Internet Censorship for Kids

[rey meustrus]

Now that I'm actively thinking about it, what I said really only applies to adolescence, when teens are doing things that have real consequences (in extremes, things such as going around to drinking parties, or joy-riding their parents' car. Less extreme, making friends and enemies and exploring the big wide world wherever available). In these cases there is a protective social structure to try and prevent teens from doing something that would have consequences, reinforced with superficial consequences that are not as effective as they were to little children (going to see the principal loses its edge after a while). In my opinion, if you try and protect a teenager from his or her self, that teenager will remember, and as soon as the protections are lifted the built up repression will be let free with more catastrophic consequences, often far away from home (such as at college).

As for the gang rape case, I don't think that protecting your high school students from furries is as important as protecting them from rape. On an aside, I've never understood why these things happen at school dances...why would you specifically plan your drinking party to coincide with the dance? Why not do it next Friday instead? Then you could have two parties, one at the school and one elsewhere, instead of trying to cock together two incompatible events.

 

[So fist]

As for the gang rape case, I don't think that protecting your high school students from furries

No but teaching them to browse the internet appropriately in what is a workplace is an invaluable habit for when they go out into the real world and compete for jobs.

In my opinion, if you try and protect a teenager from his or her self, that teenager will remember, and as soon as the protections are lifted the built up repression will be let free with more catastrophic consequences, often far away from home (such as at college).

I call utter BS because the opposite just isn't so. Kids raised with no boundaries don't inherently grow into more responsible and better adjusted adults. A kid I grew up with and knew very well was raised as such. Parents gave him cars, pocket money, no curfews, no questions, paid all his bills, so he could blow it on coke and alcohol. He had unfettered access to anything that could catch his interest. He totalled three different cars by the time he was eighteen and ended up dying at twenty six in what would be his last smash up after a night of binging on blow and beer. The idea that this could've been worse if the parents had intervened and tried to help him control his behavior is ludicrous.

Yes there is such a thing as too much authoritarian control but the idea that being grounded for drinking will lead to college alcoholism and death is a retarded little hyperbolic fallacy since the opposite action i.e. ignoring the problem and even enabling its continuance will guarantee the problem's continuance. I will go on to point out that the vast majority of maladjusted kids in the Juvenile Justice system and alternative placement schools, come from family's that are by and large neglectful and without reasonable parental control and boundaries.

 

[rey meustrus]

I think that a more valuable lesson for internet browsing is to leave the filters off, and have the librarian come by and see what you're doing (which works if all of your computers are easily viewable, i.e. not facing a corner)

I'm not saying to remove consequences. There's a difference between boundaries and handouts. Obviously you shouldn't give away cars, money, and pay the bills. I think at some point there should be reduced curfew and questions, but everything else is a recipe for disaster. What I get from that example is not that his parents should have overseen his activity more and punished him for bad actions, but that they were removing natural consequences (you wrecked a car? good) well, guess no more car then. bad) here, have another). If they were replaced with superficial consequences (hey son, let's have a talk about that) they were ineffective.

The situation I'd like to avoid is ignoring bad behaviors and having them be done secretly, to which the opposite would be discussing those behaviors and putting them into a better context, i.e. drinking is a social thing, you do it in restaurants, and it is important to think about how you're getting home. One should let consequences play out as they will, but limit their destructiveness pre-emptively (such as making sure someone knows that if they did something stupid they can call home and not get yelled at right away, but avoid crappy things like riding home with somebody who's about to toss it)

 

[Truly else]

How did this move from the refined topic of cencoring the internet where kids can get it to parental control of a kids life?

 

[mawk]

easy: they are closely related issues. you could almost say that they are the same issue, with the only difference being scale.

also trying to score mod points by popping in with "BACK ON TOPIC EVERYONE *clap clap*" doesn't actually work here as you might think

 

[Truly else]

also trying to score mod points by popping in with "BACK ON TOPIC EVERYONE *clap clap*" doesn't actually work here as you might think

At what point did I say I wanted it back?

 

[moog]

his point is that you indirectly did

 

[sojournen]

Ugh...........I was tired when posting this. Didn't look at the date of the last post, sorry if I revived a dead subject. :blush:


ANYWAYS
I'm a mom.

I take personal responsibility over my children's internet habits and usage, which to be honest is rather tyranical on my behalf, but in my opinion, necessary.

I really don't think censorship would be effective. I think parents need to pull the plug, instead of using computers and video games as babysitters. My kids have very restricted and specific usage of their computers. Neither of their computers is hooked up to the internet, they have to use mine to get online, and I monitor what they do via popping in occasionally, and checking over the recent history when they are done.

I once had an autofill come up with Girl on Girl Action, which my 10 year old daughter was encouraged by her little girlfriends to google. I had a long talk with my daughter after that incicent. Not something she should be doing at her age, IMHO, but I was also understanding.

Truth be told, North American society is so over sexualized, it's almost impossible shelter your children. I don't like it, personally, but neither can I hide from it. The internet is the least of our problems.

 

[rey meustrus]

I wouldn't make them use your computer for internet...in fact, I would never want a child to use my computer for internet. There are serious security concerns. As an example, what if the kid downloads P2P software that starts sharing files that nobody intended to share? Personal or financial information? It's something that happens a lot, especially to parents that are not savvy enough to recognize that anything is going on. Bottom line, even if you intend to monitor internet access, it should be done on a separate computer (maybe a "family" computer that anyone can use, but adults don't use it for important stuff like banking, documents, etc).

And in my opinion, children are bound to be curious about things they don't know about, and aren't going to understand why it's not appropriate (until they get there, they would probably figure it out). Nevertheless, I think you did the right thing (though doing the right thing wrongly can gradually weaken the parent-child relationship as the child approaches adolescence and wants to exercise more freedom).

 

[mawk]

As an example, what if the kid downloads P2P software that starts sharing files that nobody intended to share?

yeah, dogg, because the first thing I wanted to do when I first got my hands on a computer was download a program I knew nothing about, rifle around in the big, boring documents folder, host it on a torrent tracking site, then go off and browse Neopets. this entire scenario of yours isn't so much "children don't know better" as it is "children are completely insane and will do convoluted things for completely arbitrary reasons"

especially to parents that are not savvy enough to recognize that anything is going on

this is more or less the meat of it. stay on par or ahead of your kids in terms of computer knowledge, and you eliminate a great deal of problems. otherwise, just take the same precautions you'd be using anyway for a computer that hypothetically is used for banking or other highly important things; invest in some virus and spyware protection and you're alright.

children are bound to be curious about things they don't know about, and aren't going to understand why it's not appropriate

it's called "communication," chief. even in instances where that initially fails to drive a point home, a child doesn't need to be directly exposed to the consequences to come to understand them.

so long as you're not a total nonentity as far as your kid's internet access is concerned, most of these doomsday scenarios of yours are right out. if, before you allow your kid to use the internet, you get them to understand that they shouldn't toss around shit like their phone number or parents' credit card numbers, chances are they will not. it's not like many kids have the initial motivation to do so, anyway, and it'll insulate against the rare case of someone asking for that kind of information.

 

[sojournen]

Oh, my kids are pretty kewl about stuff, mostly because I am present as a parent. I let them use MY comp for the internet because I do know more then them, and there is no family comp in the house. I do almost daily maintainence on my computer anyways and can troubleshoot most issues.

I don't look at porn, nor keep personal info on my computer, so, mine is safe. =)
Plus, being evil as I am, if they mess with deleting history or any such shit, they loose their privileges with my comp, they never have per say..........but they know what they may and may not go into. Communication is key, as well as consistency. Maybe my little bratlings are just respectful, or just plain too smart to fuck with a system of internal government that works in their favor when they just follow the rules. I dunno.

 

[Venetia]

hey, that's good. "you can do what you want but start covering your tracks and i'll know and you won't like the consequences."

 

[sojournen]

I know right? What a bitch of a mom.

 

[rey meustrus]

The worry isn't that they're going to intentionally share sensitive files. Most P2P clients automatically start sharing from certain locations, or ask for permission to share from locations that it implies will help to share files that you want shared (to contribute to the community) like music. My recollection of Limewire is that it creates its own folder that it downloads to and shares from; this is fairly benign (though you may still be liable if the RIAA feels like persecuting your child and you begin to owe damages for frivolous copyright suits). I used Shareaza once (mostly for torrents) and I remember that it would download random shit when I wasn't looking and shared it (probably going to increase liability) and tried to share the My Documents folder without asking permission.

There's also the fact that a child is not likely to know about internet security. What if they want to play this game RIGHT NOW, so they start looking to download it? They may venture into piracy and find themselves a) bombarded by porn ads, and b) likely to download and run warez.

A popular children's online game has been the victim of phising lately (something to do with pets). The game has this set of *super cool* items that are really expensive with the in-game currency. Unscrupulous individuals go around and private message or email kids advertising this program that will give them the item for free if they download and run it. Then the program takes over the computer and their account in the game, enabling the criminal to access the credit card that the child's parents may have associated with the account (it's a rather cute, benign game that parents might be willing to pay for their child to use). The criminal can also steal data on the computer. After this, the kid's account often gets used as a zombie to further advertise the scam, meaning somebody could get such advertisement (with fake "it worked for me") from people s/he knows.

 

[mawk]

see: communication

 

[sojournen]

Ya, I think you're going a little over board on the paranoia there. I've gotten a few minor malware and viruses from kids sites, but I also monitor my kids emails and shit, so I'm not concerned honestly. They do need to be familiar with the use of the internet nowadays.

Crap, they could be solicited by a perv at the park, or walking to the store as well. I just have to trust they are able to make some decisions on their own, with the knowledge I've given. They do need SOME freedom of choice. They aren't babies after all.

You get too restrictive, or overprotective of kids and the grow up to be wieners instead of winners.

 

[rey meustrus]

Heh, strange how I've apparently gone from the "freedom for kids" position to the "overprotective." It's all perspective, I suppose. Maybe it's just that I have different concerns from most people?

 

[Venetia]

well you're only 18. you're not really separated enough from childhood concerns to start thinking like a parent. (and "oh there are 18 year old parents" isn't an argument as everyone knows that's too early to have kids). you may disagree with me but trust me in 5, 6, 7 years from now, you'll realize you have a much tighter grasp on these kinds of specific values. It doesnt seem like it but you change a lot during that period of your life.

 

[Truly else]

well you're only 18. you're not really separated enough from childhood concerns to start thinking like a parent. (and "oh there are 18 year old parents" isn't an argument as everyone knows that's too early to have kids). you may disagree with me but trust me in 5, 6, 7 years from now, you'll realize you have a much tighter grasp on these kinds of specific values. It doesnt seem like it but you change a lot during that period of your life.

Which reminds me of a quote (paraphrased).

If you're 20 and a republican, you have no heart. if you're 30 and a democrat, you have no brain.

I get that this is kinda off topic, but I just wanted to throw it into something.

 

[Venetia]

the quote is actually "if you're conservative at 20, you're heartless. if you're liberal at 40, you're brainless." but that pertains entirely to economics, not necessarily social politics :x

(i.e. 20 year olds have no money, so of course they endorse socialism: free everything for all! but at 40 you've worked half your life, and you want to enjoy the fruits of your labor, so you SHOULD be against over-taxation.)