** notes combo of username and post content **
See, it sticks with you for life!
To me, the father is perfectly normally projecting his perception of his child into adulthood, and commenting on a quality or characteristic that might be useful in her future prospects. No different from putting her school art on the refrigerator and saying she is a good artist.
You did read all the support for Roy Moore, didn’t you?
Women and girls (and to an increasing degree, boys) are so sexualized in this culture that some people don’t immediately grasp how creepy it is to refer to a child that way, but (most) parents certainly do.
There is a big difference between a ‘heart-breaker’ and an overtly sexual term, like hottie or stud or eggplant
No, you are jumping from one conclusion to another that have nothing to do with one another. Much older women used to tell me how attractive I was even as a teenager just because it was a simple fact :D.
I never thought that they wanted to sleep with me except for the few that did and they used very different tactics. Some girls (and boys) are just good looking and that is all there is to it. It shouldn’t define who they are but there is nothing wrong with acknowledging it like any other attribute as long as you don’t internalize it the wrong way.
Sometimes I see a beautiful little 4 year old girl in an Easter dress and think that is one beautiful child and that is all there is to it. That doesn’t mean you want to do anything except protect them. Pedophiles don’t work that way. They are predators. There is nothing wrong with appreciating beauty in any of its forms. I didn’t even like high school girls when I was in high school because I thought they were too young but I still thought some of them were beautiful. Beauty and sexuality aren’t directly related.
OK, you’re just checking to see if we’re really reading, right?
“Eggplant?”
That’s how I read it.
If the guy in the OP had been referring to someone’s else’s 4-year old as a fox (in a manner clearly meant to convey sexy), would your assessment be the same?
Without reservation, I’d be disinclined to bring such a person around my kid henceforth. Just wondering if I’m alone because this thread is making feel like I very well may be.
Do you think this is more likely than the possibility that he was (slightly) misusing the word? My bet is that he used the word “fox” as a synonym for pretty, cute, adorable, etc.
“Eggplant”?
And some of them might have wanted to, but there is still a big leap from “god that person (even child) is sexually attractive” and acting on that. We don’t put people in jail because they want to kill their boss - they actually need to start planning to kill their boss to have committed a crime. Otherwise most of us would be in jail.
There was some point in my son’s high school athletics career where the boys on the other team stopped being boys and started being - in many cases - very attractive young men. (The ones on my son’s team were still the kids I’d watched in t-ball, even as they became young men).
On the younger kid front, my son had a friend he met in kindergarten. That kid was one of those generically good looking kids who was going to grow up into a generically good looking guy. And he did - he’s 19 now, swings by the house once in a while, and he’d fit right into a portfolio of generic good looking white male models. And every mother of that kindergarten class knew that kid was going to be attractive. Didn’t mean we wanted to have sex with a six year old. Doesn’t mean we want to have sex with him at 19. Does mean that when we saw him at graduation last year, several of us looked at each other and said “yep, that kid is just as good looking as we thought he’d be.”
I don’t know if the father in the OP is misusing “fox”. My hypothetical is aimed at those who draw equivalence between praising a 4-year old for their sexual attractiveness and praising them for their artistic abilities.
You are not alone. I’m right there with you. I’m still reacting to the “sexpot” example, and while I know I have to take that poster at her word that her dad was not creepy, I find any use of the words “sex” or “sexy” creepy when used about a child. I would certainly have shielded my child from such a person.
The reason why I’d be relunctant to bring my daughter around someone who expressed finding her sexually attractive is because I know how such feelings can influence an interaction. Even if the influence doesn’t lead to criminal conduct, it can lead to an encounter that is gross.
Sexually attractive women are no strangers to the kind of influence I’m talking about. You smile innocently at a stranger and it’s interpreted as a come-on, a flirt, or even manipulative behavior. Your actions are viewed through a different lense than a woman who is not pegged as hot, and sometimes these biases works against you.
Kids can be very curious and affectionate. Kids that are just “cute” are seen as innocent in their actions, and most adults respond to that in a protective, caring way. My concern is that when kids are seen as little “hotties” or “players” or whatever, innocent behaviors suddenly start being perceived as flirtatious and calculating and not-so-innocent. Adults acting on those perceptions may start treating them in manner that presumes a maturity they don’t have. So when a “foxy” 4-year old smiles at someone, the message elicited is not “awww, how precious” it’s more like “yup, look at that seductress in the making”. These messages can shape how a girl sees herself, and how looker-ons see her.
I reflect back on a thread we had about slut-shaming of girls and how those most at risk of this abuse are girls who physically develop sooner than others. As soon as they start turning heads, they get a target painted on their backs.
I don’t want any this nonsense for my little girl just because she’s smiley. And yes, I’ve written a lot but I feel it’s important not to go overboard in shrugging certain things off.
You don’t have to take them at their. It is fair to think it very possible that, having been raised in a family where calling a prepubescent kid a “sex pot” wasn’t considered inappropriate, that poster may have a skewed understanding of what is creepy and what isn’t.
Heckity, you probably realized that your history made you uncommonly sensitive to possible child abuse situations. That’s quite understandable and it’s wise to have asked the opinions of others. No matter what one’s personal history, it’s reasonable for the father’s comment to have pinged your alarm. It’s a mild red flag and warrants keeping an eye on it just in case.
“Fox” has long had a connotation of being sly, tricky, intelligent but sometimes with semi-negative connotations…basically meaning someone who can outmaneuver others, whether or not it’s fair to the other parties. The term “crazy like a fox”, also, implies feigning ignorance or incompetence for the purposes of tricking someone.
It’s not inconceivable that someone could refer to someone else as “a fox” in this context, but it seems odd, because usually I feel like they’d say “like a fox” or something. The usage “a fox” almost always is used to mean physical attractiveness, because for some fucking reason this animal has acquired not one but two different metaphorical usages that are applied to humans. Why “fox”, specifically, and not one of the many other animals that are equally beautiful, came to mean “beautiful”, I haven’t the faintest idea. Also, not only is “a fox” a term for attractiveness of either sex, but on top of that, the word for a female fox, “vixen”, carries an even stronger connotation of attractiveness specifically for females.
How this all came to be, I’ll never fucking understand. Maybe a lot of humans used to want to fuck foxes?
It’s a text emoji thing, apparently - I use words myself - with the obvious sexual meaning. Hell, I heard this on NPR, so I assumed everyone knew it by now.
I have been called ‘vixen’ as an adult, by a certain person. I took it just like he meant it. It wasn’t pleasant. Sexy names should kept between lovers, not children or people you know in other areas of you life. Shouldn’t be done.
But how did you know what he meant in order to know how to take it?
Very odd. “Eggplant” is also an Italian-American anti-black slur.
I don’t find that commercial disturbing or inappropriate at all. Yeah, it’s to demonstrate the strength of a certain brand of toilet paper, but the voiceover says he’s a single parent. Some people still have issues with the idea of single fathers. :dubious: