Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Am I the only one who is uncomfortable with this statement?
Like I could understand happening to get an unintended glance at one or two, followed by hopefully a sit down talk with your son. I had conversations with my sons about underage nude photos and videos and the legal and ethical implications of them, and strongly urged them never to save any such content on any of their devices. But it would be hard to see nudes of 50+/- teen girls unless you were looking on purpose.
I mean, I guess one would have to give a crap about the fact that these girls likely had misplaced trust in the recipients of the images, but probably didn't consent for you to look at them. I know that once a person puts a photo out there, it's out there, but my own ethics would have held me to not deliberately violate their consent regardless. I mean, you're supposed to be the adult, the one with the sense to make decent decisions.
Though usually I guess American society exempts men from carrying any responsibility for that in a situation like this. "Nature" and all. Though I'd find that pretty insulting if I were a man.
Yeah, my eyes bugged and my jaw dropped reading that.
__________________ ____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
No evidence of this being the case. Excessive hyperbole.
I find it hard to believe that every girl in the school, including the shy ones, obese ones, lesbian ones, nerd ones etc. were taking and sending nudes.
I have no idea why that poster would invent such a story. Well, I have my suspicions.
I raised 2 teenaged girls in the '00s and '10s and can assure you that them sending nudes to every guy in school was nowhere in their or their friend's experience.
It is a big mistake to underestimate the human instinct to reproduce. If you think your "power of choice" or something can "override" your instincts - you are mainly wrong, but for an adolescent you are absolutely wrong.
A boy / girl attraction is as unchosen as the choice an infant has in suckling - none.
Bottom line - for whatever a million years of filtered down instincts have in mind - certain male behaviors click in female minds as "good to produce strong offspring." Not saying it's inevitable - but trying to overcome biology with logic or "feelings" or social media or peer pressure - not happening. You are in no better position now to make smart (mating) decisions as a teenager then you were in 1950, 1750 or 1750 BC. All the same.
There is attraction and there is the human cognition and the ability to step back and say "Yes, he's cute, but he's also bad news." Yes, teenagers are not "fully myelinated," which leads to impulsivity and a feeling of indestructibility, but to imply that they are not capable of making "smart mating decisions" is misguided. I certainly did not run with bad boys and my friends did not run with bad boys. Posters of Motley Crue were enough, and instead we went out with normal, even shy guys. Granted, where I'm from it seemed like every other boy was in some kind of metal band by the time he was 16--there is something like 50 metal bands for every 100,000 people in my native country --but the catch is that even then, the majority of those boys were pretty normal and actually a bit "geeky" or "dorky." They didn't display antisocial traits like breaking laws, using drugs, getting into fights, causing trouble in school, etc. They were good students, respectful of us, and generally all around good guys.
My neices did not run with bad boys, and most of my American friends' daughters do not run with bad boys, either. The closest they get is some of the American fascination with athletes or "jocks," so sometimes they get hung up on crushes of the star players, but that is about it. Are some girls drawn to the bad boys? Yes, but those tend to be the "tough" girls, many of whom have antisocial traits themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth
See, this is why sweeping generalizations are not only inappropriate, but potentially destructive. They help create and perpetuate stereotypes, which results in vilifying a significant percentage of girls who have no interest in the controversial activity.
"Oh, that's just the way teens are these days" is a meme that becomes widespread, even though it's not true of many. If the wrong people accept this erroneous belief, it could actually place teen girls in danger. There already are too many creeps out there, pedophiles, hebephiles; this kind of talk encourages those tendencies.
I agree. Let's not normalize the abnormal and inappropriate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic_Spork
Am I the only one who is uncomfortable with this statement?
Not at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by moongirl00
Not to mention it is ILLEGAL to have any nudes of under age girls or boys for that matter.
Keeping copies of them and/or sharing them with other people can get you serious prison time!
And that is why parents need to talk to their kids. Submariner said he had that talk when his son was 18, about legalities.
However, I really do not think that is enough. Parents of girls need to teach their daughters about the risks and repercussions of sending nudes, as well as how to stand up to pressure from boys, but parents of boys need to teach them how to respect girls. It is inappropriate across the board for minors to be sending photos like that, even to other minors. Boys should be taught that, and taught that it is not right to "take advantage" of other people, instead of parents waiting until their sons are 18 and able to get into legal trouble for having pictures of minors on their phones. No it is not "boys will be boys," not if that also means "boys will be disrespectful aholes who pressure and coerce girls."
This is what really annoys me about this culture. So much of the responsibility is placed on girls and women to protect themselves from exploitation and harm by men. Where is the call to teach boys and men not be prurient, exploitive, and objectifying? Some years ago a razor company, Gillette, caught a lot of flack for a series of commercials in which men were addressing other men who were catcalling and speaking disrespectfully of women, and telling the disrespectful men that it's not okay. A lot of American men got their "knickers in a wad" and went unhinged and off the rails on how that is an attack on masculinity. Has no one ever taught boys and young men in this country that they can be masculine without being toxic?
Women need to protect themselves from rape and harm? How about men just don't rape and harm?
I rant, but this thread is an example of how toxicity is rampant in male-female relationships here, and I hate it.
I have a decades long history of only dating the best of the worst & I have the best dad & my parents gave me most stable upbringing in the world.
Truly. As a teenager I only dated the guys with the longest hair, who had the best dope connections & won all the fights. Lol.
As an adult, several of the guys I've dated have made international news. Organized crime. 1% MC Presidents. Ultra-wealthy bad boys who campaigned for president of the US.
I've been doing a lot of introspection to figure this out as to why I've been like this. It certainly hasn't served me well. Wish I could find a happy medium.
I was discussing this with some family members recently. It’s funny how sometimes certain people tend to attract the same sort over and over. One family member says she always attracts military. One always attracts doctors and lawyers. One always attracts entrepreneurs. It just sucks when you somehow get the short end of the stick with who you attract.
But it would be hard to see nudes of 50+/- teen girls unless you were looking on purpose.
Exactly. Pretty sick behavior.
Also ick that he looked at them long enough to identify every single girl in the class of 98 students. He must have been watching them for years to know all their faces and bodies.
Though usually I guess American society exempts men from carrying any responsibility for that in a situation like this. "Nature" and all. Though I'd find that pretty insulting if I were a man.
And granted we're talking about a teenager, but Submariner's son, even if he didn't directly solicit these nudes, he kept them and didn't delete them. If his friends were passing them around, did he say anything to stop them from doing that? Did he tell the girls that their photos were being shared widely? There's a lot in modern ethics going on here.
There is attraction and there is the human cognition and the ability to step back and say "Yes, he's cute, but he's also bad news." Yes, teenagers are not "fully myelinated," which leads to impulsivity and a feeling of indestructibility, but to imply that they are not capable of making "smart mating decisions" is misguided. I certainly did not run with bad boys and my friends did not run with bad boys. Posters of Motley Crue were enough, and instead we went out with normal, even shy guys. Granted, where I'm from it seemed like every other boy was in some kind of metal band by the time he was 16--there is something like 50 metal bands for every 100,000 people in my native country --but the catch is that even then, the majority of those boys were pretty normal and actually a bit "geeky" or "dorky." They didn't display antisocial traits like breaking laws, using drugs, getting into fights, causing trouble in school, etc. They were good students, respectful of us, and generally all around good guys.
My neices did not run with bad boys, and most of my American friends' daughters do not run with bad boys, either. The closest they get is some of the American fascination with athletes or "jocks," so sometimes they get hung up on crushes of the star players, but that is about it. Are some girls drawn to the bad boys? Yes, but those tend to be the "tough" girls, many of whom have antisocial traits themselves.
I agree. Let's not normalize the abnormal and inappropriate.
Not at all.
And that is why parents need to talk to their kids. Submariner said he had that talk when his son was 18, about legalities.
However, I really do not think that is enough. Parents of girls need to teach their daughters about the risks and repercussions of sending nudes, as well as how to stand up to pressure from boys, but parents of boys need to teach them how to respect girls. It is inappropriate across the board for minors to be sending photos like that, even to other minors. Boys should be taught that, and taught that it is not right to "take advantage" of other people, instead of parents waiting until their sons are 18 and able to get into legal trouble for having pictures of minors on their phones. No it is not "boys will be boys," not if that also means "boys will be disrespectful aholes who pressure and coerce girls."
This is what really annoys me about this culture. So much of the responsibility is placed on girls and women to protect themselves from exploitation and harm by men. Where is the call to teach boys and men not be prurient, exploitive, and objectifying? Some years ago a razor company, Gillette, caught a lot of flack for a series of commercials in which men were addressing other men who were catcalling and speaking disrespectfully of women, and telling the disrespectful men that it's not okay. A lot of American men got their "knickers in a wad" and went unhinged and off the rails on how that is an attack on masculinity. Has no one ever taught boys and young men in this country that they can be masculine without being toxic?
Women need to protect themselves from rape and harm? How about men just don't rape and harm?
I rant, but this thread is an example of how toxicity is rampant in male-female relationships here, and I hate it.
There is attraction and there is the human cognition and the ability to step back
There is no "cognition" or "ability" that will override your instinct. Some manage - and some do not. That's the only answer necessary for the OP's situation of "some girls like bad boys." They didn't have the (blank) to override it. It's not a choice they're making - it's a lack of ability to make a choice for something else. Kinda the whole point.\
Your instincts are stronger than your cognition. Not always, clearly. But enough.
There is attraction and there is the human cognition and the ability to step back
There is no "cognition" or "ability" that will override your instinct. Some manage - and some do not. That's the only answer necessary for the OP's situation of "some girls like bad boys." They didn't have the (blank) to override it. It's not a choice they're making - it's a lack of ability to make a choice for something else. Kinda the whole point.\
Your instincts are stronger than your cognition. Not always, clearly. But enough.
I don't agree. Overall you could pretty much say I liked bad boys when I was younger.
I was young, dating that type could be exiting, lots of drama, fun, no harm just dating, so who really cares?
As I got older those things were no longer "fun", I was into getting ahead at work, saving money, being a responsible adult, and at that point I was attracted to those on a similar path as my own.
And no, I have absolutely no regrets or desire to have an affair with a "bad boy."
I don't even have "looks" type, who I fall in love with or become attracted has more to do with the whole package.
__________________ ____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
There is attraction and there is the human cognition and the ability to step back
There is no "cognition" or "ability" that will override your instinct. Some manage - and some do not. That's the only answer necessary for the OP's situation of "some girls like bad boys." They didn't have the (blank) to override it. It's not a choice they're making - it's a lack of ability to make a choice for something else. Kinda the whole point.\
Your instincts are stronger than your cognition. Not always, clearly. But enough.
I am not an animal unable to control base instincts. Kindly refrain from invalidating and insulting my intelligence and my lived experience, as well as that of others on this board, by making such sweeping generalizations and attempting to tell us who we are, how we think, and how we behave, thank you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
--but the catch is that even then, the majority of those boys were pretty normal and actually a bit "geeky" or "dorky." They didn't display antisocial traits like breaking laws, using drugs, getting into fights, causing trouble in school, etc. They were good students, respectful of us, and generally all around good guys.