Legal and consented Female Genital Mutilation

[floo]

Why?

Because trying to keep an eye on what they are up to on their computers and phones, which is what any good parent should be doing, isn't easy.

[Rhiannon]

Because trying to keep an eye on what they are up to on their computers and phones, which is what any good parent should be doing, isn't easy.

What about trust?

[Aruntraveller]

It's hard, Trent. My daughters take a strongly anti porn stance because of how they have encountered it through other children and haven't engaged with it. But peer pressure is terrible and as much as I can switch on parental controls, other parents don't and trust me, most teenagers can circumvent them in a blink of an eye anyway. Also parental controls generally come from the States and not only censor porn but swearing (which as a parent I'm not fussed about) and, very often, LBTGI issues, which I want them to be able to engage with.

I have no clue if I'm getting this right but I've found the best thing is actually to be a friend in a way, and talk about stuff that I gather most parents don't talk to their kids about, including labia size and goodness knows what else. My girls also happen to follow a lot of young feminist activists on social media and maybe some of that will rub off on their little bro. The only option is to talk about it, talk about it and talk about it some more.

Hi Rhi

Yes, I realize it is hard - and I, as a non-parent, probably don't understand just how hard it is. And as ever, there are parents who just do not care. So complete regulation of the situation is imo impossible, but it still doesn't mean we should stop trying to restrict what children have access to as you are obviously trying to do.

As to Shaker's point about censorship - if what you are saying about parental controls from USA blocking LGBTI content then his argument that some form of restriction can't be imposed is incorrect.

Anyway as I implied before it is a huge morass of a mess and I don't envy anyone bringing up children. (I never did, to be fair!)

[Nearly Sane]

It's hard, Trent. My daughters take a strongly anti porn stance because of how they have encountered it through other children and haven't engaged with it. But peer pressure is terrible and as much as I can switch on parental controls, other parents don't and trust me, most teenagers can circumvent them in a blink of an eye anyway. Also parental controls generally come from the States and not only censor porn but swearing (which as a parent I'm not fussed about) and, very often, LGBTI issues, which I want them to be able to engage with.

I have no clue if I'm getting this right but I've found the best thing is actually to be a friend in a way, and talk about stuff that I gather most parents don't talk to their kids about, including labia size and goodness knows what else. My girls also happen to follow a lot of young feminist activists on social media and maybe some of that will rub off on their little bro. The only option is to talk about it, talk about it and talk about it some more.

Applause! I think there is a huge issue about openness which is often portrayed as 'being a friend' that is missed. Good friends also have some rules, and good parents probably need more rules. We, as ever, have a problem about where we get information and where we feel we can discuss it but that was as much, if not more true, in the days of Victorian parenting. We cannot exchange an inability to talk to out children about sex because we cannot treat them seriously, to one where we cannot talk because we fo not treat us seriously.

[Shaker]

As to Shaker's point about censorship - if what you are saying about parental controls from USA blocking LGBTI content then his argument that some form of restriction can't be imposed is incorrect.

... as much as I can switch on parental controls, other parents don't and trust me, most teenagers can circumvent them in a blink of an eye anyway.

[Aruntraveller]

Fair enough point Shaker - but I still don't buy the 'shrug of the shoulders' option. It just seems we are surrendering to the WWW and not thinking enough about ways of limiting it's effect in these and similar circumstances.

[Nearly Sane]

My mother told me at the age of 13 that she wasn't allowing me to read Salem's Lot. Needless to say, I read it all the quicker and since I had been a year or so younger when I read The Rats was somewhat underawed by the what was in it. Indeed in terms of what my mother wanted to 'protect' me from Jaws was worse, as was much of the Greek mythology that I had been reading for years, and been encouraged to read. Oliver Twist is far more horrific and darker than Salem's Lot.

[Shaker]

Fair enough point Shaker - but I still don't buy the 'shrug of the shoulders' option. It just seems we are surrendering to the WWW and not thinking enough about ways of limiting it's effect in these and similar circumstances.

Because I just don't think it can be done.

I'm of that generation of whom it was said that the kids could programme the VCR where the parents were clueless. The technology changes but the principle remains exactly the same.

What one person can make, another person can break. There's no uncrackable safe or unforgeable currency. Create all the parental controls you like - it won't be a parent but a 12 year-old who gets around them.

[Sebastian Toe]

I consider myself fortunate that our children were kids in the days before everyone had computers and mobile phones. However, I do know that my husband and I would have insisted that their computer/phone use was restricted, and only permitted when we were around to supervise it. No that wouldn't have made us popular, but far better than what is going on today.

They would find away around your restrictions. Kids huh!

[Shaker]

The genie is out of the bottle on this one, frankly.

[Nearly Sane]

I consider myself fortunate that our children were kids in the days before everyone had computers and mobile phones. However, I do know that my husband and I would have insisted that their computer/phone use was restricted, and only permitted when we were around to supervise it. No that wouldn't have made us popular, but far better than what is going on today.

So they would never have been allowed around to any other children's houses? Or to have travelled to school on a bus with other children without you supervising them? Or to have been in school during break in the company of other kids without you supervising them?

[floo]

So they would never have been allowed around to any other children's houses? Or to have travelled to school on a bus with other children without you supervising them? Or to have been in school during break in the company of other kids without you supervising them?

Their secondary school's policy on phones and computers would have been laid down by my husband as he was the head teacher. We would have checked on the parents of the friends they visited and asked how they viewed such matters.  Anyway we didn't have that problem thank goodness.

[Rhiannon]

Their secondary school's policy on phones and computers would have been laid down by my husband as he was the head teacher. We would have checked on the parents of the friends they visited and asked how they viewed such matters.  Anyway we didn't have that problem thank goodness.

If any parent tried to check with me on 'how I viewed such matters' they'd be told to go away. Or words to that effect.

[floo]

If any parent tried to check with me on 'how I viewed such matters' they'd be told to go away. Or words to that effect.

How unpleasant, it is a perfectly reasonable question if one wishes to protect one's children.

[Rhiannon]

How unpleasant, it is a perfectly reasonable question if one wishes to protect one's children.

So you would need to protect your children from me?

[Nearly Sane]

So you would need to protect your children from me?

Presumably you have lines too in parental behaviour? I could use a reductio but you seem to find them offensive.

[Rhiannon]

Presumably you have lines too in parental behaviour? I could use a reductio but you seem to find them offensive.

I don't give parents a grilling before they are allowed to have my kids in their house. It's called 'trust'.

I wouldn't like drug taking in front of my kids but 'do you snort coke while your kids have friends over' isn't something I feel the need to ask.

[floo]

So you would need to protect your children from me?

We would never have let our children visit their homes of their friends unless we got to know the parents well first.

[Rhiannon]

We would never have let our children visit their homes of their friends unless we got to know the parents well first.

Seriously? Not even for tea?

So did you ask these parents about their drug taking, porn watching and so on? Just to be sure?

[floo]

Seriously? Not even for tea?

So did you ask these parents about their drug taking, porn watching and so on? Just to be sure?

If I had any suspicion they watched porn, took drugs, were alcoholics or smoked, our children would never have been permitted anywhere near their homes!

We got to know the parents of all our children's friends and with one exception we had no problems with them. The exception we reported to social services and the children were removed when it was discovered he was abusing them. Fortunately they went back to their mother who had divorced him.

[Rhiannon]

If I had any suspicion they watched porn, took drugs, were alcoholics or smoked, our children would never have been permitted anywhere near their homes!

Smoking? Ffs.

Otherwise, that's it. You don't need to grill parents and ask how they 'view such matters'. It's offensive in the extreme. Most people are ok and trustworthy. And you cannot expect them to enforce your rules in their home.

[Shaker]

If I had any suspicion they watched porn, took drugs, were alcoholics or smoked, our children would never have been permitted anywhere near their homes!

Plenty of people do all these things and more besides; it doesn't mean to say they do so while kids are around.

ETA: what Rhiannon said.

[Rhiannon]

Plenty of people do all these things and more besides; it doesn't mean to say they do so while kids are around.

Yes, it is what is done while in charge of the kids that matters. 

[Robbie]

Floo said she didn't have that problem so really doesn't know how she would have struck the balance between trust and overseeing.
Mine used computers from quite young (kids didn't have mobiles then), and frankly they understood them better than I! I only knew what i needed to know for work. My husband was more proficient but it never occurred to us to spy on the girls. Yes we did trust them for better or worse. My parents trusted me (didn't have computers then but there have always been dangers), of course they didn't know everything but I was alright.

It's very sad to think that 9 year old girls are worried about their genitalia, at that age it's usually all neat and tidy. I remember when I was 12 or so wondering if mine was normal as it seemed to have changed so much. Though i`generlly talked to my mum about things quite freely I couldn't quite ask her about that. After a while I didn't worry about it. Girls at school talked about theirs and I realised we were all much the same.

Plastic surgery in such a delicate area is so drastic! If kids have seen neat little-girl-type minges on porn sites they should know that those who produce porn - airbrush and even put make up on genitals. It's all fake.

Boys who see that sort of stuff must have a completely distorted idea about a woman's body & vice versa. Also about what is and isn't acceptable. Porn is horrible when you think many kids get their sex education from it on their 'phones now. Never mind the craze for taking a photo of your bits and distributing it.

Anatomy must be taught in detail so fact and fiction can be separated - and feelings talked about.

(My eldest once talked about girls having their clit pierced, like an ear piercing only 'down there'. She'd heard about it at school and couldn't believe it. Neither could i and made some comment about how a girl with a piercing there would be aware of it all the time. My youngest,then about twelve piped up, "That's why they have it done!" .)

I don't give parents a grilling before they are allowed to have my kids in their house. It's called 'trust'.

I wouldn't like drug taking in front of my kids but 'do you snort coke while your kids have friends over' isn't something I feel the need to ask.

You're right (tho' can't imagine parents taking drugs in front of kids). If your children are confident in themselves, and in you, they'll be able to set their own limits & respect the trust you put in them.

Sensible parents are also aware that there will be a few things about their childrens' lives that they don't know & that's normal too.

[Shaker]

Yes, it is what is done while in charge of the kids that matters.

Indeed. Otherwise, people's personal affairs are exactly that.