[quote]terribleivan wrote:
That is a very liberal answer. You were the one who said it was “basically an R-rated website” - I merely wanted clarification.[/quote]
VERY LIBERAL ANSWER?! Are you fucking serious?
What about an individual having information about a product offered in a free market place, in this case a free marketplace of ideas, and subsequently making an informed decision to consume said product does not fit the classical model of libertarian conservativism? Would it not then be a conservative answer?
It’s always easier to defame someone on the basis of their affiliations (although I see no reason that such a connection can be drawn in this case) than to respond directly to the substance of their assertions.
Oh, and on last thing, terribleivan, if I ever saw you “severely beat a child with a belt” I would beat the living shit out you. I don’t know how that slipped by everybody. I only hope that you were exaggerating when you said that.
Malonetd - I am glad you care for children and would do that. I feel the same way. For the sake of reason and sanity, I’m going to elaborate on my view for disciple of a child.
I get no joy out of punishing my son. I do it because he needs correction so that he can grow and live a strong, disciplined, and fruitfull life. Will I spank his bottom with a belt - Yes. Will I spank his bottom hard - No. Why, you ask. It’s simple.
My son is young enough that the power put in the spanking is not as important as the association between the belt and bad behavior. So, when my boy is bad, I make sure he watches me as I go get my belt and I pull him over my lap. Then I give him one very light tap.
I try to make the process take about 1 minute or so, so my young son can anticpate the discipline. In his mind, the anticipation of the punishment is so built up that I don’t need to inflict harm. All I am doing is reinforcing that his behavior was bad.
To elaborate further, the swat I give him is so light that when he and I wrestle around when we are playing, he suffers more physical harm that he would from the belt swat.
After I swat him, I hug him, and I tell him I love him. I ask him why he got spanked, and he always tells me…he always knows. I ask him if he will stop doing whatever it was that got him in trouble, and he tells me yes.
Like I said, I get no joy out of punishing my son, but I do it because I love him and I care. I don’t do it out of anger. And, I think that the method that I use for discipline will help him grow into a strong man.[/quote]
What you just described is a far cry from a “severe beating with a belt.”
I, like many others, would still like to know the answer to this. Is T-Nation an R-rated website?
[/quote]
I don’t see how you can think it’s not. TC, himself, has called the Atomic Dog articles the soul of T-Nation (or something along those lines). Looking at the content in most of the Atomic Dog articles, you can clearly see that the website is R-rated.
Also, Shugart’s blog has it’s share of what can be called R-rated features, though not nearly as many as the Atomic Dog.
Finally, by virtue of what the moderators allow, this is clearly an R-rated site. Cursing is freely accepted and graphic sexual discussions occur frequently.
To me, and the majority of other readers I would think, it looks R-rated. In fact, I would guess that Zeb even agrees it is R-rated. He didn’t come out and say it, but he did say he keeps his children away when reading the site.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
ZEB wrote:
But the truth is sex can be harmful when the age group cited in the survey participates. I have shown you the STD rates for kids in that age group who participate in sex at a young age.
That is why it is your job to not let your kids walk around clueless about sex.
That is not the issue-Don’t keep bringing it back to the parent educating their child. Obviously, that has to take place. The real issue is this: How long can a child (male or female) who is bombarded with sexual images withstand it?[/quote]
As a parent I can talk and talk and talk and talk. However, as they say, one picture is worth one thousand words. It’s time for the media to step up and show some restraint!
No one mentioned porn, why are you brining it up?
But do you realize that what is stimulating to an adult has nothing to do with what is stimulating to say a 13 year old?
Something that he or she might think of as highle provocative doesn’t even turn our heads.
When I claim that people who don’t have kids just don’t get it. That is only one of the things that they don’t get!
Your attitude is “hey let em deal with it.” And that sucks!
We really are able to do something if we have the will to do it. As a parent I have that will and as a non-parent not only don’t you have the will, you don’t even see the problem!
You are so far off course on that one that it’s even hard to address.
Your faulty logic states that since each successive generatioin has experienced more and more sex in the media that it’s normal and perfectly fine.
This is very bad logic for many reasons.
If taken to the extreme 20 or 30 years from now porno will be shown for free on prime time. I can see the new prof sitting there stating “what’s the big deal it’s just the sex act, it’s not like anyone is going to be hurt.”
Secondly, simply because each generation has experienced more and more sex in the media does not mean that that exposure has not caused much pain for each successive generation. STD’s are a very real problem for the kids in the 13 to 17 age group. Not to mention unwanted pregnancy’s. These problems don’t disapear easily. Parents talking to children is indeed important. However, everything that is said to a child can be washed away by peer pressure and the endless stream of sexual images put forth in the name of entertainment by a media that acts with little or no restraint.
LOL…well, I’m older than you (and wiser:), but still far to young to die. But I will say that Janet Jackson bearing her breast during the Super Bowl halftime show when families gather to watch a yearly tradition was indeed totally out of line!
However, more important that what I think is what is actually being displayed on TV:
“In a sample of programming from the 2001-2002 TV season, sexual content appeared in 64% of all TV programs.”
Is it safe to say that 64% is over the line? I think it is!
“Those programs with sexually related material had an average of 4.4 scenes per hour.”
4.4 sex scenes per hour-Not good
“Talk of sex is more frequent (61%) vs. overt portrayals (32%). 1 out of every 7 programs includes a portrayal of sexual intercourse.”
1 out of every 7 programs includes a protrayal of sexual intercourse.
And how many of them show the consequences of sexual intercourse? ZERO And there in lies one major problem!
Thank you for proving my point! Since the advent of cable TV in the mid 70’s entertainment has grown increasingly more sexually explicit. Network television has tried to match the sexual depictions for the past 30 years.
Your generation was about the first to have such programming constantly thrown in their face. Certainly it’s worse now but it had been going on for about 15 years by the time you were in 8th grade. One might say that you grew up with it!
Have you stopped debating me and actually taken my side? This is the second point in a row which you have agreed with me on!
“Telling” kids that sex is dangerous WILL NOT STOP THEM. We agree! That would never work (very well) when the entertainment industry is SHOWING them that sex is fun and consequence free.
How can my mere words as a parent match the best babes that Hollywood can produce and place in front of my child?
It’s time that they show the consequences behind the act, at least half the time. If they see that little hottie with a swollen tummy after the roll in the hay they might think twice.
There are no amount of words which can match the power of repeatedly giving our children the wrong impression about sex.
[quote]There are studies to support this. However, this is not rocket science and no one really should need a study to demonstrate to them that the more that someone is exposed to something (if it looks good) the more they want to do it.
There are studies that prove we never landed on the moon as well.[/quote]
I’m just a bit tired of hearing that studies can be shown to prove anything. I have given you some credible studies done by the RAND corporation. Now it’s time to either acknowledge the crediblity of thost studies or produce some studies which refute them!
Thus far not one person on your side has refuted the RAND study with anything other than empty words, just as you are doing on this your latest post!
I think there are som good programs on and I have said that in previous posts. But I’m also looking for the adult themed programs to be aired after a certain hour. This will put more quality into the prime time hours and less temptation in our childrens view.
MTV is there to make viacom (it is viacom right?) rich. They do it at the expense of good taste and sound moral values.
We agree again! This is a record man…
I will throw in you missed one big one: moral principals. I have a problem picturing prof X telling his 14 year old daughter that it’s okay to have sex behind the school tonight as long as the kid wears a condom. No I don’t think you would do that…
[quote]however, don’t sit there acting like past decades were so wonderful when they each had their own major downfalls.
[/quote]
I do know from my business training and
being a parent that when something is not working you fix it! It’s not about looking backward or forward. It’s about doing what works for our children and future generations.
The refuse to even acknowledge the avatar apparently because they lose their argument if this is just about nudity.
How do you figure the argument is lost?
I would be ignorant if I didn’t believe that a woman posing is a sexually provocative way was more than just nudity. If we lived in a remote African tribe where the men wore strings around their waists and the woman wore nothing but bands around their neck, perhaps our views would change.
But, this image is not of a nude tribal woman suckling her infant child as she weaves a bowl. If it were the nude tribal woman, it would still be nudity, but it would not likely begin such an intensive debate.
There is a difference. Have you figured that out yet?
[/quote]
Good post terriblevan!
In addition to that what some of these childless child experts are not thinking of is that what is provocative to a child is probably not all that provocative to most adults.
In other words if you are a 9 or 10 year old boy that avatar is probably pretty hot stuff. And while I did not complain originally regarding the avatar (T-Nation not child friendly) I can see why the poster did not want his daughter looking at it.
Remember gentlemen we are dealing with children-
Keep this in mind:
Repeated exposure to sexual images (yes even avatars) will lead to more sexual thoughts which lead to more sexual actions. It’s called advertising if you need studies that prove advertising works then you are not as smart as I originally thought. But the studies are there and I have shown them to you. However, it’s easy to figure this out on your own-not at all difficult. I guess it just seems easier when you are a parent. At least that’s what you guys are telling me by your idiotic insistence that everything that isn’t pornography is just peachy for a kid to be exposed to repeatedly.
“Telling” kids that sex is dangerous WILL NOT STOP THEM. We agree! That would never work (very well) when the entertainment industry is SHOWING them that sex is fun and consequence free.
[/quote]
Then tell them the truth. Sex IS fun. Then tell them about the consequences.
[quote]malonetd wrote:
In fact, I would guess that Zeb even agrees it is R-rated. He didn’t come out and say it, but he did say he keeps his children away when reading the site.[/quote]
Yes, I keep them away. But if you think about it the poster who complained to the original poster was probably taken aback by the avatar.
If you don’t read TC’s R rated articles and stay out of certain other areas this site is probably a PG more than an R.
Then you click on a thread called “My Apologies” and see the suggestive avatar with your daughter sitting on your lap. Have a little empathy for fahterhood guys someday you’ll be there.
While I don’t bring my children anywhere near this site I can still understand why the poster complained. And he did it with great respect I might add.
As to the rating question, I think it was you malonetd who first brought it up in a post: 1-9 11:30PM.
Someone may have mentioned it before you I’m not sure on that point. However, it was surely not terriblvan. That terriblevan would now like a clarification on that point is not unreasonable.
“Telling” kids that sex is dangerous WILL NOT STOP THEM. We agree! That would never work (very well) when the entertainment industry is SHOWING them that sex is fun and consequence free.
Then tell them the truth. Sex IS fun. Then tell them about the consequences.[/quote]
I know it’s difficult to imagine but try. Some years down the road in the not to distant future you are sitting there across from your 13 year old daughter (and you will have a daughter as your first child trust me on this:).
Now tell her to make sure that her boy friend wears a rubber before he has sex with her tonight. And also make sure that you tell her that your not mad because he is 17 years old.
“Telling” kids that sex is dangerous WILL NOT STOP THEM. We agree! That would never work (very well) when the entertainment industry is SHOWING them that sex is fun and consequence free.
Then tell them the truth. Sex IS fun. Then tell them about the consequences.
I know it’s difficult to imagine but try. Some years down the road in the not to distant future you are sitting there across from your 13 year old daughter (and you will have a daughter as your first child trust me on this:).
Now tell her to make sure that her boy friend wears a rubber before he has sex with her tonight. And also make sure that you tell her that your not mad because he is 17 years old.
Yea…imagine that stuff …
[/quote]
Quit making up impossible scenarios. Why would a 17 year old think he could have sex with my 13 year old daughter and live? The whole idea is preposterous. Thus, you have no point.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I know it’s difficult to imagine but try. Some years down the road in the not to distant future you are sitting there across from your 13 year old daughter (and you will have a daughter as your first child trust me on this:).
Now tell her to make sure that her boy friend wears a rubber before he has sex with her tonight. And also make sure that you tell her that your not mad because he is 17 years old.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Professor X wrote:
ZEB wrote:
“Telling” kids that sex is dangerous WILL NOT STOP THEM. We agree! That would never work (very well) when the entertainment industry is SHOWING them that sex is fun and consequence free.
Then tell them the truth. Sex IS fun. Then tell them about the consequences.
I know it’s difficult to imagine but try. Some years down the road in the not to distant future you are sitting there across from your 13 year old daughter (and you will have a daughter as your first child trust me on this:).
Now tell her to make sure that her boy friend wears a rubber before he has sex with her tonight. And also make sure that you tell her that your not mad because he is 17 years old.
Yea…imagine that stuff …
Quit making up impossible scenarios. Why would a 17 year old think he could have sex with my 13 year old daughter and live? The whole idea is preposterous. Thus, you have no point.[/quote]
[quote]ALDurr wrote:
ZEB wrote:
I know it’s difficult to imagine but try. Some years down the road in the not to distant future you are sitting there across from your 13 year old daughter (and you will have a daughter as your first child trust me on this:).
Now tell her to make sure that her boy friend wears a rubber before he has sex with her tonight. And also make sure that you tell her that your not mad because he is 17 years old.
Yea…imagine that stuff …
Sounds like you’ve been in this situation.[/quote]
No I thank the Lord that I have never been in this situation. However, I have had friends in that situation and trust me prof’s answer above is what they wanted to do to the 17 year old.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Remember gentlemen we are dealing with children-
Keep this in mind:
Repeated exposure to sexual images (yes even avatars) will lead to more sexual thoughts which lead to more sexual actions. It’s called advertising if you need studies that prove advertising works then you are not as smart as I originally thought. But the studies are there and I have shown them to you. However, it’s easy to figure this out on your own-not at all difficult. I guess it just seems easier when you are a parent. At least that’s what you guys are telling me by your idiotic insistence that everything that isn’t pornography is just peachy for a kid to be exposed to repeatedly.
[/quote]
Hence the need for parents to do their job and help insert judgemental STOP between the visual stimulus (hypnotic suggestion, one could say) and the response (inner suggestion/self-talk).
Yes, children are gullible and easily influenced emotional sponges. But parents should be there to progressively help them on their way to civil, responsible, healthy, and mature views of the world. One avatar at a time. ;0)
IMO, advertising of any form is just like hypnosis. You cant fall victim to it if you dont want to. At least, it does if you are working above reptilian/trance state. This refers to individuals. Mobs and crowds don`t operate that way.
Oh, and on last thing, terribleivan, if I ever saw you “severely beat a child with a belt” I would beat the living shit out you. I don’t know how that slipped by everybody. I only hope that you were exaggerating when you said that.
Malonetd - I am glad you care for children and would do that. I feel the same way. For the sake of reason and sanity, I’m going to elaborate on my view for disciple of a child.
I get no joy out of punishing my son. I do it because he needs correction so that he can grow and live a strong, disciplined, and fruitfull life. Will I spank his bottom with a belt - Yes. Will I spank his bottom hard - No. Why, you ask. It’s simple.
My son is young enough that the power put in the spanking is not as important as the association between the belt and bad behavior. So, when my boy is bad, I make sure he watches me as I go get my belt and I pull him over my lap. Then I give him one very light tap.
I try to make the process take about 1 minute or so, so my young son can anticpate the discipline. In his mind, the anticipation of the punishment is so built up that I don’t need to inflict harm. All I am doing is reinforcing that his behavior was bad.
To elaborate further, the swat I give him is so light that when he and I wrestle around when we are playing, he suffers more physical harm that he would from the belt swat.
After I swat him, I hug him, and I tell him I love him. I ask him why he got spanked, and he always tells me…he always knows. I ask him if he will stop doing whatever it was that got him in trouble, and he tells me yes.
Like I said, I get no joy out of punishing my son, but I do it because I love him and I care. I don’t do it out of anger. And, I think that the method that I use for discipline will help him grow into a strong man.
What you just described is a far cry from a “severe beating with a belt.”[/quote]
I know…I embelish a touch at times. But, I would hope that you and other would approve of my style and adopt a similar style.
Thanks to YOUR fucken swearing… my boy has told my wife that he saw the F-word on a site on my computer. Well, it pretty much had to be this FUCKEN SITE, so the wife tells me, I got to make sure to close the page when he’s in the fucken room.
I know a girl whose parents were very over protective, particularly her father. She was raised to see sex as something bad and dirty, and to avoid it. She doesn?t enjoy sex, in fact she hates it, because it always leaves her feeling dirty, guilty and like she has somehow gone behind her fathers back.
Now this has fucked her up emotionally, because as anybody who has had a relationship knows sex is a very important part of it. Every one of her past boyfriends has cheated on her, not necessarily cause they?ve been bad guys, but because their sexual needs as men had been neglected.
And she seems to have somehow connected sex with her father which is just?wrong. Im not saying that she should go out and slut it up, but she has been so repressed that sex with her partner is something wrong to her and not the act of love and trust that it should represent.
Her parents trying to ?protect? her from nasty titties and pee-pees as a child, has made it extremely hard for her to have a normal serious relationship as an adult. Who has done the real damage? The media flashing boobs on tv? Or her parents being so uptight and protective that her mind is warped?
