you want, whenever you want, as long as you can deal with the consequences. In North Korea, those might be more dire than in the US, but there are still consequences. And yes, that pertains to the internet too.

I'm pretty sure we all know everything is recorded. That's why it's common sense not to send inappropriate photos. I'm also pretty sure that common sense and teenagers don't go hand-in-hand, and that's why this sort of thing isn't unusual. That's not to say that we don't think it's a big deal, and we don't know that those photos last forever.

Is there some reason we're currently :dead-horse: ?

[nelliebelle1197]

I simply pointed out a fact about young pregnancy which is an absolute truth according to the experts which is why I posted the articles. Not trying to shame the girl but a fact is a fact.

However, her actions make her a child pornographer the minute she forwarded the picture to anyone else. This is a legal fact. These are NOT two consenting adults their are children in the eyes of the law and did something illegal. If the girl wants to take a naked photo to keep on her phone and not share or show anyone else that is her business but the minute she forwards or shows that photo it is ILLEGAL. The minute an adult views the photo it most definitely can put them in a very arkward position and certainly doesn't make it any less illegal.

That has to be one of the least intelligent arguments I have ever encountered. I can't even break it down. She is 13. She is not legally, ethically or morally a child pornographer. She sent pictures of herself to another CHILD. That does not make her a child pornographer. That makes her a kid with bad judgement. I really hope your "degreed legal profession..." is custodian at a law firm because you have yet to demonstrate a grasp of how laws work. We have a lot of lawyers, social workers and social service providers who are VERY familiar with the law in his/her particular jurisdiction or country and who can quickly pull case law, statutes and regulations. I suggest you refrain from attempts are arguing legal points with us. You will not be well-acquitted.

[FundieFarmer]

I'm confused by your posts, FreeFundies.

Are you coming at this from a place of concern for the kids who are doing this?

The vibe I'm getting is that you really only want to hoot and holler about legalities, so that's why I'm asking.

[FJismyheadship]

No. It's not truth. The girl sent a nude picture but that DOES NOT MEAN she WILL become pregnant by the time she is fifteen. You don't know what's gonna happen to that girl. You don't know that she WILL have sex before she is grown. You Don't know whether or not she will use protection if she DOES have sex. There are so many variables at play you cannot say that it's a fact that she would probably be pregnant by 15.

[Maggie Mae]

I'm confused as well by the "degreed law professional" I'm guessing it's a Sally Struthers degree in file management, as Free Fundies doesn't seem to have the writing ability or reading comprehension of a lawyer.

However, the children being charged with child porn is nothing new. I'm on tapatalk so hopefully this link to Oregon Live will work.

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ss ... s_cha.html

[2xx1xy1JD]

Back to the original topic.....

I did have some issues with Disney shows when my kids were really young (under 6), because very young children simply lack the ability to think critically about what they view. They just simply absorb everything, unfiltered, and they learn through constant repetition.

We did an accidental brainwashing experiment with our youngest. We bought the DVD for a movie called Ushpizin - a foreign film in Hebrew with subtitled, dealing with the themes of extreme poverty, infertility, anger management, dealing with the demons of your past, and adopting a Hasidic lifestyle. In other words - it's not a kids' movie at all. We left the DVD in the car, and it kept playing as I did carpool. I did a lot of carpool, and my 2 year old spent a lot of time in his carseat. Well, one day, I realized that he was acting out scenes from the movie, which he had memorized, even though he didn't understand the language. He honestly thought that he was the main character, and he would compulsively try to dress like the character, act like the character, search for anyone who looked like the character, etc.

Long story short - I think it makes sense to ensure that the early media exposure is positive (even if the shows drive adults crazy, because how many times can you listen to a singing map?), because it will get hardwired into your child's head.

I also wanted stuff that was commercial-free, that featured a wide variety of kids and that didn't promote racial or gender stereotypes. I remember liking That's So Raven because it showed that you didn't have the be a skinny blonde to be a main character.

Disney DOES do anti-bullying stuff on their shows. What bothers me, though, is that there's the designated anti-bullying week, where the shows all have the right message, but then the rest of the time it's perfectly fine to have characters who are constantly the butt of jokes. How about showing respect for feelings all the time?

[FundieFarmer]

.../snip...Disney DOES do anti-bullying stuff on their shows. What bothers me, though, is that there's the designated anti-bullying week, where the shows all have the right message, but then the rest of the time it's perfectly fine to have characters who are constantly the butt of jokes. How about showing respect for feelings all the time?

You're right; I don't love that the jokes are often at the expense of others and that feelings are sometimes genuinely hurt by things that are said. Unless it's a teaching moment ("this is not appropriate, X character said this and Y character was upset so X character apologized and learned a lesson") I really don't think it's necessary, and I think it teaches kids how to be mean, in some cases.

But that's just one childless woman's opinion. :D

[DaffyDill]

Can someone translate this into normal person speak?

No. Normal people don't speak that way.

[2xx1xy1JD]

Re kids, backtalk, disrespect, etc:

I'll tell you how we handle it - obviously, your children are different and results can vary.

Generally speaking, my kids know that I'm pretty chill about most things. They don't have to finish their broccoli, I'm not strict on bedtime, they can figure out for themselves if they are cold enough to wear a coat, etc.

There are a few things that I REALLY care about, and treating others with respect is one of those things. I pick my parenting battles by asking the question, "will this matter when my child is 20?" Well, there are plenty of adults who don't treat others with respect, or who manage to act appropriately in public and then treat family like shit. There are plenty of families where siblings are estranged. They are plenty of people with screwed up relationships, because they never figured out how to treat others with basic respect. So, the kids learned very early on that I'd let other stuff pass, but this was a big deal to their dad and I.

Here's what we do:

1. Role model

I don't think you can order your child to be respectful if you put them down, or if they always hear parents fighting, or if they see that you are horrible to other people. We had to start with our own behavior. I've relaxed the language a bit now, but when they were younger, I trained myself not to swear and to really watch what I said. We tried to make it a point to not fight within ear shot of the kids, and to communicate respectfully. We don't do name calling, put downs, etc. The parents have to set the tone by what they do themselves.

2. Control what they do, not how they feel

Siblings will get annoyed with each other. Kids will feel grumpy. They can get stressed. Hormones are lots of fun.

I don't expect my kids to always feel wonderful. They are entitled to their moods. We just try to help them realize that they are having a mood, figure out what triggers the moods, and figure out the best way to deal with them when they come. So, one kid knows that he NEEDS his sleep, another kid knows that she gets "hangry" (angry when hungry), another knows that certain times of the month throw her for a loop. We don't engage with the kids when they get in those moods. We address the cause, if possible, calmly tell them that they aren't being respectful, and then tell them that we'll speak to them when they are over the mood and can be respectful.

3. Realistic consequences

I'm not a huge "consequences" person in general, but occasionally I do need to do something. Anything you do should be logical and immediate. I really hate idle threats, which are worse than useless.

For example - my kids know that cyber-bullying is a big area of concern, and I've been very clear that I have a zero-tolerance policy. Girl 1 once took a photo of The Boy without his permission (no child porn - I think he was just holding his blankie) and threatened to send it to a friend. Well, I swooped in, took the phone away, put it where she couldn't get it, and make it clear that if she ever did anything like that, the iPhone would disappear and she'd get a "granny plan" basic old-fashioned cell phone instead. The kids know I would seriously do this.

If they fight over the TV - the electronics get unplugged, the remote is taken away.

If they say or do anything really mean to each other - everything stops until they apologize. No meals, no rides, nothing from us until they make a sincere apology.

Same thing if they are like that to us. They can complain or make wishes known respectfully, but blatant disrespect is a no-no. Again, everything stops until there is an apology. Don't expect to say "I hate you" and then get a ride, or have me take you shopping. or expect me to make you dinner (*unless the disrespect is coming from a "hangry" child, in which case getting the blood sugar normal is a priority).

[wotdancer]

Re kids, backtalk, disrespect, etc:

I'll tell you how we handle it - obviously, your children are different and results can vary.

Generally speaking, my kids know that I'm pretty chill about most things. They don't have to finish their broccoli, I'm not strict on bedtime, they can figure out for themselves if they are cold enough to wear a coat, etc.

There are a few things that I REALLY care about, and treating others with respect is one of those things. I pick my parenting battles by asking the question, "will this matter when my child is 20?" Well, there are plenty of adults who don't treat others with respect, or who manage to act appropriately in public and then treat family like shit. There are plenty of families where siblings are estranged. They are plenty of people with screwed up relationships, because they never figured out how to treat others with basic respect. So, the kids learned very early on that I'd let other stuff pass, but this was a big deal to their dad and I.

Here's what we do:

1. Role model

I don't think you can order your child to be respectful if you put them down, or if they always hear parents fighting, or if they see that you are horrible to other people. We had to start with our own behavior. I've relaxed the language a bit now, but when they were younger, I trained myself not to swear and to really watch what I said. We tried to make it a point to not fight within ear shot of the kids, and to communicate respectfully. We don't do name calling, put downs, etc. The parents have to set the tone by what they do themselves.

2. Control what they do, not how they feel

Siblings will get annoyed with each other. Kids will feel grumpy. They can get stressed. Hormones are lots of fun.

I don't expect my kids to always feel wonderful. They are entitled to their moods. We just try to help them realize that they are having a mood, figure out what triggers the moods, and figure out the best way to deal with them when they come. So, one kid knows that he NEEDS his sleep, another kid knows that she gets "hangry" (angry when hungry), another knows that certain times of the month throw her for a loop. We don't engage with the kids when they get in those moods. We address the cause, if possible, calmly tell them that they aren't being respectful, and then tell them that we'll speak to them when they are over the mood and can be respectful.

3. Realistic consequences

I'm not a huge "consequences" person in general, but occasionally I do need to do something. Anything you do should be logical and immediate. I really hate idle threats, which are worse than useless.

For example - my kids know that cyber-bullying is a big area of concern, and I've been very clear that I have a zero-tolerance policy. Girl 1 once took a photo of The Boy without his permission (no child porn - I think he was just holding his blankie) and threatened to send it to a friend. Well, I swooped in, took the phone away, put it where she couldn't get it, and make it clear that if she ever did anything like that, the iPhone would disappear and she'd get a "granny plan" basic old-fashioned cell phone instead. The kids know I would seriously do this.

If they fight over the TV - the electronics get unplugged, the remote is taken away.

If they say or do anything really mean to each other - everything stops until they apologize. No meals, no rides, nothing from us until they make a sincere apology.

Same thing if they are like that to us. They can complain or make wishes known respectfully, but blatant disrespect is a no-no. Again, everything stops until there is an apology. Don't expect to say "I hate you" and then get a ride, or have me take you shopping. or expect me to make you dinner (*unless the disrespect is coming from a "hangry" child, in which case getting the blood sugar normal is a priority).

If I ever have children, I would like to steal this list from you!

[DGayle]

DGayle, not arguing with some of your thinking but am pointing a ton of things out on It. You are perfectly safe checking on your own kids and what they are doing on internet/phone. The young girl needs to be advised of what she is doing no matter what simply because it is ILLEGAL. The ramifications can be ridiculous but they exist and for good reason. She is not creating ART but CHILD PORN.

When you support laws making a teen who takes a picture if HER OWN BODY a criminal offense as child porn, then you can't justify making it legal for her to masturbate (child molestation), or for two teens who are the same age to have sex (statutory rape). It's her OWN body. SHE chose what SHE wanted to do HERSELF with HER OWN BODY.

Unlike children finding daddy's Playboy when it is shipped it has to be in packing to block out the view as required by law.

When the girl sent it to the boy, that is not much different than a girl mailing something to a boy. It was for him. Someone else chose to open it. If someone other than an adult chooses to open the Playboy wrapper, Playboy isn't made a criminal, nor should that girl be.

If this was your daughter who did this and the boy forwarded the picture to a large school group how would you feel? If your daughter went to school and everyone was calling her out? Everyone who got the pic can get into trouble. You would find yourself at the school and they would call the police to stop the picture from going around.

Which is always a possibility no matter how well we educate out kids. There's enough of a natural punishment on without tossing a teen onto a sex offender registry for taking a picture of HER OWN GODDAMNED BODY.

There are a lot of issues coming off of this but it isn't going to change the outcome of the legal fact that it is child porn.

The big issue coming out of this is that you fully support criminalizing teens taking pictures of their own bodies because an unwitting person might see it. Guess you've never been on the internet before this because there are times when people stumble across pictures that they didn't expect.

If someone goes through her teen son's phone to make sure he's not doing anything she doesn't approve of, that means she knows there's a chance she'll find something she doesn't want. If your friend didn't realize that looking through her teen son's phone for stuff she might not approve of comes with the risk of finding stuff she doesn't approve of, then she's too stupid to be breeding.

At no point should a teen taking a pictures of her own body be a criminal offense, PERIOD. The only time this should be a crime is if she turns around and tries tricking little kids or adults into seeing the pictures. And the adults shouldn't be criminals for seeing something they didn't search for. You supporting making the teen taking pictures of her own body into a criminal offense is so incredibly stupid and disrespectful to teens making choices for their own bodies. There are real child sex crimes. Our system doesn't need to be clogged up with cases of teens taking pics of their own bodies to send to their peers who clearly sometimes want them, like your friend's son did.

[DGayle]

Daffy, The laws are placed to advise and protect those that are victimized. For some reason you don't see that young teens are victimizing themselves and that the parent on the other thread is insane for just accepting the behavior when it is clearly illegal. Those are your issues.

So what are you doing to criminalize masturbation? Hands are touching teen bodies in sexual ways. The owners of those hands should be criminals!

As to Fundiefarmer, the boy did the blocking and he knows that his mother does go through his phone.

But he kept the pic. That really sounds like something a teen boy who doesn't want a picture would do....

[happy atheist]

Daffy, The laws are placed to advise and protect those that are victimized. For some reason you don't see that young teens are victimizing themselves and that the parent on the other thread is insane for just accepting the behavior when it is clearly illegal. Those are your issues.

As to Fundiefarmer, the boy did the blocking and he knows that his mother does go through his phone. The way she talked to me it had just happened the day before. We were both shocked and it is a sad day that this is what kids are doing. It isn't funny, but sad.

As to Techs, the reason I started a separate thread is that it isn't a Disney daughter issue anymore and there wasn't any other threads dealing with the issue.

Why did you start a new thread in order to yell repeatedly about someone who posted in the original thread? Is she supposed to magically know that you're talking about her in the new thread and come join you? Or are you hoping that she won't know you're talking about her so that you can continue unchallenged?

Why are you obsessed with starting threads?

[FundieFarmer]

Thanks for straightening out this shituation, Happy Atheist!

[Palimpsest]

Why did you start a new thread in order to yell repeatedly about someone who posted in the original thread? Is she supposed to magically know that you're talking about her in the new thread and come join you? Or are you hoping that she won't know you're talking about her so that you can continue unchallenged?

Why are you obsessed with starting threads?

Watch out! She'll start a new thread to tell us why she is obsessed with starting new threads!

I'm afraid this goes beyond merely being comprehension-challenged. My theory is that she is writing a guide: "What not to do as a newbie on any forum: 20 ways to piss people off."

[formergothardite]

Watch out! She'll start a new thread to tell us why she is obsessed with starting new threads!

I'm afraid this goes beyond merely being comprehension-challenged. My theory is that she is writing a guide: "What not to do as a newbie on any forum: 20 ways to piss people off."

:lol: She does seem to be working very hard to make herself unlikable.

FreeFundies, the plus side of learning about forum before starting eleventy threads is that you learn things like: at Free Jinger threads go off topic on a regular basis so there is no need to start a new thread.

[Trynn]

I didn't say I would be ok with it, I said the desire to do so was fairly normal. I don't tend to say much when I'm posting on a phone. If it were my daughter we'd talk about it, especially the fact that it does qualify as child poem and that she needs to be careful about that.

[Freefundies]

Is a "degreed law professional" something other than a lawyer?

As a lawyer, one of the constant reminders that we get from our insurer and our licensing body is to avoid practicing law over the internet. This is one reason that I'll often include some sort of disclaimer like "do not rely on this for legal advice, please seek advice from a local lawyer for your particular situation." Another reason for the disclaimer is that laws vary from place to place, and the internet is almost everywhere. Canada has its own set of laws. Each state has its own laws. Those laws are something similar, but they are rarely identical.

As for the topic itself: Something can be a theoretical possibility, even if it is rarely prosecuted. So, teens may send nude selfies all the time and it doesn't mean that government officials are paying attention each time and knocking on doors to arrest people. It can mean, though, that if someone receives a nude teen selfie and decides to forward it to others to be mean, and the teen attempts suicide as a result and confesses about the selfie issue, it's possible for irate parents to go to the police and trace where the photo was sent. Those involved in passing it around could very well find themselves in legal hot water.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scot ... -1.1320435

The Rehteah Parsons cases is tragic and extreme. Yes, it did lead to child porn charges against minors - but the circumstances went well beyond the scenario described by the OP.

Now, occasionally you also find people caught up in legal problems because they hung around the wrong people and got too close to an existing police investigation (my heart goes out to the very ill dry cleaner who is being railroaded because police were investigating Rob Ford), or because they pissed on someone (like an ex) who decide to make life miserable.

Another point to ponder is that lots of people are stupid about the risks of technology and don't really understand privacy concerns. For example, iCloud can share texts and photos across devices if the family shares an account. I found this out when a client showed me explicit texts between his wife and her boyfriend, which got transmitted to their kid's iPad.

2XX Thanks for posting. I normally instruct people to consult an attorney when prompted as I try to keep what I do out of it and I must admit as I usually dictate my docs out my mind speeds at one thousand miles a minute as I'm typing so it all doesn't come across correctly and I don't always feel the need to spell check myself on a snarky forum as it is just that. However, when I read Trynn's response it was so egregious to me that I felt something needed to be said so I started a separate thread to address a REAL problem as people aren't going to gain knowledge about this issue through the Disney & Daughters thread.

I'm glad you posted the article as it just furthers the point. Once parents find themselves having to hire an attorney to defend their kids actions and you see the parents aren't getting the principles of the matter then you really know what your dealing with. This is truly how I felt reading Trynn's response in that its okay for kids to take naked selfies and send them out as its normal. The Courts believe it is anything but and the parents need to understand that the moment it goes out for public consumption it has crossed the line into child porn and therefore is Illegal.

I completely agree that the courts are just beginning to catch up on these issues but they are moving them forward and a lot of parents are going to find themselves dealing out the $$$ to defend the kids actions while the court is going to slut shame the child as well as send them to therapy for reprogramming. We are already hearing the outcomes from kids forwarding child porn to one another as you brought same out in the article but the parents don't want to listen. Things will only get worse.

I don't know if you've traveled in the past to Greece or some of the Eastern European countries but I wonder what parents would feel having a beautiful vacation in Greece only to see their young naked teens picture displayed up in shops windows while heading up to the Accropolis. It was very legal to show disgusting/filthy pictures of young teens and women proudly on vendors carts and store windows and they don't care where they get them from.

Thanks for posting and letting me know someone fully understood the point.

[Freefundies]

Why did you start a new thread in order to yell repeatedly about someone who posted in the original thread? Is she supposed to magically know that you're talking about her in the new thread and come join you? Or are you hoping that she won't know you're talking about her so that you can continue unchallenged?

Why are you obsessed with starting threads?

Hello fun killer, I started the thread so not to highjack the Disney daughters thread. Child porn is Illegal and egregious by definition. I wanted to point out to parents how this looks to the court by advising them on the basics of what is Child porn by law. After all what is the purpose of starting a new thread if not to identify and talk about a new subject. Did I think that there would be so many parents agreeing to let their children commit child porn and choosing not to want to fully face and deal with that issue is a whole separate matter. These parents are completely daft when presented in front of Judge in our country and don't want to own up to what is proper by the laws of the land. However, I see you have earned your title well and don't find the need to have a discussion on child porn. But need I remind you that it is very hard to challenge and win on any child porn issues.