e petition asking for internet constrols on !!!!!! etc

janninew

I work in a large secondary school and have had many conversations with teenagers regarding body image in Class lessons. Many girls feel like boys won't be interested in them if they don't have big boobs or they aren't willing to have sex. I asked why they thought this and one girl said 'boys are only interested in girls that look like !!!!!! stars.' I found this quite sad really, that normal teen girls are feeling like this and have these worries and pressures.

I remember my younger brother (he was 13 years old at the time) saying to my 16 year old sister, 'men only fancy girls with big boobs, that's why you don't have a boyfriend!' My poor little sister was devastated.

Far to much pressure now a days on young people, not only with !!!!!!, but with pics in the media of how we should all look. I'm 28 years old and its got so much worse since I was a young teen.

All we can do is bring our children up to realise its what's inside that counts, and to find somebody who loves you for you.

Lotus-eater

janninew wrote: »

Far to much pressure now a days on young people, not only with !!!!!!, but with pics in the media of how we should all look. I'm 28 years old and its got so much worse since I was a young teen.

All we can do is bring our children up to realise its what's inside that counts, and to find somebody who loves you for you.

Yep.

The media is much more damaging than !!!!!!, IMO.

mrs_marty

I personally think this is my responsibility as a parent to police at home. At the moment not an issue as none are old enough to use the internet unsupervised my eldest DD is only 8, and uses our laptop in the front room. She is getting a refurbished laptop for her Christmas which will be policed by us and parental controls set.

I think also in terms of violence/sex they are exposed to via media well again down to us parents, however I do believe that some marketing and the images they use to sell products can be questionable. But again that is down to me as a parent to over ride any media pressure that may be felt.

janninew

mrs_marty wrote: »

I personally think this is my responsibility as a parent to police at home. At the moment not an issue as none are old enough to use the internet unsupervised my eldest DD is only 8, and uses our laptop in the front room. She is getting a refurbished laptop for her Christmas which will be policed by us and parental controls set.

I think also in terms of violence/sex they are exposed to via media well again down to us parents, however I do believe that some marketing and the images they use to sell products can be questionable. But again that is down to me as a parent to over ride any media pressure that may be felt.

Which is great for your children to have a responsible parent and upbringing, so many children aren't as lucky. Who will be responsible for protecting children who have parents that don't care? I'm not sure what the answer is, but in my job I come into contact with parents who wouldn't have the first clue about supervising their own children, they are allowed to do anything they please and I'm sure they can access anything they want on the internet.

adouglasmhor

Torry_Quine wrote: »

I'm sorry you feel that way. Personally I think we are all responsible especially if a child is in difficulty

Don't be sorry. I do help out human beings in difficulty if I can. But it's not a responsibility it's a choice.

adouglasmhor

janninew wrote: »

Which is great for your children to have a responsible parent and upbringing, so many children aren't as lucky. Who will be responsible for protecting children who have parents that don't care? I'm not sure what the answer is, but in my job I come into contact with parents who wouldn't have the first clue about supervising their own children, they are allowed to do anything they please and I'm sure they can access anything they want on the internet.

Maybe the parents should be held responsible, they might get a clue then. I am sure if they were giving their kids open access to cigarettes or booze something would be done about it, why is age barred legal media any different from age barred legal drugs?

janninew

adouglasmhor wrote: »

Maybe the parents should be held responsible, they might get a clue then. I am sure if they were giving their kids open access to cigarettes or booze something would be done about it, why is age barred legal media any different from age barred legal drugs?

I agree in an ideal world parents would be reponsible for their own children, but this isn't an ideal world, hence the need for Social Services, the Police etc. I also believe children are allowed to drink at home, they just aren't allowed to buy alcohol, not sure about smoking. We have official agencies to protect children who have no protection at home, imagine if they just said its down to their parents, what would become of the children then?!

surfsister

janninew wrote: »

Which is great for your children to have a responsible parent and upbringing, so many children aren't as lucky. Who will be responsible for protecting children who have parents that don't care? I'm not sure what the answer is, but in my job I come into contact with parents who wouldn't have the first clue about supervising their own children, they are allowed to do anything they please and I'm sure they can access anything they want on the internet.

totally agree!! that's why I started the thread!

MissMitch

janninew wrote: »

I work in a large secondary school and have had many conversations with teenagers regarding body image in Class lessons. Many girls feel like boys won't be interested in them if they don't have big boobs or they aren't willing to have sex. I asked why they thought this and one girl said 'boys are only interested in girls that look like !!!!!! stars.' I found this quite sad really, that normal teen girls are feeling like this and have these worries and pressures.

I remember my younger brother (he was 13 years old at the time) saying to my 16 year old sister, 'men only fancy girls with big boobs, that's why you don't have a boyfriend!' My poor little sister was devastated.

Far to much pressure now a days on young people, not only with !!!!!!, but with pics in the media of how we should all look. I'm 28 years old and its got so much worse since I was a young teen.

All we can do is bring our children up to realise its what's inside that counts, and to find somebody who loves you for you.

I'm 41, there was that same pressure when I was that age, my first boyfriend split with me after 2 weeks because I wouldn't sleep with him, another went off with my best friend for the same reason...it's really nothing new and has multifarious causes.

Boys want girls like that because their idols are generally over-paid footballers with beautiful girls falling over themselves to get to them whether they look like David Beckham or John Terry. Pick me one days newspaper that doesn't have stories like that in it?

So that's why I don't think ADULTS who enjoy watching !!!!!! should have to inconvenience themselves to stem the flow of what is already an ocean of shallow, misguided 'culture'!

adouglasmhor

janninew wrote: »

I agree in an ideal world parents would be reponsible for their own children, but this isn't an ideal world, hence the need for Social Services, the Police etc. I also believe children are allowed to drink at home, they just aren't allowed to buy alcohol, not sure about smoking. We have official agencies to protect children who have no protection at home, imagine if they just said its down to their parents, what would become of the children then?!

I said parents should be held responsible - that means dealt with, supervised, prosecuted, punished, re-educated whatever. By the very official agencies to protect children you mention. Which are paid for by our taxes which I also mentioned.

I did not say left to their own inadequate devices by society as a whole. I don't know how you came to that conclusion.

Children are allowed to drink at home, but I'm pretty certain if they are allowed to be drunk regularly to their deficit there are laws in place to protect them there too.


Your post was a subtle non sequitor to mine; I am not sure whether you really did not understand my post or are attempting to stimulate more debate?