Will Teen Titans Tentacle Porn Mess a Kid Up?

In a current GQ thread, the OP asks for assistance in limiting the web content that might be visible to his or her youngsters.

I offered a description of my dual-homed Linux proxy server solution, which was put in place when my then-five-year-old wanted to use the computer with his “Webkinz” stuffed animals. He’s now twelve, and although he enjoys a vastly expanded list of acceptable sites, he doesn’t have unfettered Internet access. This was followed by the…er…following:

I agree with Bryan Ekers that any continuing discussion is more GD than GQ, so here we are.

In my view as the parent of a 12-year-old, I’m confident that if he happened to view Teen Titan tentacle porn, it wouldn’t mean his life as a normal kid was over. It wouldn’t involve years of therapy. So if that’s what Bryan meant by “mess up,” I agree.

But I took the import of his statement to be a general lack of concern for limiting the Internet content that a 12 year old child views. (“Why not just set up a virtual PC and let him look at whatever he wants?”) This, I obviously do not share. I think it’s absolutely appropriate, wise, and prudent to limit the material a 12 year old sees. I’m not opposed to his occasional glimpses of boobies. But unfortunately, “boobies” does not accurately capture the wealth of truly disturbing material out there. Frankly, I am not old enough to see some of the things that are now immortalized on digital video for the world to remember.

So the topic for debate is obvious: is my concern appropriate?

I can only share my experience. I have a thirteen year old boy and a twelve year old boy. They have full access to the internet. We talk about what they might find online in terms of sex, violence and general wierdness. They know that they are free to go anywhere and watch anything.

I am assisted in this approach by the fact that by twelve year old is 12 going on a thirty year old computer technician- rebooting his computer for him when he got locked out, he watched over my shoulder and said “that means if you had fixed parental controls, I could avoid them by just doing what you have done.”

Kids are smarter than we think, and being human they are open to foibles such as forbidden fruit and being opposed to parental views- no target leads to no harm in my opinion. If they scare themselves to death watching horror movies and have nightmares we shall talk about it. If they come to a fuller understanding of female anatomy then they will be better educated than I was when I had to go from theory into practice.

A footnote- my thirteen year old wanted Grand Theft Auto. I knew that if he did not have it at home he would play it at friends so I bought it for him, not liking the supposed content but seeing it as the best course of action. When I finally watched my younger son playing it I found the level of violence to be less convincing (though more serious) than Tom and Jerry! Certainly it is not a moral story but nor are wargames and such.

I remain relaxed about my choices.

I am confident in my kids ability to deal with all of what’s in the wide world.
There’re just a number of conversations I’d rather not have yet.

There is a concern, here, however that concern is highly ambiguous. The social science literature is far from reliable and many studies are basic data dredges of self-reported information (e.g. an inmate serial rapist says his uncle touched him. Both situations, both his rape and his childhood abuse, are terrible.) and it ends up being pretty much a reported set of anecdotes.

My personal opinion (which if anyone has scientific rebuttals, I’m all ears) is that the betrayal of trust and repression are far more of tools to screw someone up than seeing tentacle porn, even the crazy tentacle porn. I get that you might be offended or disgusted, but simply telling them “NO!” does nothing. It’s better to give them a trusting environment to share with you what they learn than it is to try and protect them from the world.

As an example of something similar, look to the War on Drugs’ D.A.R.E. program. They spread a shitload of misinformation and once kids found out that Marijuana wouldn’t chew them up and spit them out, they rejected the entire message – even for harder drugs where is the information is ostensibly true – after they try marijuana or see their friends try it. They will do the same to you. They’ll find out that yes, it is sexy and weird and maybe a little alluring, but they won’t see their innocence burning away with a horde of demons waiting to drag them to hell. They’ll start rejecting your parenting.

By being open and honest with them about what they find, you’ll build a relationship with your children where what they find or get into can be contextualized for them. Don’t protect them from the information and be upfront with your discomfort if you encounter it. Tell them WHY you don’t want them to see that stuff and if it isn’t rants and rages and prohibition, they may look at it some more, but it’ll taper off. If you do go with rants and rages and prohibition, you’re more likely, again: in my opinion, to push them to keep secrets. Even if this time they obey your ban, the next time you might not even find out about things they may be into until you stumble across it, where the surprise will probably shock you into an excessive reaction.

An excellent post!

I think the worst possible outcome of allowing your kid unfettered access to the internet is that, at some point, you might find yourself in the position of explaining what a German scheisse video is to your twelve year old. I don’t think this will hurt the kid, but it might do irreparable damage to yourself.

I’m curious as to what evidence there is for this kind of thing. I mean, we know that violent media doesn’t lead to an increase of violence, despite the best wishes of the Jack Thompsons of the world. I mean, what kind of “messing up” would happen? I mean, is anything on the internet that much more disturbing than, say, “Saw”? Because I don’t recall a whole lot of kids needing therapy after seeing that one. I mean, I’ve spent enough time on 4chan to become largely desensitized - it’s extremely hard to show me a picture that shocks or disturbs me any more. But does that make me messed-up? I mean, I recognize that it is shocking for the average person, and were I to encounter that in real life, I’d probably be shocked… I guess I’d like to hear how, precisely, you’d expect this to fuck up a kid. Honestly, I think the worst real-world effect that could come of it is an unrealistic expectation of sex… But you’re far more likely to get an expectation you’d act on from just standard vanilla stuff than, say, a bunch of cartoons getting railed by tentacles. So I dunno. I think Miller kinda nails it. “Well, see honey, love is…” “Yes, but why was there a bird involved? And what was up with all the cream cheese?!”

(On a side note: Bricker, you know Zone-Sama? Hi-five! :smiley: )

I have certainly seen some things on the Internet that I would rather never have seen, or even known the existence of (no, I won’t list them), and I’m an adult, capable of making mature decisions, and responsible for my own welfare. There are doubtless also a great many things that a 13-year-old would also rather not see, and since 13-year-olds are not as good at decision making as adults, it’s the responsibility of their parents to make some decisions for them, for their own good. I think some degree of Internet restriction falls into this category.

Yes.

The world is more terrifying, disgusting and disturbing than any of us here can imagine, and it’s all on the net somewhere. I’ve seen things that gave me lasting nightmares and queasies. I’d just as soon my kids didn’t find them, deliberately or through misdirected links.

Boobs and weird sci-fi porn are absolutely the least of things I worry about.

Agreed. Tentacle porn makes for an eye-catching thread title, but my general proposition was: “More generally, I am convinced that at 12, it’s still appropriate to sharply limit his unfettered access to the Internet, because the questionable material that is available is not ‘boobies.’”

Honestly, the closest argument I’ve seen about “messing up” a kid that I would personally give merit is that they watch porn and then have unrealistic expectations for bedroom activities. (e.g. “All women want anal sex with a black-colored ‘tool’ the size of a locomotive, no exceptions.”)

I certainly can see that happening, but I think it will happen no matter the situation. Adolescents will automatically draw on what they have learned to help them deal with a situation - thus any previous experience will alter how they try to deal with their first sexual experiences. In the 60s, it was Playboy and such. Today, it’s the internet. Tomorrow, it’ll be ultra-realistic holographic chambers. In all ages, it’ll also have some hilariously bad advice from teenage peers as well as books, music, and what they overheard from your bedroom that night when they were seven.

This is why I opine that it’s better to be open, honest, and provide contextualization.

Take it from someone who grew up in the information age. If you think what you found was bad, wait until they have online friends in places that don’t keep records (like a Facebook or such). Someone will either introduce or another young person will stumble across something crazy and share it.

Worse, you have to basically discover these before your kids, with three months off a year where they can potentially spend all day surfing the internets, and then find an effective method of blocking them.

Restrictions (especially services like a NetNanny or their competitors) always concentrate on blocking things that are incredibly easy to get to and it gives you a false sense of protection. They may not be able to access SexyPornTube.Satanism.HEX but they will certainly find many, many things worse without ever having to use a web browser.

But is it feasible that your kid will come to you for these open and honest conversations? I mean, after finding a hentai site and masturbating themselves into a sore,soggy mess after school, will these kids really casually wander over to dad later and strike up a conversation about the complex relationship between sex and violence? Is dad going to start that conversation ?

I think his is the kind of thing that’s gonna depend on the kid. If a kid is a talker–someone who deals with anxieties externally–I would worry about it less. But if a kid is high strung and internalizes things, I would be much more careful.

Bricker: I think pornography is inherently immoral, so I wouldn’t want my child to see it (when they’re 18, they can do as they like). It’s not really an issue of ‘does this encourage people to become violent criminals’ or whatever, it’s that the act of viewing pornography itself is morally wrong.

…On second thought, I don’t think I want to get into the “why” Hector thinks porn is immoral. But it does make me wonder - do you really think that stigmatizing something enticing is going to make it less enticing to your kids? Or that not openly talking about it will make it less of a negative influence?

I’ll venture a more detailed opinion later on when time permits (I gather I have been implicitly invited to do so), but I would like to note that I’ll tend to side with whoever is paying for the computer equipment and internet access if they wish to impose personal standards on how it should be used. I don’t, for example, feel I could summon much of an objection if Sun-Times Media began to impose content restrictions (or more of them) on the subject matter of this message board, since they are paying for its maintenance. If it reached a point I found was too oppressive, I’d take my participation elsewhere.

If a parent who is paying for a household’s internet access is uncomfortable with certain websites, be they sexual, political, scientific, religious or cultural in nature, well… I’ll wish them good luck but I won’t argue their choices. This was not on my mind when I made my original GQ comment, which I now regret as being unsuitable for that forum.

I don’t really have an answer for this question, but perhaps it would clarify your thinking if you were to articulate your basis for that conviction?

I don’t have kids. As a computer savvy person, I get asked about parental controls and restrictions, though. What I would suggest is that parents participate in their young people’s media-consuming habits. So they can read/watch whatever, but the parents read/watch it too and discuss it with them. Keep the internet in the family room where the parents can be aware of what’s going on. Educate the kids about what to do when something they see makes them uncomfortable.

There’s some scary stuff online. They’re going to find it. Be there when they do. That’s how I see it.

I probably wouldn’t let a child have a private internet connected device until he or she was at least 16.

Also: imo, the real concern is not what they might see but who they might find themselves chatting with. And I’m not just talking about the proverbial molesters but internet misogyny and racism from their own peer group.

I don’t have an opinion on the OP, but I thought I’d share a 9 second You-Tube link. Ladies and gentlemen, Teen Titan Tentacle.

(SFW. From the original series.)

In principle I would support Bricker’s view that parent have the right - and duty - to set limits for their children but as a parent whose kids are now grown up I have to say, “Good luck with that” at least when they are 12+. It obviously depends on the child but I suspect you are either in for a monumental amount of conflict or apparent acceptance followed by evasion (or more likely both!). Based on my massive data set of one son, one daughter I suspect the least worst option is the uncomfortable discussion of just how weird things on the internet can be and please, please ask about anything they are really worried about.

The other question is, “when is the right time to be introduced to tentacle porn?” If not 12 then 13, 14, 15, 16? Only at 18?

There psychological, even neurochemical, impacts of porn have become increasingly documented in recent years. Most of the impacts, however, come from repeated exposure over time. The real danger isn’t that he sees one horrific image that scars him for life; the danger is that he sees one arousing image that doesn’t scar him, but leads to another and another and six years from now he has a life-altering habit. The guys who spend six hours a day in a dark room fapping to tentacle porn didn’t start out there.

[QUOTE=Farin]
This is why I opine that it’s better to be open, honest, and provide contextualization.
[/QUOTE]
It’s not a choice. I don’t get the sense that Bricker is attempting to use the filter to get out of his parental obligation to create an open and honest relationship with his son and to provide context and explanation and education about sex.

Parents can have an open and honest conversation with kids about alcohol that concludes with “and that’s why there’s a lock on the booze cabinet.”
Two other possibilities to consider, Bricker.

  • You can get a tracker that doesn’t block any objectionable sites, but does report them to you.

  • Instead of installing a filter on his internet viewing, make it generally applicable to everyone in the house. I think this is especially true if you concerns are primarily grounded in morality and not ideas about brain plasticity, etc. The implicit message of parental filters is “you shouldn’t see this now, but it’s okay if I do, and it will be okay for you when you’re older.” Consider instead sending the message “There is bad stuff out there, and I don’t want it in my house, period.”