Eh. I have plenty of pictures of my daughter naked as a baby. The weird part of this is showing off the naked picture to a stranger on the bus and making mention of the genitals in specific.
Anyway, everyone knows that naked baby pictures are used to torture children in front of their serious romantic partners brought home for the first time. This has not happened in my 14-year-old daughter's life yet, but I hope to one day have this privilege that comes with parenting.
Yep, my wife has seen my little baby wiener. The awkward teenage pictures were far more embarrassing though. Hers are buried in a hoarder house so I might never get to see her embarrassing school band photos.
Dude, this has been a traditional way for parents to embarrass their adult children in front of their partner for decades. My wife has seen my naked baby pictures without my parents even showing them to her. And I've seen hers. What's the big deal? It's not like either of us found them sexy.
They're baby pictures. We're not talking about something erotic here. Naked babies are not some sort of scandalous thing. In most cultures, they're normal.
We're not talking about social media, we're talking about the significant other of my child. Or even relatives. I didn't get my daughter's permission to take her photo when she was a baby, so I shouldn't have sent a photo to my father on the other side of the country based on this reasoning.
used to torture children in front of their serious romantic partners brought home for the first time.
Things were different when we were kids. It's a fucked up thing to psychologically abuse your (presumably) teenage kids like that and objectively people know that. (Your daughters) consent in the subject is the only thing that matters. The only reason anyone is giving you a pass is because you're FlyingSquid, but maybe leave those pictures in the closet until closer to the wedding.
Oh please. It's not psychological abuse. It's "torture" the same way telling the story about the time they told a lady in the checkout line, "I came out of my mommy's bagina!" when they were three to an adult child's partner is torture.
You show me an example of anyone suffering PTSD because their parents showed their partner baby pictures.
Yeah saving it for their long term partners (if you have to) is probably a better idea than showing them during the first meeting.
And please don't dismiss other peoples trauma because you didn't experience it personally, childhood trauma takes many different forms, some we're only just becoming aware of.
I didn't dismiss anyone's trauma, I'm asking if that has ever resulted in anyone's trauma, a parent showing their adult child's partner a picture of them naked as a baby.
I mean if nothing else, not as a "torture," showing the partner the first couple of pictures of the kid as a baby should be acceptable to people just as a "this is what they looked like when it all began" and they don't come out with clothes on. They also are unable to understand the concept of consent, let alone give it.
I would also suggest that if that did cause someone trauma, it would be because the parent was aware this sort of thing would upset their child to that level and did it anyway. I think most parents wouldn't actually show the pictures if they knew it would cause the child real psychological pain, because that isn't the point in doing it. It's usually a form of good-natured ribbing, not malicious.
I didn’t dismiss anyone’s trauma, I’m asking if that has ever resulted in anyone’s trauma
How can I speak for every person? Has it caused someones trauma? Yeah I bet it has. You initially made it sound like you were showing bath pics to every teen-aged first date that came over which would obviously be pretty fucked up.
showing the partner the first couple of pictures of the kid as a baby should be acceptable to people just as a “this is what they looked like when it all began"
Yeah we agree, baby pics are fun, I especially like noting family resemblances as everyone ages. My sister made my mom a big set of scrapbooks/albums for each of her kids one year, no naked baby pics were included. They're great fun to look at, highly recommend.
They also are unable to understand the concept of consent, let alone give it.
This is the primary issue, without even going into the obvious power dynamic between child and parent when it comes to consent later. Where do a childs rights end and parents begin?
I would also suggest that if that did cause someone trauma, it would be because the parent was aware this sort of thing would upset their child to that level and did it anyway.
I would suggest that most parents think they're doing great doing it just like it's always been done (i.e. generational trauma) and "they turned out just fine." but there are definitely some intentionally abusive ones too. The child with the intentionally abusive parent is obviously going to have way more trauma.
I think most parents wouldn’t actually show the pictures if they knew it would cause the child real psychological pain, because that isn’t the point in doing it.
The "real psychological pain" part makes it look like you're dismissing trauma, just because it's not something you experienced doesn't mean it isn't valid and while intent matters so does the result. I'm sure you specifically are a good parent and you're very conscious of your kids mental headspace but by default I'd say save it for the fiance if you just have to have them.
This is the primary issue, without even going into the obvious power dynamic between child and parent when it comes to consent later. Where do a childs rights end and parents begin?
Again, if we argue that children have to consent to get their photo taken, no one should take any photos of their children below the age where they can do that. That means no baby pictures at all.
The “real psychological pain” part makes it look like you’re dismissing trauma
You have no evidence of this trauma. You're just guessing.
Spoken like someone who's never been in therapy or studied psychology, people bet and guess and infer stuff all the time; it's a "soft" science for a reason.
That means no baby pictures at all.
Specifically pictures of their genitals, I feel like no baby genital pics is a good default, yes, what a weird hill to die on.
You have no evidence of this trauma.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence
You're just guessing.
Guessing, inferring, surmising, call it whatever helps you sleep at night. I think of it as erring on the side of safety and respect for my kids. Not having pics of their junk doesn't make my life any worse, there's only downsides for them.
Again, babies don't come out with clothes on. The idea of expecting consent for sending grandparents pictures of what their newborn grandchild looked like when it was just a few seconds old is ridiculous.
And yes, psychology is a soft science. That doesn't mean that you personally can claim that people have been traumatized by this without showing any evidence of it just like you can't claim that people have been traumatized by a Luke Skywalker action figure without showing any evidence of it. You can infer whatever you like. Inferences aren't truth and they are based on personal biases.
Suggesting that because psychology is a soft science, you can make whatever claim about trauma you infer is ridiculous. Where did you get your psychology degree from, anyway?
We're talking about pictures of your kids genitals. What a weird fucking hill to die on. Its your kid, take all the pics you want, probably don't get caught with them on your phone.
It's ok to just say "you know what you might have a point" and walk away sometimes my dude.
And yet I don't think you do have a point without evidence,
My point is childhood trauma takes a lot of forms and "good natured" showing naked pictures of your children to potential romantic partners the first time they visit (the thing we were talking about) is undoubtedly traumatic for a portion that experience it. I'm not aware of any specific studies studying the impact of showing nude photos of your children to their potential romantic suitors but I do know that childhood trauma has been studied and has far-reaching, unknown impacts. Even if the victim often doesn't recognize the instance as abuse until much later in life, if ever.
Sorry... you're saying a baby feels trauma and shame when it has its picture taken and that leads to psychological problems as an adult and creates more trauma when you show that photo to their partner?
Also, virtually every new parent has photos of their baby naked on their phone. And it's legal. I have no idea why you don't think it would be. A nude picture of your own baby is not child porn. No one has ever been put on a sex offender list for having a picture of their child just after it exited the womb on their phone. What a silly thing to say.
you’re saying a baby feels trauma and shame when it has its picture taken and that leads to psychological problems as an adult and creates more trauma when you show that photo to their partner?
You're being willfully obtuse. The trauma and shame comes from the picture being displayed for the parents amusement to potential romantic partners the first time they come over, presumably in their early teens.
virtually every new parent has photos of their baby naked on their phone.
Most I've seen are completely swaddled and only their little faces are visible.
And it’s legal.
Where did you get your law degree?
I have no idea why you don’t think it would be. A nude picture of your own baby is not child porn.
I mean, I personally agree with that.
No one has ever been put on a sex offender list for having a picture of their child just after it exited the womb on their phone.
Crazier shit has happened and we're not talking about gross little bloody newborns fresh out of the box. In every baby pic I've ever seen (and in the context of this comic); they're bath pics, specifically ones with their junk in it! It's weird, just place some bubbles or a wash cloth strategically or something it's not that difficult fuck.
Was the focal point of the photo on the child’s genitalia or pubic area?
"It seemed to be."
"Was the child who is depicted in an unnatural pose, or in inappropriate attire, given the age of the child?"
"They were naked."
"Was the child nude or fully or partially clothed?"
"Completely nude your honor."
That's how quickly that can be used against you and I for one don't have that kind of faith in our legal system.
Look, it's your kid you do whatever you want, we could argue back and forth all day, I'm sure you're a decent parent and handle things as appropriately as possible but for anyone else reading this maybe give some consideration to pictures you take of your vulnerable kids and what purpose those pictures serve, some strategic bubbles or a cloth make the picture 100% innocent and it becomes a non-issue.
can you provide evidence that has ever happened to any parent?
How could I even find that evidence? I don't have access to court records re custody battles and divorces or therapy notes from every doctor out there. I showed you links indicating that even unintended childhood trauma lingers into adulthood but you dispute showing embarrassing images could possibly be humiliating or that any parent could possible make a bad decision regarding them.
seem to think you can make any claim you like without evidence
I never claimed it happened, I claimed it could be bad which is self evident to me but apparently not everyone. My hypothetical illustrated how easily innocent actions could be misconstrued, nothing more.
get indignant about it when you aren’t automatically believed.
My only point here is that maybe taking pictures of your naked children and parading them around when their first boy/girlfriends start coming over (the thing you said it was for) maybe isn't the best idea and could be saved for a time later, when they're ready to show people. If anyone is indignant it's someone who feels their parenting skills are being questioned.
everyone knows that naked baby pictures are used to torture children in front of their serious romantic partners brought home for the first time. This has not happened in my 14-year-old daughter’s life yet
What age did you start meeting your partners parents? Gonna be any time now isn't it?
Ah, so you ignored virtually every single other post I made since then where I clarified and just focused on that one. I see. Well yes, that does make it easier to make such silly criticisms, doesn't it?
I think his point is that he's the exception and he would be very upset if he got thrown in with all the pedo's.
I agree with what you said, such a strange hill to die on. He wont accept any variation like covering just their genitals or making them off camera. Its like its very important he has baby dicks and vaginas saved on his computer and phone.
And of course since he would never hurt his own children (said every parent who inadvertently abuses their children), we shouldn't make him adhere to the rules the rest of us do.
All hail king flying squid I guess. I'm starting to realize that quantity of posts does not equal quality of character.
It would be legal on Google Drive too. I challenge you to find me one example of a parent getting in legal trouble for having a photo of their baby naked on either their phone or on Google Drive.
Legal trouble is not the only kind of trouble.
I just didn't link a news article because I thought it was widespread enough.
Try "guy loses google account false positive" on Google Search
It will still cause you problems if you are reliant on it though.
I am also trying to slowly get enough alternatives that random Google decisions don't cause me misery, but...
Oh yeah, I would never rely on it for plenty of other reasons. I do back up some photos to it, but it's one of multiple backups. I look at it as a redundancy.
Well, simply that, a false positive on the drive gets the whole Google account removed. Not just the drive access, but all your past mails (and the future mails you will receive because you are unable to tell others that you had to change your Mail ID), all other accounts you made using said ID become harder to access and same for other Google services (paid or not) that you might be using at that moment.
And you can't even send a user data retrieval request.
Just wanted to say that I appreciate the nuanced debate here, and that neither of you resulted in insulting each other after getting to the bottom of it. More of this on Lemmy!
The real psychological pain comes from the realisation that your parent never really cared about your boundaries.
They'll even give your ITR account OTP to someone who will block you out from it and it will be your fault for trusting them with it, but I guess this example is too irrelevant.
The teenage years are around the time when children start evaluating their own actions and start having their own personality (which is kinda related to the rebellious stage). They realise the power dynamic between them and their parent which they were until then not conscious about.
It is the parents' actions during this time that determines what their evaluation of the past power dynamic will be and so will be their decision of what relationship they will have with their parents once they are financially independent.
So, whether or not the experience is traumatic, your future relationship with your child depends upon how much they care about who sees their pictures.
People are replying and reporting trauma, you are saying you don't believe them, that its not good enough. Besides the fact its absurd that you think psychology or sociology is even close to solving or understanding nearly any of the topics we are talking about.
When it comes to psychology, self reports are evidence, and you disagreeing with that doesn't change anything.
I experienced trauma from my childhood. It wasn't exclusively the pictures but it was a part of it. And my mom says the same bullshit you are saying now.
But I'm sure you'll just be so in tune with your kid, and have perfect adherence to unassailable morals, so they will make it through this abuse just fine. I don't understand why you are so proud of that fact, but here we are.
And I'm sure you'll say I made this all up for the sake of argument, since that's exactly what you told the first person.
Are you now accusing me of having a child porn collection? That is a very serious accusation. You definitely should contact lemmy.world admin right away. They have my contact information because I've given it to them as a moderator, so they can call the police.
You will do that, right? Because of my child abuse and child porn collection? You're not just all talk, are you?
You can make all the jokes you want, you have no idea if that exact picture of your daughter features prominently in a CP collection somewhere, right this instant.
Oh I'm sorry I'm supposed to believe you are replying in good faith right now? I'm alright with ending this here if you have nothing more to say about it.
Good faith or not, you made a claim that I am abusing my daughter and have a collection of child porn. Your claims, not mine.
So if you do not contact anyone over it, you are enabling and endorsing child abuse and child porn. Based on your claims. Whether or not my replies are in good faith have no bearing on your belief, if it is sincere, that I possess child pornography.
Either you want to do something to stop someone you know has child pornography or you don't.
I promise I won't tell anyone about your child porn collection. Its okay you don't have to worry.
You really should put more than just a cursory thought into your replies you know. Gotchas only work if you can't pause to think about how stupid of a point you are making right now.
I like how you think saying I'm required to do something actually makes me required to do something. I am not the child porn police. I am not responsible for reporting every murmur of child porn, or abuse.
I sincerely believe that the naked picture of your child on your computer/phone/physical image is CP because thats one of its possible uses, and you have no idea it is not being used as porn right now. I also sincerely believe I have no obligation to report absolutely anything about this. Its a fucking discussion over the internet with a stranger, you really think theres even an authority for me to report you to?
I also sincerely believe you are just an idiot, rather than a pedophile, and you just have a very inflated ego and sense of self righteousness. I'm sure you've never been wrong, but if you were it was for a good reason, right?
I promise I won’t tell anyone about your child porn collection. Its okay you don’t have to worry.
I see. Then you're fine with child pornography.
I also sincerely believe you are just an idiot, rather than a pedophile
So the multiple times you accused me of having a child pornography collections were lies? What a horrible thing to lie about, my teenage daughter having pornographic photos of her as a child. Why would you say that about a teenage girl?
I wonder if you would tell her that to her face and then say, "actually, I just think you are the child of an idiot?"
I never said you dont have a collection of CP. You have more than one picture right?
I mean if she's on here I can tell her right now? Flying Squid's daughter, I sincerely believe your dad to be an idiotic blowhard who thinks his powers of prediction are near limitless.
This is why I accused you of bad faith. Never said any of that. Would be nice if you'd stop building straw men to attack.
Is there a reason I should hide my opinions of her father from her? What abuse am I supposed to be levying here.
You probably shouldn't bring her into a conversation with adults if you don't want her hearing others opinions of you.
You know you and your daughter could both go your whole lives without that picture ever being a problem, and I'd still be against its existence right?
So, what words are you going to put in my mouth next? Seems to be getting harder and harder for you to twist your opinion into fact.
Here I'll put it simply for you: I think the pictures you currently have are immoral to have taken, and immoral to keep now. I think your daughter is the victim of this. I dont know if she will ever be harmed by it, but the fact that she could is enough. I dont think I'm required to report you for having admitted having these pictures. I dont think anyone's required to do anything based on simple comments on an anonymous forum. If you were in my community, and you asked how I felt about this, I would tell you all this to your face and hope that changed your mind, but past that I wouldn't do anything probably more out of distrust of our legal system than anything though. If you think I'm awful for that, I'm okay with that. Maybe we are both awful people. Did I miss anything?
Edit: oh I also think you can have CP and not be a pedophile. Like I said, that just makes you stupid.
You said all of that. You said I had child porn of her, which means we had an incestuous relationship. You said I was stupid. Intelligence is hereditary, so you're telling her that her genes are defective too.
That's what I think you're awful for. Saying that you would tell that to a 14-year-old girl.
If that's what those words mean to you and your daughter, sure but that's not the same as me saying them. Those are all your ideas and I dont endorse a single one of them, nor would I say them to your daughter.
Why do you think you can just change what words I say to be other more offensive words and then attack those?
I think you unintentionally abused your daughter by creating child porn of her.
Without the intent of pedophilia you could just be ignorant, but since you are defending it actively, this makes you stupid.
You are willfully ignorant, which is what I mean when I call people stupid or an idiot.
If you really want to insist that number 1 there equals an incestuous relationship then sure I'll bite the bullet on that one. I just don't think its relevant because neither of you knew it at the time nor intended the situation to be incestuous. It was accidentally incestuous maybe, but that's entirely your fault because you are the adult.
Essentially, you were ignorant then and now your an idiot, but it was wrong the whole time.
You show me an example of anyone suffering PTSD because their parents showed their partner baby pictures.
i literally provided myself as an example in this, i quite literally said that i would consider it a violation of privacy, and no that's not PTSD, but PTSD is the extreme end of things here. We aren't just talking about PTSD.
You claiming that it would give you PTSD is not evidence that anyone has suffered or is suffering from PTSD because of it. That's just you making an assumption about a situation you've apparently never actually faced.
It's amazing that you got this far into the conversation and, despite my repeated mention of a daughter, you think my baby had testicles. And I never suggested she was anything but cisgendered, so I'm really not sure how you missed that. But based on the rest of your silly question, I have a few guesses.
Only someone who knows nothing about external female anatomy thinks "nards" could possibly be a gender neutral term. But do tell me what plural parts of her genitalia that would show up in a typical naked baby photo would count as "nards."
Believe it or not, I don't have a single photo of my daughter's ovaries or fallopian tubes. They're way too far up inside her for a camera to capture.
They’re way too far up inside her for a camera to capture.
Unless the cameras are designed for that. Usually found in hospitals and on plumbers. And the pictures that come out of those are not identifiable as who they're from.
I definitely agree with you that "nards" is in no way gender neutral as a term. I wonder how "gender neutral" @Ilovethebomb would think it to refer to an infant boy as having a "hoo-haa", "vag" or a "pus"?
Reading through this entire comment chain was interesting, because it seems everyone has missed each others points
FlyingSquid I believe means like, parents having a photo album (ie, a literal traditional physical one my mum had of me) which contains like “photo of first bath” or “photo of new t shirt but no bottoms cause running around as toddlers do”, completely innocent shit mixed in with general baby photos. And pulling that album out is used to embarrass the adult son/daughter with funny baby pictures and “haha look at baby you naked”, completely innocent humour. It might be less common these days, generationally people don’t do it as much.
nomus(?), killingtime(?) etc etc the others replying seem to be taking the comic literally as if the photos are solely of genitalia and thats the frame/centre point of the image instead of it just a kid doing something normal and happens to be nude.
I am sure flyingsquid isn’t going around with photos of their kids privates to show to people / send it to people etc with the specific intention of showing private areas but instead like my previous example, the kid is in the bath. Or running around without bottoms or a nappy cause it was changing time. Who knows. But its a far cry from the extreme end which everyone else seems to be assuming
If you believe I am abusing mine and other children, please contact the lemmy.world admin. They have my contact information and can report me to police.
Lemmy.world is basically reddit V2, with mostly former Reddit admins. From what I've heard about that crowd, they're quite possibly sex offenders themselves.
Ah, I see. You're too bitter to do anything about child pornography and incest when you know for certain someone is doing just that. Would you like contact information for me so you can tell them exactly where to go? I'll give it to you.
What difference would that make if I gave you my contact information? Name, address and phone number. I will give it to you in PM and you can report me to the police. You can screenshot this entire thread too.
Either you don't actually believe I have an incestuous relationship with my daughter and possess child porn or you do and you don't care, because I've given you an option to do something about it.
No, you said that about lemmy.world admin. Authorities arrest people for child pornogeaphy all the time and here is someone you are accusing of being a child pornographer willing to give you their name and address. If nothing else, you could come take care of the problem yourself.
So I guess you’re okay with child abuse.
Unless, of course, that’s not actually what you think.
My point: You say that I am a child abuser and that I possess child pornography. I am giving you a chance to get me arrested, tried and put in prison.
You are refusing to take that opportunity, meaning either you're lying or you have no problem with child abuse and child pornography.
My offer stands- any time you want to report me to the FBI for having child pornography, I will give you my contact info in private. (This offer is open to anyone.)
Of course, you could just admit I don't actually have child porn and I'm not actually abusing my child and that's why you are refusing to report me...
Nope, my argument is that you won't do anything about it, therefore you think it's okay.
You know how to get my info to report me to the FBI if that's what you believe. You refuse to do it. There can only be two reasons, unless you're going to lie and claim that the FBI never arrests people for possession of child pornography.
Based on that reasoning, I should not show anyone any photo of my child until they were old enough to consent to them being taken.
based on that reasoning i shouldnt expose my child to the visual perception of other people who exist outside in the chance that one of them non consensually perceives my child.
You wouldn't expose your child naked in public, why would you expose them naked on picture?
I’m not embarrassed by my body and if that’s what her partner really wants to see, I don’t care.
that's great, the implication there is that you're still showing it to other people, and if we're talking family and friends, i don't know many people that would want that.
i mean, most people use bathrooms. Considering that human waste is literally a biohazard, i feel like doing anything else would be quite rude at best, and arguably a crime at worst.
I might note here as a Finn that this prudishness concerning the naked human body seems very American.
You're not allowed to go to a public sauna in your swimming wear here. And if you're a dad and have a small daughter, you're obviously going to have her in the men's changing room. And when I was a kid, I was in the women's changing room with my mom.
Even at parties it's not uncommon to have a mixed-gender sauna where everyone is naked. I'd say most commonly it's women wearing a towel and men wearing nothing, or if it's in a sauna near a beach/lake then people will have their swimwear on most times.
Still, just being naked isn't considered sexual in any way. You can even see the non-sexual nature for about 50% of the people who are naked. (Vis-a-vis their lack of visible arousal.)
I was so confused by their comment that I totally misread it. Not only are they saying that most people wouldn't change a baby's diaper in public, but that it isn't necessary sometimes. Like there's always a place to do it discreetly when they've just had an explosion?
I've noticed through-out the years that a lot of people on forums like Reddit and Lemmy have very weird and unrealistic ideas about what having kids is like.
idk i've grown up around a family with various siblings, and my experience has generally been that doing much of anything with a baby, especially one that shits itself is often more work than it's worth.
maybe this shits uniquely american, but i can't recall anybody just changing their babies diaper in public. In public bathrooms sure (a car even? Though i don't consider that public), there's changing stations there, and it's to be expected, but certainly not just, in the middle of a park.
Are we going to deal with a 5 year old shitting their pants in the middle of a public park also? And if so at what point should i be dealing with my shit pants in public, because that is technically, a thing that can happen.
hence why i said rude at best, because yknow, human fecal matter has never been known to cause disease and sickness in other humans. Let alone what kind of sanitary problems that would cause in most places.
Im sure people carry kit with them, but shit happens (literally) and i would certainly want to be in a bathroom rather than not be in one, because that way it's atleast contextually contained and expected. Also do you not have a car? That would certainly explain some of this.
park is an incredibly broad definition. Are we talking a national park? Fucking yellowstone? A childrens playground? A public park? A parking lot? All of these are very different from each other, and some of these would make more sense than others.
in fact, going by the most broad definition "An area of land set aside for public use, as." this includes places like the DMV, or local government buildings, and my personal favorite. Memorial sites.
you have got to give me something to work with here if you're going to sit there and call me stupid.
Why does it matter what kind of park if it doesn't have a restroom and I didn't drive? Is a national park without a restroom different from a city park without a restroom if I didn't drive to it? I don't even understand what you're trying to say.
First you say I should have used a restroom or my car. Then when I explained to you that isn't always possible suddenly it matters if it's a national park or a city park? What?
idk maybe because i'm just trying to figure out what the fuck you mean when you're talking about this shit. I'm trying to give you the benefit of doubt here, and you're squandering it by yelling at me and saying it literally does not fucking matter.
For all i know you don't even live in fucking america. Maybe it's just me applying incorrect cultural customs, but i wouldn't know because you keep yelling at me.
I don't think you are trying to figure out what I mean because I just explained to you what I meant and instead of responding to that, you berated me once again.
I think what you're trying to do is find someone to constantly berate to make yourself feel superior and you found someone.
And don't worry, I agree, you're superior. It's very easy to be superior to me.
That doesn't change the fact that sometimes you have no choice but to change a diaper in public. The fact that you don't have any children might make you realize you don't understand that, but even though you are definitely better than me (and that is not sarcasm, most people are better than me), I still know more about this specific subject than you do.
I don’t think you are trying to figure out what I mean because I just explained to you what I meant and instead of responding to that, you berated me once again.
bro i literally asked you what you meant by a park and you said almost verbatim "a fucking park dumbass, what the fuck else do you think i mean"
I think what you’re trying to do is find someone to constantly berate to make yourself feel superior and you found someone.
you literally keep responding to me, idk why you're saying that. You have a family (i assume), clearly im a dumbass that just doesnt understand anything and is trying to piss you off. Then why do you keep responding?
Why not? I have nothing better to do. What is your point if not to berate me? You keep responding too. If you weren't trying to berate me, you shouldn't have accused me of "committing a crime at worst" because I changed a diaper in public, which, and I have no idea why you're not aware of this, is never a crime. I don't think you're stupid enough not to be aware of that, so I can come to no other conclusion that you just want to feel superior to someone.
Feel free to tell me why you're responding if that isn't the reason. I doubt you will.
Now... I will again explain to you the whole park situation since you're pretending I didn't:
Why does it matter what kind of park if it doesn’t have a restroom and I didn’t drive? Is a national park without a restroom different from a city park without a restroom if I didn’t drive to it?
Any park you don't drive to and you don't have a restroom requires changing a diaper in public.
You've never been in this situation, so you wouldn't know. And yet you keep acting like you know. The reason I posit, again, is because you want to berate someone you feel superior to.
Feel free to explain to me why you're actually talking to me if not for that reason.
i mean originally, this was about taking photos of naked children (which i still think is weird) and then showing them to other people for the explicit purpose of embarrassing them.
It was, rather civil, if i recall. You were the one that came out swinging at me, am i not supposed to respond in kind? You don't play with fire and then get mad when it burns you.
You keep responding too.
mostly because idk what the fuck you're trying to say, and i'm trying to figure it out, but you keep fucking cock blocking me here. You literally could've said something like "80% of the parents i've talked to do the same thing i do" and i would've just accepted it. But so far you've really only been angry at me for thinking differently than you.
There is literally an entire standard for how you should be handling this shit because it's considered a biohazard.
Bacteria and viruses that cause only mild disease to humans, or are difficult to contract via aerosol in a lab setting, such as hepatitis A, B, and C, some influenza A strains, Human respiratory syncytial virus, Lyme disease, salmonella, mumps, measles, scrapie, dengue fever, and HIV. Routine diagnostic work with clinical specimens can be done safely at Biosafety Level 2, using Biosafety Level 2 practices and procedures. Research work (including co-cultivation, virus replication studies, or manipulations involving concentrated virus) can be done in a BSL-2 (P2) facility, using BSL-3 practices and procedures.
Now to be fair, this isn't exactly a fucking nerve agent, but in the same way that i don't want to shit on the floor of a public bathroom, it's definitely something i'd be conscious of if i had a kid.
I don’t think you’re stupid enough not to be aware of that, so I can come to no other conclusion that you just want to feel superior to someone.
i wasn't arguing that it was, i was stating that it could theoretically be considered to be a crime based on it's classifications alone.
so you wouldn’t know. And yet you keep acting like you know. The reason I posit, again, is because you want to berate someone you feel superior to.
i feel like you're discounting how brazen you're being about this.
Feel free to explain to me why you’re actually talking to me if not for that reason.
likewise, why not. But also, perhaps because i don't fucking know anything about this topic.
I'm very aware. Wouldn't it be cool if you asked questions rather than pointed fingers and lectured me about biohazards and telling me where I should change diapers in that case? Too late now I guess.
Taking photos of naked children isn't, and shouldn't, be normal in any culture I'm familiar with, and you definitely shouldn't be showing them to anyone.
That's a tradition that ended a long time ago. I'm talking about traditions that are ongoing. Also traditions that, despite someone else's claim, probably don't cause any psychological harm, at least most of the time.
I think you may be surprised and hopefully disturbed by this UNICEF article.
Despite a steady decline in this harmful practice over the past decade, child marriage remains widespread, with approximately one in five girls married in childhood across the globe. Today, multiple crises – including conflict, climate shocks and the ongoing fallout from COVID-19 – are threatening to reverse progress towards eliminating this human rights violation. The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals call for global action to end child marriage by 2030.
So no, it was not "a long time ago." It's "hopefully by 2030."
Also traditions that, despite someone else's claim, probably don't cause any psychological harm, at least most of the time.
Oh, so as long as you don't believe the person and can therefore invalidate their feelings without guilt, and it only psychologically hurts "some" people who you I suppose arbitrarily believe over the ones you don't, it's fine?
Also traditions that, despite someone else's claim, probably don't cause any psychological harm, at least most of the time.
Actually you asked for nothing, you made a whole lot of assumptions instead. And
evidence that it hurts anyone
Here again you invalidate the feelings of those telling you with their own words that they don't like it. The evidence they don't like it is them telling you they don't like it, you don't need a scientific paper to corroborate that some people find it objectionable, you just dismiss them because you want to partake in the behavior they find objectionable.
I absolutely asked for evidence. I just didn't ask you for evidence. Weird that you apparently read through my comments and didn't see that.
And not one person has told me that they were personally hurt by this happening to them. They have just said that it is wrong.
You show me the person in this thread who said it caused them pain. I can't invalidate feelings that people don't have. Someone not liking something has nothing to do with whether or not that thing causes trauma or any sort of psychological damage to anyone unless it caused them that damage.
And now I am asking you for evidence. Please quote the person that was hurt by their parents doing this.
Yes, if you can't provide evidence for something I have no reason to believe you. I'm not sure how that's a lame excuse. It's why I'm an atheist as well. But you do you.
I'm not sure why you think I would talk about me showing a child my daughter's baby photos since we were talking about me showing them to my adult child's partner. Do you think my daughter will be a pedophile when she's an adult and that I would support her in that or something?
Well it's usually done to teen children's teen partners ime, but ok fine I hope your adult childs adult partner asks for copies for later, the age of the person making the creepy comment is really not important but I think it's worse if they're adults so I'll roll with it lol. Maybe she doesn't know her husband's proclivities, I'm not sure most pedos advertise it willingly, but he's "tooootally not gonna spank it he just wants it for archival purposes" lol.
If your wife says "not tonight I have a headache" do you ask for evidence of hypertension? If she says something you did made her upset do you ask for evidence in a peer reviewed paper on why X could possibly be psychologically damaging? I'd bet the answer is "no I take her word at face value because it is her feelings after all." But fuck the feelings of others? Would I have to begrudgingly have sex with you for you to take my word about my feelings?
My wife and I have her and my naked baby photos. We didn't have to ask for copies, they just gave us the family photo albums. And when parents die, that often happens automatically. It kind of feels like you don't know how any of this works.
And now you're comparing showing someone a naked baby to marital rape? Really?
I didn't say "baby photos" I said "if your wife tells you she is upset about something do you ask her for peer reviewed studies on how that something could possibly psychologically effect someone negatively, or do you just believe she is feeling how she says she is feeling?"
What on Earth does that have to do with parents causing their adult child psychological trauma by showing their partner naked baby pictures?
Did you think I meant showing it to their partner if they were adamant that you did not do so and it was going to hurt them? Did I ever even imply such a thing?
You seem to think people being upset about things is inconsequential without it going through a peer review process, I'm just trying to gauge where your limit is for that.
Where do you draw the line on how much discomfort/sadness/anger your actions cause before it becomes a wrong thing to do?
I understand embarrassing your adult child by showing child porn of them to their partner is below your bar, but can you describe how you figure out which side you are on?
Do you disagree any traditions that are designed to embarrass someone? What about hazing in college or the military? What about making fun of girls over voice chat? If these are bad examples to you, can you come up with something else and answer about that?
Of course there are levels of unacceptable. And the level is above showing someone's adult partner a naked baby picture for fuck's sake.
I'd ask you if there is any level of discomfort that is acceptable? Tickling causes a level of discomfort, but also pleasure. Should I not tickle a child? Punishing a child when they do something wrong causes them discomfort and sadness and anger. Should time outs be considered child abuse?
Depends if you are talking legally or morally. I disagree with a lot of whats legal. Your examples are silly and easy to answer:
If they want to be tickled than yes, if not than no.
Punishing the child is for their own best interest, not to get them to learn to listen to the king of the house better. We make decisions for them because they aren't capable of making the best decisions for themselves.
So how exactly does taking pictures of them naked when they are babies or children, help them in any way?
Its a stupid tradition. Embarrassing people is always bad. Purposely hurting people is always bad. Regardless of the trauma it causes it would still at best make you an incredibly selfish person.
And yet it's true. Being upset and trauma are two very different things as I know from personal experience of both. For example, you're upset with me right now. You're not traumatized by my post, I'm sure.
Okay, well someone else claimed that they did have that trauma and I don't disbelieve them. I would have had a more substantive response to their post, but they decided to accuse me of child abuse.
Edit: and now, they are saying I have a child porn collection. So I'm not sure I believe their claim at this point either.
You do understand that to cultures where this isnt the norm, it sounds ridiculous to show naked pictures of your child when they were an infant to, well anyone?
It being a tradition has no bearing on it being awful or not. Circumcision is a tradition.
I'm sure you can find a more modern way to embarrass your child without resulting to CP?
I personally have no use for pictures of baby genitals, but you really do huh? It even makes you upset we want to take away your baby genital pictures huh?
Is this some perverse form of individualism?
Edit: if you took a picture of you cleaning your daughters vagina out, and showed someone, yes that would be child porn and child abuse.
Again- they don't come out of the womb with clothes on. Are parents not supposed to take a picture of their newly-born child or should they put a fig leaf on them?
I've asked several times- if this is child pornography, find me an example of someone getting in legal trouble for having a naked photo of their own baby on their phone. One person.
Were you even in the room with your newborns? Both of mine were moved to a table, cleaned up, and swaddled. I would have had to literally interrupt them to take a genital picture of them.
But I guess where you live, they pause first and ask if you want a full naked body shot? Cool tradition, I know you love those.
I'm sure noone has been in trouble for ONLY having their naked child's pictures on their phone, but I'm sure those pictures have ended up in CP collections. I'm sure you have perfect opsec though so its fine.
Legality as side, since its not the law preventing me from abusing children anyways, I'm arguing that its morally wrong. Plenty of immoral actions are legal from my perspective.
Why does your perspective need baby genitals to be featured again?
No one paused anything. My wife gave my mother-in-law a camera and she took a picture because my wife asked her to. Then we sent that picture to my father and my mother who was on a layover in an airport.
I assume no one masturbated to it.
And who is featuring them? Certainly not me. Have I shown them to you? No. And i wouldn't.
And you can say, for certain, that noone has ever seen that photo without your permission? I guess you might have me here if its a physical photo locked in a safe somewhere.
Edit: although these had to printed at a business, where anyone working could have copied them
You also have this absolutely ludicrous idea in your heads that having a naked photo of your baby is child pornography. And yet none of you have an example of a parent facing legal repercussions for it. And somehow that doesn't clue you in that it is, in fact, not child pornography.
And then there's the Finnish guy who is telling you all what prudes you are. One of the few sane takes.
Thanks, please carry on telling me what kind of ideas I have. Forgive me for thinking babies have some rights.
No one said it's child porn. It's just that when parents show off your naked baby pictures it gets uncomfortable for everyone, as many here have expressed.
Multiple people have also said it's wrong to do that, so.. carry on cherry picking I guess. But sure, if you think it's ethical to go around flashing your kids genitals, then carry on I guess. You can't fix stupid.
See, this is on par with arguing semantics around how it's not pedophilia because the victim wasn't prepubescent. You may be technically right, but the fact that you're making the argument is gross.
If it's child porn, you show me one single parent who has gotten in trouble for just taking a picture of their baby when it's naked and showing that picture to their adult child's partner.
I keep asking for evidence that anyone, anywhere has had lasting mental health damage from this and congratulations, you're the latest to just assume it happens without evidence.
You've shown in your replies to numerous comments that you are ignoring the personal accounts of others sharing their experiences they don't like it and for some reason want peer reviewed sources
If you where to compile the data of these responses into data that would form the basis of a paper
Why is it so important to defend this for you that you ignore anything that doesn't conform to your own biases and views on it flying squid
Your wanting of peer reviewed evidence or psychological evidence seems to stem from the ignorance of anything that doesn't conform to your views and biases on this
And your responses to people ignoring their accounts of not liking it comes of as rude, distasteful and ignorant
My response, when my mom showed my first partner naked baby pictures was to nudge my partner and say "don't worry, I'll send you some more recent ones.
My mom super didn't appreciate the joke, but she never pulled out baby pictures for future partners.
Oh ew that’s some borderline pedo shit. “Here’s the person you’re fucking as a baby. Hahaha you’re sexually attracted to a baby. I created child pornography just to make you uncomfortable because you’re a normal, non-pedophilic person”
I think it might be the clinical word vagina vs wee wee, but vajayjay still would be weird in this context. Honestly, dont show strangers your kids genitals.
Yes, all genitals seem weird to show people. I don't even show them to my parents. I tried not to take them at all, and instead tried to take a few with angles that obscured any private areas. I think my parents have seen a couple of those, but I don't even send them.
Perhaps the comic is from the mindset 40 years ago. I could easily see parents of that era doing this and thinking it was fine.
I think it's more that adults sexualizing children wasn't considered a frequent risk, people didn't think anyone they knew would look at babies that way. Gen X parents really shifted a lot in terms of culture in the US, under their generation child sexual abuse cases have dropped significantly, and that's adjusting to unreported numbers.
under their generation child sexual abuse cases have dropped significantly
If this is true, that's really impressive. I've heard how insanely widespread all kinds of abuse used to be through history, often even openly. But if the culture shift was really as sharp as this seems to suggest, I'd be worried it could go almost just as fast back in the other direction.
I can't say world wide, but in the U.S., home photography was not new 30-40 years ago. I was a kid 30 year ago and I had real camera and various disposable ones over time. Maybe home videography was becoming more common 30-40 years ago, but photography had been around.
I just remember the Simpsons movie where Bart Simpsons penis is portrayed for a few seconds, I'm really sure that they don't have the balls to portray a child vagina
