ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags celebrity incidents , Mick Jagger , sexual assault incidents , sexual assault issues

Reply
Old 5th February 2020, 09:32 AM   #161
MoeFaux
Suspicious Mind
 
MoeFaux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,456
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
Iíll take ďJoe Biden rejected campaign slogansĒ for $200, Alex.
Hah!
__________________
This post brought to you by the artist fauxmerly known as Moe.
MoeFaux is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2020, 10:26 AM   #162
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 6,078
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
For pete's sake, I thought you were talking about reality.
So it does not happen then? Parents can't keep their children from having perfectly legal sexual relationships because they think that sex before marriage is immoral?

As i recall American parents have been until very recently and probably still can in many states, force their kids to have "gay cure" therapies because they are not heterosexual.
__________________
We would be a lot safer if the Government would take its money out of science and put it into astrology and the reading of palms. Only in superstition is there hope. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2020, 10:47 AM   #163
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,947
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
So it does not happen then? Parents can't keep their children from having perfectly legal sexual relationships because they think that sex before marriage is immoral?

As i recall American parents have been until very recently and probably still can in many states, force their kids to have "gay cure" therapies because they are not heterosexual.
Parents are allowed to handle their kids legally. Gay therapy is rapidly becoming illegal so no longer allowed. You earlier were suggesting kids could be essentially imprisoned at home, or that death or threats of death could be issued. Those too are illegal and therefore not allowed.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2020, 11:16 AM   #164
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 6,078
Originally Posted by MoeFaux View Post
So...lock up your daughters: it's still a big thing. At least with Joe Biden, who seems to be obsessed with them. He's no Mick Jagger, though, so he hasn't got a chance.
He probably still expects people to ask their lovers parents for permission to take their hand in marriage... sick bastard.
__________________
We would be a lot safer if the Government would take its money out of science and put it into astrology and the reading of palms. Only in superstition is there hope. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2020, 11:18 AM   #165
carlitos
"mŠs divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 21,489
At what age in Sweden can a child tell their parents to sod off, they want to screw someone and stay out late?
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2020, 01:34 PM   #166
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,967
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
So it does not happen then? Parents can't keep their children from having perfectly legal sexual relationships because they think that sex before marriage is immoral?



As i recall American parents have been until very recently and probably still can in many states, force their kids to have "gay cure" therapies because they are not heterosexual.


As an American father myself, I can tell you that I did not allow my daughter to go on unsupervised dates until she was 17. I didnít threaten anyone, nor did I imprison her in her home. I just didnít give my permission to do so and if she did it anyway, there would have been consequences such as loss of privileges.


Ok, wait. I did threaten someone. When she was 15, she was taking our dog to dog training classes at the local PetSmart. The teacher was a 29 year old dude who flirted with her and she gave him her cell number. He texted her to meet up and I saw the text. I went with her to this meet up and told him that if he ever texted/met up with my daughter again, I would not hesitate to go to his employer and/or the police.

Would I have been in trouble in Sweden?
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2020, 01:43 PM   #167
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,321
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
It feels like every single American movie or TV show depicting teenage relationships always show their parents objecting to it, because they know just how dangerous teenage love and sex is. At some point they become angry when their child (especially if they are female) comes home after they have been with their lover, which tends to imply that they need their parents permission to be in a relationship or even just be with someone (It's almost as if their parents have a say in who they can be partners with). So of course they impose a curfew upon them, because again their child can be kept at home at their parents leisure.

Oh and their parents are so concerned about their children's welfare that they absolutely demand that their lover have dinner with them. Just to make sure whether they consent to the relationship apparently. No doubt every teen is thrilled to be forced to have their boy/girlfriend judged and evaluated by their parents (as is their right).
There have been quite a few good films around this topic. Clearly a life-changing traumatic event that Hollywood has had to tackle it as a tension filled crisis, on a par with Godzilla thundering down the boulevards towards New York skyscrapers.

So we have had 'Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?' (right winger parents) and 'Get Out!' (liberals desperately bending over backwards to be 'woke').

Result: a box office smash and Oscar nominations.

This is because we the audience empathise. We know boyfriend's mum is scrutinising one in great detail, committing to memory every pore, hair and a piece of clothing, all the while emphasising just how terribly nice they are. Dad is jovial and jokey, his face rosy as he takes in your figure, nodding approvingly. Boyfriend tries to sing your praises without making it too obvious that he itrying to ingratiate you with Mum and Dad.

Toe-curling. There should be a law against this practice.

ETA: 'Meet the Fokkers' stretched to three or four follow ups.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ogonblick i sander,
vilken trost vad an som kommer pa! ~ L Sandell

Last edited by Vixen; 5th February 2020 at 01:52 PM.
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2020, 01:45 PM   #168
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,321
Originally Posted by Max_mang View Post
It's so cliched and baked in to the culture it's used in commercials. This one is from last year:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H45-5Rga1B8

Back on topic, my personal feeling is this: Mick shouldn't have done it. Even if he was a caring, loving, generous, all-around great guy and she was mature for her age and completely capable of handling it (in other words the most ideal conditions imaginable), he shouldn't have done it.

He should have been the adult and decided there's still some variables that can't be known at the time. He also could've thought "You know, maybe other people will hear about this and see how easy it is to have sex with underage girls when you're in showbiz. This could lead to real perverts and predators getting in to showbiz just for that reason and make it so bad there has to be a giant #metoo movement someday to fight against it." (that last one's a stretch, I know)
But don't you see: he became a pop star because of the thought of all that sex with adoring groupies.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ogonblick i sander,
vilken trost vad an som kommer pa! ~ L Sandell
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2020, 01:48 PM   #169
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,321
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
At what age in Sweden can a child tell their parents to sod off, they want to screw someone and stay out late?
It's normal is Sweden for people to leave home and live alone at sixteen.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ogonblick i sander,
vilken trost vad an som kommer pa! ~ L Sandell
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2020, 01:53 PM   #170
DragonLady
Illuminator
 
DragonLady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,439
I don't understand the debate here?

I've known a LOT of people -my own father and uncles included- who absolutely believed that boys should date early and often, but girls should "save themselves" for marriage.

Just a few weeks ago I was talking (online) to a person who had installed security cameras to make certain her 18-year-old son didn't "play house" with his 18-year-old girlfriend when she stayed over at his (their) house.

A while back we had a thread here about a man who shot to death a teenage boy he found in his daughter's room. His (successful, iirc) defense was that he didn't know the girl invited the boy, but I honestly don't think it would've made any difference.

It's not unusual for American women to have to justify their choice of men even decades after marriage -house paid for, kids grown, and parents still saying "you should've married that nice boy we liked".

I don't know how many references or resources one might be able to dig up, as it's not politically correct and one of the many unwritten/unspoken threads through our society, but it is there, and it's not showing any real signs of unraveling for at least another generation.
__________________
http://www.troubador.co.uk/book_info.asp?bookid=2499

ďShe would be half a planet away, floating in a turquoise sea, dancing by moonlight to flamenco guitar.Ē ~ Janet Fitch

The Gweat and Tewwible Winged One
DragonLady is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2020, 02:01 PM   #171
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 10,035
Arcade22, I am an American father of three adult girls, and I'd like to take this time to opine that you have no idea what you are talking about.

My kids were raised to have self respect and be smart. They have literally never had a curfew, or had their dates meet with supervision or pre-approval, because we trust them and they have never significantly betrayed that trust.

All their mother and I ever required is a quick text regarding where they physically were so that the cavalry could come if needed. They also had a text code, an 'x', meaning they needed a no questions asked extraction immediately. Kind of a standing get out of jail free card. None ever needed it, yet they all knew it would be honored.

They all stayed out all night on their proms and stuff, and our extra beds were offered to any friends unfit to drive (providing we could contact the parents). The States are not the oppressive Puritanical nightmare you assume them to be
__________________

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain

Truth is not what you want it to be; it is what it is, and you must bend to its power or live a lie -Miyamoto Musashi

Last edited by Thermal; 5th February 2020 at 02:04 PM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2020, 02:34 PM   #172
ahhell
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,169
Originally Posted by DragonLady View Post
I don't understand the debate here?

I've known a LOT of people -my own father and uncles included- who absolutely believed that boys should date early and often, but girls should "save themselves" for marriage.

Just a few weeks ago I was talking (online) to a person who had installed security cameras to make certain her 18-year-old son didn't "play house" with his 18-year-old girlfriend when she stayed over at his (their) house.

A while back we had a thread here about a man who shot to death a teenage boy he found in his daughter's room. His (successful, iirc) defense was that he didn't know the girl invited the boy, but I honestly don't think it would've made any difference.

It's not unusual for American women to have to justify their choice of men even decades after marriage -house paid for, kids grown, and parents still saying "you should've married that nice boy we liked".

I don't know how many references or resources one might be able to dig up, as it's not politically correct and one of the many unwritten/unspoken threads through our society, but it is there, and it's not showing any real signs of unraveling for at least another generation.
That bolded bit is just silly. As thought there's never been an American man who has never married a women his parents didn't like and never stopped hearing about it. Or a Swedish women that hadn't heard the same.

Aside from that, it has largely unraveled over the last generation or two, to the point that I've never heard the notion of a shotgun wedding or over protective fathers of girls being anything other than a joke.

Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
It's normal is Sweden for people to leave home and live alone at sixteen.
This makes it seem like it's just a disagreement over when to consider someone and adult, a 16 year old living on their own would be quite uncommon in the US. And frankly, the "if you are living under my roof, your living under my rules!" attitude seems pretty reasonable to me.

Last edited by ahhell; 5th February 2020 at 02:38 PM.
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2020, 02:34 PM   #173
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 6,078
The reason why "parental consent", together with the notion of "parental rights", is so problematic lies in the simple fact that what the parents want for their child is not necessarily what's in the child's best interest. There's no shortage of examples demonstrating that parents can be, and often are, more concerned with their own wishes rather than those of their child, or their objective well-being.

If it's illegal to have sex with a 15 year old because legislators have, in their infinite wisdom, decided to enact a general age limit that is higher than that, based on the reasoning that those under said age are too immature to consent to sex, it's fairly straight forward to dismiss any objections from the underage individual because they are legally assumed to lack the maturity decide for themselves about this at all.

But what if the parents consent? Right now in Turkey legislators of the ruling party are trying to enact the type of law that allows the person who had sex with an underage individual to avoid prison, if they marry their victim. With the parents consent, of course. The impetus for this law is the large influx of Syrian refugees, who are not only more conservative than the Turks, they also live in rather desperate material and social conditions. Because of this, they place far less importance on the well-being of their individual children than their family as a whole. Yet this law basically assumes that the parents would serve as a kind of safe-guard against abusive relationships, even when no one really has any illusions about the fact that they can't serve that role.

If a 15 year old is too young to have sex because the law says so, then that should be the case no matter what they think about it. More importantly, their parents should not be able to overrule the legality of their ability to legally have sex. The same applies to marriage and plenty of other things where the law has often allowed parents a say in things where really the welfare of the child ought to be the only significant factor.
__________________
We would be a lot safer if the Government would take its money out of science and put it into astrology and the reading of palms. Only in superstition is there hope. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr

Last edited by Arcade22; 5th February 2020 at 02:37 PM.
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2020, 02:55 PM   #174
DragonLady
Illuminator
 
DragonLady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,439
Quote:
Aside from that, it has largely unraveled over the last generation or two, to the point that I've never heard the notion of a shotgun wedding or over protective fathers of girls being anything other than a joke.
You're not alone. I know lots of people who see the whole subject as nothing but a joke and don't understand that for many, many other people it's a very real way of life.

Quote:
More importantly, their parents should not be able to overrule the legality of their ability to legally have sex.
That does happen here, too. A family will allow a person to move into the house & have a sexual relationship with an underage person with their full knowledge and consent. It's not common, but it happens.

Arranged marriage is still a thing, too. Polygamist families make the news the most often, but other groups practice it as tradition, and sometimes the people involved -whatever their ages- have no real power to refuse.

ETA: That was easy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1X1MNvuRpdg
__________________
http://www.troubador.co.uk/book_info.asp?bookid=2499

ďShe would be half a planet away, floating in a turquoise sea, dancing by moonlight to flamenco guitar.Ē ~ Janet Fitch

The Gweat and Tewwible Winged One

Last edited by DragonLady; 5th February 2020 at 02:56 PM. Reason: include link
DragonLady is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2020, 03:02 PM   #175
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,967
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
The reason why "parental consent", together with the notion of "parental rights", is so problematic lies in the simple fact that what the parents want for their child is not necessarily what's in the child's best interest. There's no shortage of examples demonstrating that parents can be, and often are, more concerned with their own wishes rather than those of their child, or their objective well-being.

If it's illegal to have sex with a 15 year old because legislators have, in their infinite wisdom, decided to enact a general age limit that is higher than that, based on the reasoning that those under said age are too immature to consent to sex, it's fairly straight forward to dismiss any objections from the underage individual because they are legally assumed to lack the maturity decide for themselves about this at all.

But what if the parents consent? Right now in Turkey legislators of the ruling party are trying to enact the type of law that allows the person who had sex with an underage individual to avoid prison, if they marry their victim. With the parents consent, of course. The impetus for this law is the large influx of Syrian refugees, who are not only more conservative than the Turks, they also live in rather desperate material and social conditions. Because of this, they place far less importance on the well-being of their individual children than their family as a whole. Yet this law basically assumes that the parents would serve as a kind of safe-guard against abusive relationships, even when no one really has any illusions about the fact that they can't serve that role.

If a 15 year old is too young to have sex because the law says so, then that should be the case no matter what they think about it. More importantly, their parents should not be able to overrule the legality of their ability to legally have sex. The same applies to marriage and plenty of other things where the law has often allowed parents a say in things where really the welfare of the child ought to be the only significant factor.
They can exercise their rights to have all the sex they like once Iím no longer responsible for supporting them. When my daughter turned 17 (the legal age of consent in Texas), she was still in High School and we were still responsible for her and the rules applied: she could date as long as we knew who she was dating and what time she was going to be home; no sex. Our concern wasnít religious notions of chastity but ensuring she would be free to finish school and start her adult life (if thatís what she wanted) unburdened by teenage relationship drama and kids like her mom and I were. Would such a rule have gotten me in trouble if we lived in Sweden?
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2020, 05:50 PM   #176
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,881
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Arcade22, I am an American father of three adult girls, and I'd like to take this time to opine that you have no idea what you are talking about.

My kids were raised to have self respect and be smart. They have literally never had a curfew, or had their dates meet with supervision or pre-approval, because we trust them and they have never significantly betrayed that trust.

All their mother and I ever required is a quick text regarding where they physically were so that the cavalry could come if needed. They also had a text code, an 'x', meaning they needed a no questions asked extraction immediately. Kind of a standing get out of jail free card. None ever needed it, yet they all knew it would be honored.

They all stayed out all night on their proms and stuff, and our extra beds were offered to any friends unfit to drive (providing we could contact the parents). The States are not the oppressive Puritanical nightmare you assume them to be
Very similar to our attitude with our now 18 yo daughter. Teenagers are going to have sex whether their parents know about it or not. Might as well be open and realistic and make sure they are properly prepared. My wife (with her partners at the time) and I (with my partners) were screwing like bunnies when we were 16, 17, 18. It didnít do us any harm and it will not harm most teens.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2020, 05:56 PM   #177
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,967
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
Very similar to our attitude with our now 18 yo daughter. Teenagers are going to have sex whether their parents know about it or not. Might as well be open and realistic and make sure they are properly prepared. My wife (with her partners at the time) and I (with my partners) were screwing like bunnies when we were 16, 17, 18. It didnít do us any harm and it will not harm most teens.


I mean, yeah...this is true. My wife and I definitely were among the bunnies. Even though she got pregnant, it didnít ďharmĒ us. I fully admit I was irrational in raising my daughter...but donít I have the right to be irrational?

My problem is with the idea that if I forbid my kids from having sex while they live under my roof (I know, I know...fat lot of good that will do) that I would get a visit from Swedish Child Protectorate would come over and punish me somehow. I canít believe thatís true.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2020, 06:37 PM   #178
p0lka
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,780
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
As an American father myself, I can tell you that I did not allow my daughter to go on unsupervised dates until she was 17. I didnít threaten anyone, nor did I imprison her in her home. I just didnít give my permission to do so and if she did it anyway, there would have been consequences such as loss of privileges.


Ok, wait. I did threaten someone. When she was 15, she was taking our dog to dog training classes at the local PetSmart. The teacher was a 29 year old dude who flirted with her and she gave him her cell number. He texted her to meet up and I saw the text. I went with her to this meet up and told him that if he ever texted/met up with my daughter again, I would not hesitate to go to his employer and/or the police.

Would I have been in trouble in Sweden?
Wow
p0lka is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2020, 07:07 PM   #179
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,881
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
I mean, yeah...this is true. My wife and I definitely were among the bunnies. Even though she got pregnant, it didnít ďharmĒ us. I fully admit I was irrational in raising my daughter...but donít I have the right to be irrational?

My problem is with the idea that if I forbid my kids from having sex while they live under my roof (I know, I know...fat lot of good that will do) that I would get a visit from Swedish Child Protectorate would come over and punish me somehow. I canít believe thatís true.
I have no idea how or why you decided my post was a personal criticism of you. It is merely a description of the method we have applied to raising our daughter. A method that is every bit a valid as yours. The only difference is that we know what our daughter is doing and are able to provide any necessary guidance in a timely manner.

Tell you what, if you think you are being irrational raising your kids so they cannot be open with you then you carry right on doing that.

And by the way, I have never got any woman pregnant unintentionally, and my wife has never been pregnant unintentionally. Knowledge can be useful.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2020, 07:22 PM   #180
Babbylonian
Penultimate Amazing
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 12,433
Defending questionable (or lousy) parenting practices with "it's my right as a parent" is always sad and pathetic.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2020, 10:48 PM   #181
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 13,668
Originally Posted by p0lka View Post
Wow
Indeed
__________________
"Covid-19 doesn't care whether you are a Republican or a Democrat; its an equal opportunity killer" - Joy Reid

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2020, 11:03 PM   #182
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,967
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
I have no idea how or why you decided my post was a personal criticism of you. It is merely a description of the method we have applied to raising our daughter. A method that is every bit a valid as yours. The only difference is that we know what our daughter is doing and are able to provide any necessary guidance in a timely manner.



Tell you what, if you think you are being irrational raising your kids so they cannot be open with you then you carry right on doing that.



And by the way, I have never got any woman pregnant unintentionally, and my wife has never been pregnant unintentionally. Knowledge can be useful.


Iím confused by this post. I didnít take your post as a personal criticism at all. I certainly didnít mean my post as a criticism of you at all, though it seems you took it that way. Iím speaking in the context of how my parenting style might be viewed by the Swedish government, not fellow Americans. I donít care what they think...
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2020, 03:18 AM   #183
sphenisc
Philosopher
 
sphenisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,161
Originally Posted by https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/feb/06/derek-mackay-scottish-finance-secretary-quits-over-messages-to-boy-16
"Scotlandís finance secretary, Derek Mackay, has resigned hours before he was due to deliver next yearís budget after it emerged he had been sending messages to a 16-year-old boy."
(AoC is 16 in Scotland.)

Would this situation be treated differently in the US, Sweden, elsewhere?
__________________
"The cure for everything is salt water - tears, sweat or the sea." Isak Dinesen
sphenisc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2020, 03:21 AM   #184
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 6,078
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
As an American father myself, I can tell you that I did not allow my daughter to go on unsupervised dates until she was 17. I didn’t threaten anyone, nor did I imprison her in her home. I just didn’t give my permission to do so and if she did it anyway, there would have been consequences such as loss of privileges.
A 15 year old, let alone a 17 year old, would not need to have nor should they expect to be given parental permission to have sex or be in any kind intimate relationship with anyone. At that age they are a largely autonomous individual that is deemed mature enough by society to take personal responsibility for their own sexuality and personal relationships.

Ultimately there's a big difference between not assisting your child in doing something that you disapprove of, however justified you are in that disapproval, and actively keeping them from doing so. Parents are not obligated to drive their children to their friend(s) or lovers, nor is there an absolute responsibility to facilitate such contacts. Young children have a right to have friends, and parents are allowed to discriminate in who they chose to allow their children to be friends with, but as they grow older their own opinions of who they want to be friends with begin to overrule their parents wishes. Trying to force your kids to be friends with someone that they don't like is the kind of behavior that tends toward poor parenting, and in extreme cases could constitute child abuse.

Parents are however not allowed to actively prevent such contacts by restricting their freedom of movement or by utilizing physical force, emotional abuse or other forms of abuse (all kinds of physical "discipline" of children is illegal). I should note here that people cannot disinherit their children at all.

The only exceptions would be if it's necessary for their welfare and well-being, on purely objective grounds. That is not however a decision that should be made arbitrarily by the parents, because it could easily lead to situations where it ends up being an unjustified infringement in their child's freedom and autonomy, especially with regards to older children.

Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
They can exercise their rights to have all the sex they like once I’m no longer responsible for supporting them. When my daughter turned 17 (the legal age of consent in Texas), she was still in High School and we were still responsible for her and the rules applied: she could date as long as we knew who she was dating and what time she was going to be home; no sex. Our concern wasn’t religious notions of chastity but ensuring she would be free to finish school and start her adult life (if that’s what she wanted) unburdened by teenage relationship drama and kids like her mom and I were. Would such a rule have gotten me in trouble if we lived in Sweden?
In the vast majority of cases children are in a very exposed situation. They are not able to chose where they live and are dependent on their parents for everything. This does not mean that parents interests in their child are absolutely allowed to overrule their child's own wishes and desires, especially as they become older.

Parental responsibilities to their child extends to recognizing that they are a individual person with their own personality and will, and as they mature their ability and will to fulfill their own wishes and desires may run counter to those of their parents. In that regard parents have to accept that they cannot decide for their children except in those cases where it would be motivated by concerns for their welfare.

Having children is, for the most part (edit: in developed western ciuntries), a choice people make. In that regard complaining about how you would be responsible for the upkeep of your children's children if they were to have a child comes off unjustified selfish and petty. It's really no different from complaining about being forced to pay for the upkeep of women that you have had children with. If you don't want to pay for your child, don't have children.
__________________
We would be a lot safer if the Government would take its money out of science and put it into astrology and the reading of palms. Only in superstition is there hope. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr

Last edited by Arcade22; 6th February 2020 at 03:56 AM.
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2020, 03:33 AM   #185
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 90,447
Originally Posted by sphenisc View Post
(AoC is 16 in Scotland.)



Would this situation be treated differently in the US, Sweden, elsewhere?
I've just started a thread about that incident.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2020, 05:36 AM   #186
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 88,913
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
So it does not happen then? Parents can't keep their children from having perfectly legal sexual relationships because they think that sex before marriage is immoral?
What do you mean, "so"? Nothing I've said implies this. The only thing I've implied is that real examples would be appreciated, rather than fictional ones.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2020, 05:55 AM   #187
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 6,078
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
What do you mean, "so"? Nothing I've said implies this. The only thing I've implied is that real examples would be appreciated, rather than fictional ones.
Others in this thread have filled in with anecdotal examples of the type of behavior i described.
__________________
We would be a lot safer if the Government would take its money out of science and put it into astrology and the reading of palms. Only in superstition is there hope. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2020, 07:26 AM   #188
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,321
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
A 15 year old, let alone a 17 year old, would not need to have nor should they expect to be given parental permission to have sex or be in any kind intimate relationship with anyone. At that age they are a largely autonomous individual that is deemed mature enough by society to take personal responsibility for their own sexuality and personal relationships.

Ultimately there's a big difference between not assisting your child in doing something that you disapprove of, however justified you are in that disapproval, and actively keeping them from doing so. Parents are not obligated to drive their children to their friend(s) or lovers, nor is there an absolute responsibility to facilitate such contacts. Young children have a right to have friends, and parents are allowed to discriminate in who they chose to allow their children to be friends with, but as they grow older their own opinions of who they want to be friends with begin to overrule their parents wishes. Trying to force your kids to be friends with someone that they don't like is the kind of behavior that tends toward poor parenting, and in extreme cases could constitute child abuse.

Parents are however not allowed to actively prevent such contacts by restricting their freedom of movement or by utilizing physical force, emotional abuse or other forms of abuse (all kinds of physical "discipline" of children is illegal). I should note here that people cannot disinherit their children at all.

The only exceptions would be if it's necessary for their welfare and well-being, on purely objective grounds. That is not however a decision that should be made arbitrarily by the parents, because it could easily lead to situations where it ends up being an unjustified infringement in their child's freedom and autonomy, especially with regards to older children.



In the vast majority of cases children are in a very exposed situation. They are not able to chose where they live and are dependent on their parents for everything. This does not mean that parents interests in their child are absolutely allowed to overrule their child's own wishes and desires, especially as they become older.

Parental responsibilities to their child extends to recognizing that they are a individual person with their own personality and will, and as they mature their ability and will to fulfill their own wishes and desires may run counter to those of their parents. In that regard parents have to accept that they cannot decide for their children except in those cases where it would be motivated by concerns for their welfare.

Having children is, for the most part (edit: in developed western ciuntries), a choice people make. In that regard complaining about how you would be responsible for the upkeep of your children's children if they were to have a child comes off unjustified selfish and petty. It's really no different from complaining about being forced to pay for the upkeep of women that you have had children with. If you don't want to pay for your child, don't have children.
AIUI A parent can disinherit a child if they stipulate a specific reason outlining exceptionally outrageous behaviour of that individual in their will. However, this has nothing to do with respect for one's children, it is merely based on ancient laws from the Middle Ages of passing on property to the next generation. (For the uninformed this differs from UK /US inheritance laws in that in those jurisdictions, the spouse gets the legal entitlement, not the children.)

Parents being possessive towards their offspring wrt their friends and who they date is surely not unknown in Sweden (aside from the immigrant communities you have alluded to)?
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ogonblick i sander,
vilken trost vad an som kommer pa! ~ L Sandell
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2020, 07:27 AM   #189
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 88,913
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
Others in this thread have filled in with anecdotal examples of the type of behavior i described.
Yes, I was talking about you, Arcade. You responded to my request with a fictional example, so I called you on it. I don't know why it's so difficult.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2020, 08:16 AM   #190
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 48,678
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
I mean, yeah...this is true. My wife and I definitely were among the bunnies. Even though she got pregnant, it didnít ďharmĒ us.
Nonsense that relationship drama destroyed your lives and ruined your education. Simple really. At least you saved your daughter from your mistakes.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2020, 08:22 AM   #191
carlitos
"mŠs divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 21,489
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
A 15 year old, let alone a 17 year old, would not need to have nor should they expect to be given parental permission to have sex or be in any kind intimate relationship with anyone. At that age they are a largely autonomous individual that is deemed mature enough by society to take personal responsibility for their own sexuality and personal relationships.
So - at what point does the parent's responsibility turn from keeping the child safe, to allowing the child independence in things like sex, curfew, etc.? As I asked earlier, at what age can a child tell their parents to sod off, and stay out as late as they want or have sex with whomever they want?
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2020, 08:31 AM   #192
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,881
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Iím confused by this post. I didnít take your post as a personal criticism at all. I certainly didnít mean my post as a criticism of you at all, though it seems you took it that way. Iím speaking in the context of how my parenting style might be viewed by the Swedish government, not fellow Americans. I donít care what they think...
Maybe I misunderstood, but when you quoted me and them asked me "Don't I have the right to be irrational?" it seemed that you thought I was implying that you were irrational.

I have no argument with how you raise your children. It is not my business. You seem to be doing what you think best and that is good.

It seems we were both misunderstanding each other's intent. That can happen when posting on a forum. No harm, no foul.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2020, 08:55 AM   #193
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,967
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Nonsense that relationship drama destroyed your lives and ruined your education.
It did make it very, very difficult for us, yes. We didn't want that kind of struggle for our daughter (or our son who had the same kind of rules). I can't see how that's unreasonably draconian.

Quote:
Simple really. At least you saved your daughter from your mistakes.
Yes, we did. #winning.


***
I have never said that the way we raised our kids was a model of child-rearing. I know what mistakes we made. What I'm objecting to here is this idea of a nanny state coming in and chastising a parent for not letting their teenage daughter have sex. I believe that parents do have a right to raise their children as they see fit (barring abuse and neglect, of course).

It seems that in Sweden, if I were Tommy Chong and forbade a 15yo Rae Dawn from leaving with a 33yo rock star, that the Parent Police would come tell me how wrong I am because kids at that age are legally of age, basically autonomous and can make their own decisions about who to hang out with. That seems fundamentally wrong to me.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2020, 08:59 AM   #194
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,967
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
So - at what point does the parent's responsibility turn from keeping the child safe, to allowing the child independence in things like sex, curfew, etc.? As I asked earlier, at what age can a child tell their parents to sod off, and stay out as late as they want or have sex with whomever they want?
And to put a finer point on it: At what point can kids involve some State authority to make their parents fall in line?
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2020, 10:30 AM   #195
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 48,678
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
So - at what point does the parent's responsibility turn from keeping the child safe, to allowing the child independence in things like sex, curfew, etc.? As I asked earlier, at what age can a child tell their parents to sod off, and stay out as late as they want or have sex with whomever they want?
18, before that parents can have them kidnapped and beaten for getting to uppity. There is a whole industry based on this, and avoiding responsibility for the inevitable deaths.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2020, 10:32 AM   #196
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 48,678
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
It did make it very, very difficult for us, yes. We didn't want that kind of struggle for our daughter (or our son who had the same kind of rules). I can't see how that's unreasonably draconian.

Yes, we did. #winning.


***
I have never said that the way we raised our kids was a model of child-rearing. I know what mistakes we made. What I'm objecting to here is this idea of a nanny state coming in and chastising a parent for not letting their teenage daughter have sex. I believe that parents do have a right to raise their children as they see fit (barring abuse and neglect, of course).
Because abstinence only education does not work, it is far more effective to give them the knowledge to have good safe sex than try to prevent them from having sex at all. That is shown over and over again.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2020, 10:50 AM   #197
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,803
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
So it does not happen then? Parents can't keep their children from having perfectly legal sexual relationships because they think that sex before marriage is immoral?

As i recall American parents have been until very recently and probably still can in many states, force their kids to have "gay cure" therapies because they are not heterosexual.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conver...on_therapy.svg

It's banned in several states and there are currently proposed bans in the majority of U.S. states.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2020, 11:12 AM   #198
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 13,668
Originally Posted by sphenisc View Post
(AoC is 16 in Scotland.)

Would this situation be treated differently in the US, Sweden, elsewhere?
In America, they would elect him President.
__________________
"Covid-19 doesn't care whether you are a Republican or a Democrat; its an equal opportunity killer" - Joy Reid

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2020, 11:54 AM   #199
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,967
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Because abstinence only education does not work, it is far more effective to give them the knowledge to have good safe sex than try to prevent them from having sex at all. That is shown over and over again.
What do you mean it doesn't work? My daughter had her first child at 27!
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2020, 12:53 PM   #200
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,739
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
The reason why "parental consent", together with the notion of "parental rights", is so problematic lies in the simple fact that what the parents want for their child is not necessarily what's in the child's best interest. There's no shortage of examples demonstrating that parents can be, and often are, more concerned with their own wishes rather than those of their child, or their objective well-being.

If it's illegal to have sex with a 15 year old because legislators have, in their infinite wisdom, decided to enact a general age limit that is higher than that, based on the reasoning that those under said age are too immature to consent to sex, it's fairly straight forward to dismiss any objections from the underage individual because they are legally assumed to lack the maturity decide for themselves about this at all.

But what if the parents consent? Right now in Turkey legislators of the ruling party are trying to enact the type of law that allows the person who had sex with an underage individual to avoid prison, if they marry their victim. With the parents consent, of course. The impetus for this law is the large influx of Syrian refugees, who are not only more conservative than the Turks, they also live in rather desperate material and social conditions. Because of this, they place far less importance on the well-being of their individual children than their family as a whole. Yet this law basically assumes that the parents would serve as a kind of safe-guard against abusive relationships, even when no one really has any illusions about the fact that they can't serve that role.

If a 15 year old is too young to have sex because the law says so, then that should be the case no matter what they think about it. More importantly, their parents should not be able to overrule the legality of their ability to legally have sex. The same applies to marriage and plenty of other things where the law has often allowed parents a say in things where really the welfare of the child ought to be the only significant factor.

I thought this was the law in many US states already? Thirteen US states have no minimum age for marriage essentially allowing legal pedophilia.

Quote:
Between 2000 and 2015, over 200,000 minors were legally married in the United States, or roughly six children per thousand. ... In many cases, minors in the US may be married when they are under the age of sexual consent, sixteen to eighteen for most states. In some states minors cannot legally divorce, leave their spouse, or enter a shelter to escape abuse
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_..._United_States

So Turkey has better protection for children than the US.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:32 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.