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.
Both variants are pretty wtf to me. Not necessarily showing the pictures but explicitly pointing out their genitals.
Showing pictures too.
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.
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.
LOL, mom busted out the baby pics for every gf. My. Turn.
Gonna show your new step dad all the naked pics of your mom you have?
That’s weird
Torture? Why people have such trouble with their romantic interest seeing pictures of you naked when you looked totally different?
It’s not actual torture. It’s just embarrassing your kid over something that most people would consider trivial as a form of ribbing them.
Nah it’s basically waterboarding…
You’d sure think so from some of these responses.
But I do enjoy the person who thinks you need to get consent from a baby to ethically take its picture.
We’re talking about in the nuddy here, in which case you really should have a good case for taking that photo.
The good case is that the child was just born and didn’t come out clothed. Something many of you don’t seem to understand.
To ethically take nude pictures. Ftfy
So many of you think babies come out clothed.
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.
Seems like these people are sexualizing babies and then making you seem like the crazy one. It’s kind of insane.
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.
Naked photos of children is pretty much the definition of CP, yes.
A parent is unlikely to face prosecution unless they share the photos, but that doesn’t mean it’s legal.
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
freak out some more, kid
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.
One single parent.
Wrong, it is a form of mental torture and a violation of your privacy and consent
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.
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”
That second paragraph is pretty creepy actually, I think you’ve missed the point of the comic.
I’d say it’s okay to show someone your child’s genitalia when they’ve already seen it anyway.
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.
I wouldn’t want to see naked photos of a significant other as a minor, but maybe that’s just me.
Normal people don’t view children as sexual beings, so their junk just isn’t any different than their foot. Parents especially. I see my daughter’s vagina several times a day, frequently covered in poop. It doesn’t register any differently than any other part of her that needs cleaning.
You’re still weird if you make a point of showing photos of it to someone though.
It’s everyone who isn’t a weirdo
This thread is giving me the ick
Yeah, definitely. At best they’re arguing tooth and nail for embarrassing their child in front of their partner, if not outright CP.
Major ick.
Right? All you’re doing is saying, “when I saw it last, it was a lot smaller than when you saw it.”
Seeing someone naked as an adult isn’t the same thing as seeing them naked as a minor.
You do see that, right?
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.
Chopping part of your child’s dick off has also been traditional for decades, that’s a very poor justification for that behaviour.
I agree
Are you really comparing showing your child’s long-term partner their naked baby pictures with circumcision?
My point is “we’ve always done it like that” isn’t really a justification.
They are challenging the logic, is this really a confusing idea to you?
They are challenging the logic, is this really a confusing idea to you?
it’s still weird (source, i have parents), at least ask your daughter for consent first.
I’d consider it to be a breach of my privacy otherwise.
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.
i didn’t take them and i didn’t consent to them existing either. Neither did i consent to them being shown to anybody.
Naked humans are also normal, yet we still wear clothes. babies included, weirdly enough.
At what point does “naked baby photos” turn to “naked children photos” is my question.
how about this. You can have your naked baby photos, you just also have to be in the photo and naked as well.
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.
DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT CONSENT IS
YOU LEARN IT AT SCHOOL, ITS VERY IMPORTANT
Removed by mod
Tbf child marriage is also traditional, Muhammed had a 9yo bride (it’s “ok,” he didn’t have sex with her until she was 11.)
Defending things based solely on tradition can get pretty weird sometimes.
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?
Not sure I can agree with you on this one.
Today I learned flying squid is okay with this kind of thing and that’s fucked up
It’s a violation of privacy & consent
How do you get a baby’s consent exactly?
You can’t, that’s why you don’t take photos of them naked.
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 resorting to CP?
Which cultures? And why do they get to decide what is right and what is wrong?
Also, naked photos of children are not child porn. Do you think they come out of the womb with clothes on?
I had to clean shit out of my daughter’s vagina regularly when I changed her diapers. Was that, similarly, sexual assault?
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.
NO IT IS NOT
Always get the consent of the now adult that was in the picture as a child or don’t take the picture if they are still a child
Dude, do you think I would intentionally cause my child actual pain? My god.
It’s all fucking weird. I never took photos of my child naked. I don’t get the idea at all.
I’m glad someone else sees it.
Downvoted because taking pictures of your child is still weird even though you don’t show them to anyone
I would argue the top picture is also a big no no.
I thought that is the point
Dark Arc is saying that it is generally considered a bad thing, contrary to the comic which is implying that it is generally considered good or neutral when it should be considered bad.
you guys missed the point. neither should be bad. it’s only bad because of how we sexualize eveything. it’s the sexualization that’s bad, and honestly, that wouldn’t even be that bad if it weren’t for the patriarchal exploitation of sex.
Shouldn’t both be bad? Stop sharing naked photos of people who can’t give you consent to do so.
there is nothing inherently wrong with our naked bodies. society has conditioned us to have shame. once upon a time, being naked was normal.
Yeah I’d still rather people not show off photos of me without them asking. Its okay to have privacy.
This has now gone to: sharing baby pictures is a privacy violation because the baby can’t give consent.
Lot of very special people in this thread on Lemmy today.
Yeah, i mean in today’s world, i value privacy too, but don’t you wish you lived in a world where we were more in tune with the natural world and our natural selves?
STOP SHARING NAKED IMAGES OF PEOPLE WHO CANNOT CONSENT
IT IS THEIR BODY, NOT THEIR PARENTS AND NOT YOURS
WHY IS CONSENT SO HARD FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND
Lay off the caps lock bud.
wow. you are triggered. you must still be young enough that this hits home for you.
Stop sharing any photos of people who don’t give consent, whether they can or not.
In an alternate timeline where we never had the stigma around nudity, I’d be just as embarrassed of my nose in a photo than I would of my penis.
Or maybe 10 years after I cut ties with you because you became a massive douche sandwich, I don’t want my picture on the same Facebook wall as your white pride rally.
Not you, personally, but any body really.
deleted by creator
Hmm, that’s a good point, I was just clarifying what Dark Arc said as far as I can tell. You’re right neither should be sexualized, but in the world we live in neither should be shared IMO.
neither should be bad.
Yes, they both should be bad. Don’t show people photos of naked children.
Still shouldn’t be sharing naked pictures of people without consent and of people who cannot consent
I think krippix’ point (as well as the comic’s point) is that the first is socially acceptable while the second is not. And that then suggests that the first scenario should also not be socially acceptable.
And that then suggests that the first scenario should also not be socially acceptable.
Last part depends on interpretation. But most likely yes.
I agree with this interpretation
Don’t take pictures of your child naked people
I don’t think it really takes a side … just kind of points out that it’s super weird that it’s more socially acceptable in one direction than the other.
I do hope the author intended for what I said to be the point though.
You’d think so, but a disturbing number of people think the problem is there is a difference, not the nude photos.
Yeah that’s kinda the point.
My mom has a picture of me when I was a baby taking a bath. My grandma made her censor my genitals with masking tape. I miss my grandma.
Dude, my mom covered our genitals with a washcloth. The only pic of me naked shows my bum. I had no idea nude baby pics were so popular.
Removed by mod
Is one photo a collection? Huh. I guess I also have a collection of refrigerators.
Definitely, there’s nothing “cute” about nude photos of children.
I mean, penises are just inherently funny. Look at them, they’re ridiculous.
I feel.like we generally give women a pass on A LOT of weird behaviors about children.
That does include elevated attention to the genital area (seriously, why? Leave our genitals alone ffs), borderline fetishizing breastfeeding, and also a lot of other stuff.
Like, for example, I had several women independently telling me how baby feces smell nice and milky. Like, what the hell and why do y’all feel it’s appropriate for a casual conversation???
Or that they love to smell baby feet. Huh? Funny thing I first got those stories after seeing a TV ad (was a while ago) with a woman burying her face in baby feet.
I can only assume this is either a result of hormonal shifts throughout pregnancy, or that there’s plenty more female pedophiles than we knew.
People are too weird about genitals. Our culture finds it so uncomfortable to talk to their sons about cleaning their penis that we started cutting the foreskin off to spare them the embarrassment.
Depends where in the world you are. In the US it was popularized by Dr Kellogg to curb masturbation. He also recommended a few drops of carbolic acid applied to young girls clits to damage the nerves and avoid what he called “abnormal excitement”.
Dude was opposed to pretty much anything even vaguely resembling pleasure, he invented corn flakes as a food to be as bland and tasteless as possible. The only reason they ever became a popular breakfast cereal is because of his brother adding sugar to them despite Kelloggs objections
‘cleanliness’ and ‘looking like their father’ were later justifications after the practice had already gained traction.
This is so screwed, too.
Like, I was once tasked to explain to my nephew how to properly clean a penis at, like, age of 7. C’mon, parents, what are you there for?!
Just literally teach it alongside cleaning every other body part, what’s the issue? Why should another man show this in particular to your kid?
This doesn’t make it justifiable, but circumcision goes back a lot longer than our culture has existed. If Judaism had won out instead of Christianity, it could have been even more widespread than it is now. Some Muslim sects also mandate circumcision, and they could be the ones ruling the world.
Unfortunately, circumcision is a particular form of mutilation that transcends cultures.
Unfortunately, circumcision is a particular form of mutilation that transcends cultures.
a lot of mutilation goes back centuries for human history. You can pick up any variety of mutiliation and it’s been done, scarrification, penile subincisions, foot binding, skull stretching, i can keep going.
Just because it’s historically common and pervasive doesn’t mean we should consider it to be normal. The aztecs commited human sacrifice, and we think capital punishment is bad enough that we need to hide it away from the general public and make it “sterile” which in reality means using a completely botched medical injection process.
also what culture “should be” does not determine what it is now, i’m not sure the legality of naked baby photos to begin with tbh, i’m pretty sure they’re still considered to be CP, unless legally stated otherwise somewhere. They wouldn’t count as CSAM i think, since there’s not abuse going on, but arguably it might count as CP still.
I literally started my comment by saying that doesn’t justify it.
yeah, i just wanted to provide a few more examples i suppose.
About smell :
“In 2021, inhalation of hexadecanal was found to reduce aggression in men but to trigger aggression in women.[4] Hexadecanal is one of the most abundant substances emitted by human babies from their heads, which may be an evolutionary survival mechanism to induce mothers to defend the baby and fathers to not attack it. But it is not yet known whether the amount of hexadecanal emitted by humans is sufficient to affect other humans.”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HexadecanalIt would make sense. There are other behaviours that directly lower male aggression. Smiling and emotional tears.
Which is awesome for babies since non-human primate males are known to kill offspring of other males in order to get the mother in estrus sooner.
It’s also the reason women smile when nervous and cry a lot more. I suppose you have to if you lack offense and defence. E.g. estrogens slowing muscular and skeletal growth in the upper body. And growing hair enough for thermal regulation, but not enough to redistribute blunt forces. The reason beards exist is to protect the jaw.
Interestingly, the main motive for men to commit homicide is dominance seeking behaviour. Men are more likely to kill every age with exception of infants. Women’s main motives for homicide are self-defence first and jelousy second. Infanticide is almost exclusively done by women. Often their own too. Never trust a woman who had a miscarriage with your newborn or your pregnant wife. High prolactin, loss of child and stealing babies is not just a human thing.
I wonder how the willingness to kill your own (high risk and expensive) baby influenced human evolution. Since it’s the other way around in other primates. Recon it reduced rape to be merely a dominance thing rather than a reproductive strategy?
Yes humans, as animals, have many wild internal forces. Horrible cases of abuse (babies, infants, women) were most certainly the result of these. Such horrible stories are then (sometimes // in part) keept (in folklore // culture) and help to warn us about these internal forces.
(sorry I know I don’t have the exact words)i believe it makes biological sense that if a women kills babies from rape, this, over many generation, would reduce rape. But again, this is something that is beyond my knowledge.
It does. We also evolved embryo wasting. A measurement to reduce non-viable pregnancies. Except it also tends to dispose of potentially healthy embryo’s. They used to think 70% was wasted. But now they think it’s between 40 and 60%.
This is a good thing, since it also enables more monogamous behaviour. More sex with the same guy = greater chance at conception. And reduces both male/male and female/female competition. So basically more coop-mode for everyone. Sucks only women suffer the drawbacks of this perk.
Not only that. Paternal care is something other primates lack. But men did develop paternal care as prolactin levels in the brain increase when men see their baby. Paternal care interestinly enough, isn’t just a back-up parent in case the mom dies during labour. It’s invaluable. Especially to boys who prefer to learn from their fathers.
On top of this, we also have meno- and andropause. Where people lose fertility. This is only seen in two other species. Both matriarchies where the leader is determined by her experience. Orca’s and elephants. Sticking around while not competing with her own children is amazing. It’s why we live so long. Fun fact. Male orcas only live 30 years, but female orcas live somewhere between 60 and 90 years. Makes that “women live 3 years longer than men on average” seem insignificant huh? In any case. Love your grandparents.
Anyhow. It’s no surprise that forced mating is so common in nature, but not that common in humans. We are doing well despite rape still existing.
I am male and I did like sniffing my baby’s head. Interesting.
women are pure. they can talk about a baby’s genitalia and it’s cute. if a man wants to be a kindergarten teacher, though, whoa, pedophile alert!
all of em eh? The moment you identify male it’s gone I guess, and vice-versa
I think you’re conflating fun facts about our anatomy and human bodily processes with something sexual.
deleted by creator
You are again talking about the comic strip, valid.
@Allegro took it in a whole different direction, which I think is false
I think it’s likely really surprising to learn/experience that feces of a breastfed baby (and to a lesser extent formula fed babies) don’t smell like shit. It’s natural to want to share a surprising learning. Might also be good to be forewarned the milky smell ends once normal food is introduced.
Nah, it was rather in a context of how cute and nice-smelling babies are, not that it was an immediate new discovery
I had several women independently telling me how baby feces smell nice and milky.
Likely some instincts playing a prank. A lot of mammals lick their baby’s shit.
TIL but I don’t know if I’m happy about it
Thanks for the share though!
there’s plenty more female pedophiles than we knew
I’m going to go with “Yes”
I never knew it was acceptable to do this with boys
It is. My mom did it. I’ve seen many other moms do it.
I get a chuckle about Ultra sound images as well. It’s fine if a woman wants to post those photos of her insides on the Internet. But I’m the bad guy if I say “Jessica pop that pussy open let’s see it in person.”
Thanks for ruining ultrasound for me
Anytime pal. lol wait till you learn mens nipples and womans are 100 identical.
I hope this isn’t a long wait
Mine are hairier. Like the jet.
You should have seen some of the woman I been with. I needed a good damn machete to get to the temple of suck.
My condolences.
Uhh. Nah.
But they arent tho. I am a trans woman who has been on estrogen for 4 months. In that time i have absolutely noticed my nipples changing, both growing and getting hard more regularly than before.
Yawn your missing the point.
Removed by mod
Look up signs of breast cancer in men.
Nope that is not the argument that is being made here. The fact that men get breast cancer at such a low rate compared to women nullifies your comment.
Nothing to do with the nipple or how it functions.
You would fail basic biology with that excuse.
Can’t tell if this is satire lmao but just start poppin’ some estrogen and get back to me in a couple years.
So I have to take a PILL *FOR YEARS to make my body produce something that a womens body does naturally but you still think that is 100 the same?
Oh you’re actually that stupid, let me laugh harder
Are you actually this dumb?
You actually just need a LOT of stimulation, same as women. It’s not a fun or recommended way to start lactating, but it’ll do the trick
(And thus the Nipple Wars started)
Is a transperson who lactates You sure about that?
Taking hormones that don’t generate with xy
Exactly. XY is not at all a hindrance to lactation. Because XY and XX nipples are the same. It’s just hormones (usually while pregnant) that make them function.
You make it sound like you have ultrasound videos in your streaming queue.
You can’t see the baby without the ultrasound. It’s not like you could grab a speculum and get a good look in person.
You’ve obviously never been in one of those flashlight enthusiasts groups. They’ll gladly tell you how you can see anything if you light it enough.
Ultrasound is just really slow light
Ackchyually… that’s completely wrong. Frighteningly so, I might add, where has basic education gone.
Ultrasound are mechanical waves, light is EM radiation. Really slow light is infrared. Really fast ultrasound is… even more ultra ultrasound. Slower ultrasound would be this.
Humor is dead.
Yes, you killed it.
Wait, let me try:
The earth is flat!
See how funny I am?
Really, you did it. You really did it. You killed humour so dead it’s not even working for me, any more.
Christ, what an asshole.
Not with that attitude
Is it a baby or is it just cells? Am I viewing cunt cells or nah?
You’re not viewing cunt cells in ultrasounds people share. You’d be viewing a fetus, uterus, placenta. But that’s all internal. Not external.
Please include yourself in your previous mentioned list of cunt cells.
If you think someone posting photos of anatomical scans and sexually harassing someone are comparable, then idk what to say.
Removed by mod
You’re*
The most ironic spell-check I’ve ever given.
Having had four kids, if you are showing people pictures of any baby in the bath naked, they’re gonna be upset no matter the gender. I don’t think his is true at all.
I wish I could burn half my mother’s photo albums.
You can. Just not yet
Given there are people in this thread defending this tooth and nail, that’s quite reassuring to know actually.
Let me guess. You’re a guy.
My mom was one of those top ladies. 😬
It’s OK kolanaki, I find your wee wee very cute too
Instance checks out
Showing one or looking one? Nevermind, I don’t want to know.
So labia, then? Or vulva, maybe. Unless that camera is an internal one, they’re likely not seeing any vaginas.
I too took middle school health class
Of course, you’re technically very right - what they see is not vagina.
But in the culture, the word often simply refers to female genitals as a whole.
That doesn’t mean anyone using that word is not aware of the words “labia” and “vulva”, they can even differentiate between labia majora and labia minora etc.
But for the sake of brevity and simplicity, people just say “vagina”, even if it’s not necessarily a technically correct term.
I feel you and what everyone is doing annoys me too, but our only recourse is to do something worse.
My proposal: we start calling our cock “corpora cavernosa”.
Examples:
- “Hey, Chumley, don’t just stand there with your corpora cavernosa in your hand.”
- ”He’s being a total corpora cavernosa!”
- ”My corpora cavernosa got pinched by my zipper.”
- ”Hey, bro, does my corpora cavernosa hook off to the right?”
His issue was phrasing. The woman used a euphemism which significantly shifted her perceived intentions. “Look at his little wee-wee” is far removed from “look at his little penis.” Synonyms are not created equal, so simply substituting without considering connotation will only cause confusion. He should have said “get an eyeful of her little vagina.”
Look at her little vajayjay, nope still weird.
Gawk at her crack, mate!
Nope.
Gander her bandersnatch
Hmm
Behold the axe wound
Huh
Peek at her meatflaps
Nah
Behold! Her cave of wonders!
🤷
And his nephrite rod!
???
Now I want Arby’s.
I don’t get it.
Crack, cocaine.
Even worse.
I think if he referred to it as her little pussy or cunny it would make it significantly worse.
That’s more adult slang for vagina. Little kid euphemism would be something like hooha or twinkle.
Man saying that to another man is still questionable. Still sounds like he’s lending his child out for drugs.
vomiting intensifies
Nope, not better.
Are there people seriously calling vagoos as hoohas
You call called them vagoos. I’m not sure you have much room to judge.
I’d say coochie but that one makes them sound less pointy
Why do you think of vulvas as pointy?
The characters sound. I don’t know what you mean
No word feels great which is pretty sad considering how many child-friendly euphemisms there are for a penis. With my daughter we try to emulate the same vibe as ‘willy’ combined with some anatomical accuracy by using the word ‘vulvy’. Sounds gross to many, makes sense to others. Your mileage may vary haha.
In the UK, we call it a minnie for girls. Willy for boys.
hoohas and floofs
my older sister and her daughters… I always had a hard time not laughing at it.
You guys want to consider gender in vacuum but it is never a good idea.
Look at the sexualisation and brainwashing of the girls and patriarchy and men having this big power gap and sometimes using it in the most monstrous of the ways even today let alone 100 years ago. This is why the second image is big wtf while the first is small wtf.
That’s because in the first no one would immediately think that they sexualise the boy while in the second we arrive at this conclusion immediately and without hesitation thanks to all the hard work of men thorought history.
I know having this original sin of your fathers on your shoulders is not a cool feeling but this is the reality we are in.
The sooner this collective PTSD heals and that can only happen after some time of treating women as humans, the better for everyone. Problem is that point in history is far, far away considering the core issue is still prevalent.
It will take another 100 years of intense education and raising new generations to have the society that isn’t obviously fucked up and deeply hurt.
No one in the picture or the audience is sexualizing little girls (or boys). Instead, the outrage is caused by harmful expectations of purity that are imposed on girls and women, but not boys. As well as the current moral panic about pedophilia, which again is unhelpful in actuality protecting children.
Want to protect help children from predators? Help them remove the stigma around their bodies and sex, and empower them to speak and be heard when something they don’t like happens. Failing to do so reinforces the feelings of shame that all too often enable predators to get away with what they do.
And maybe also don’t share potentially embarrassing photos without consent but that’s small potatoes compared to the above issues.
Help them remove the stigma around their bodies and sex, and empower them to speak and be heard when something they don’t like happens.
This. So much this. If auntie wants to give them a kiss and they don’t want to get slobbered then tough fucking luck auntie, I’ll back the little shits up when they bite you. Predators are, by and large, able to do what they do because people don’t teach kids that they do, in fact, have bodily autonomy.
And while I’m at it bodily autonomy of kids also implies that parents don’t parade photos around like some fucking trophy or something. Have some basic fucking regard for your own kids and what they want. How would you feel when they’re showing nude pictures of you to their classmates yeah I thought so.
How would you feel when they’re showing nude pictures of you to their classmates yeah I thought so.
Depends, does your mom have an onlyfans?
I like this take. If you get to show photos of your kids naked to your friends, they should have the same privilege.
How about nobody does it unless the subject is consenting?
Explaining consent to certain members of the comments section is like explaining music to a rock, I think this approach might get the message across.
Secrets die in the light
“Knowledge is the light in the darkness of ignorance”.
I like this additional take with pure facts and discussion, It’s mostly uncharacteristically civil and starts to be interesting or at least has potential to be.
However I am mostly focused on why one picture is big wtf and why one is smaller wtf.
You’re right, but I feel showing people photos of your child’s genitals should never be OK, outside of medical professionals etc.
It will take another 100 years of intense education and raising new generations to have the society that isn’t obviously fucked up and deeply hurt.
I don’t share in your positivity.
Collective ptsd is not real and anyone who uses that term should be mocked mercilessly for the rest of their life.
In fact, collective trauma can impact relationships, alter policies and governmental processes, alter the way the society functions, and even change its social norms (Chang, 2017; Hirschberger, 2018; Saul, 2014)
I never said collective trauma does not exist
collective trauma refers to the impact of a traumatic experience that affects and involves entire groups of people, communities, or societies. Collective trauma is extraordinary in that not only can it bring distress and negative consequences to individuals but in that it can also change the entire fabric of a community (Erikson, 1976).
I appreciate your efforts but it is a real, scientifically proven phenomenon.
“Collective trauma” ≠ “collective PTSD”
Sure, but PTSD is a specific disorder that individuals are diagnosed with. If a group of people are unable to work towards a single goal, saying they have “collective ADHD” is imprecise and potentially offensive to people with the diagnosis.
That said, I knew what you meant 🤷
I think there’s a couple of people around with collective OCD that just can’t stand metaphor.
Jokes aside, and not being a sociologist, I do think it’s a good distinction because PTSD implies a maladaptive reaction to trauma, and communities, just like individuals, can process their trauma well or they can mess it up.
It seems to be the accepted term in the scholarly and clinical community.
“Collective trauma” or “collective PTSD”? The latter is what we were discussing earlier in this thread. It has zero occurrences on Google Ngrams: https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Collective+PTSD%2C+collective+trauma&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-2019&smoothing=3
I was talking about collective trauma which OP was citing, though their initial term is collective PTSD.
Why would you use n-gram and not journal search engine like Google Scholar. There seems to be an engagement in the concept of collective PTSD since about 2007.
Is this an area of research or practice for you? It is not mine.
Trauma and ptsd can be used interchangeably. PTSD is more precise term and clinically significant. Trauma is more colloquial. I used PTSD on purpose to accent the debilitating effect it has on the society as a whole.
trauma and ptsd cannot be used interchangeably at all. PTSD is a specific mental condition documented in the DSM-5 and recognized by doctors that have multiple variations and nuances that must be taken into account. Trauma is an overarching term to describe experiences that have had a significant and profound impact on someone’s mental state and health. I’m not usually a crazy stickler for word usage but this is just horribly imprecise language. You can have trauma without having PTSD. They are not the same thing and should not be treated as such.
Trauma and ptsd can be used interchangeably
the sky, and blue jeans can also be used interchangeably.
You wouldnt though.
No, collective trauma is proven. Collective ptsd is not.
Aydin, C. (2017). How to Forget the Unforgettable? On Collective Trauma, Cultural Identity, and Mnemotechnologies, Identity, 17:3, 125-137, DOI: 10.1080/15283488.2017.1340160
tl;dr “Misandry is perfectly fine because men are evil and nothing a woman has ever done is wrong.”
The problem isn’t that the bottom scenario isn’t accepted, it’s that the top scenario is. No one should be showing off nudes of children in public, or anywhere really, regardless of gender. It’s weird, it’s sick, and it has no place in this world.
There’s nothing wrong about nude children or any other human old or young. Just go to a beach in Europe…
Yes Americans are weird about this thanks to years of well… catholic brain rot
If you’re taking photos on a nude beach in Europe you’re getting decked. Kid, adult, doesn’t matter.
There’s a massive fucking difference between sitting naked in a sauna with other naked people and sitting on public transit, fully dressed, gossiping about non-consensual nudes of children. How is that even a question. How are you capable of equating those things.
Nude adult humans = Nothing wrong Nude children = “Hi, I’m Chris Hansen with dateline NBC”
Children do not belong on a nude beach
Such a weird thing to say … when I was little ('70s) it was not uncommon for kids to swim nude, we didn’t care… Any adults who are ogling kids aren’t going to stop just because of one layer of clothing.
Well you have no idea then. Here no one cares. It’s normal and nothing sexual about it
And not even on the nude beach either on a normal beach too there’s hordes of nude children running about. I am waiting for your head to explode now
It’s weird, it’s sick, and it has no place in this world.
Only if you think a naked body = sex, which is a weird assumption to make if you think about it.
Except the comic doesn’t show them discussing or showing a naked body, it’s a weirdo pointing out the genitals to another person in a very public place. If it was toes, it’d be fine. If it was just a naked body it’d be whatever, mostly. But they’re specifically pointing out genitals, that implies sexual focus. It’s only “cute” and “funny” for the old women here because eventually it’ll be an organ used for sex…
Nah, it should never be acceptable to show photos of people naked to your friends without their express permission. Outside of medical professionals of course.
Because the only time it’s appropiate for two people to be naked together is when dey fucking?
You misinterpreted OP, otherwise I also do think the top scenario is weird.
sexualisation and brainwashing of the girls and patriarchy and men having this big power gap
Women can do what men can’t = sexualisation and brainwashing of the girls and patriarchy. Ok. “Men having this big power gap” indeed.
and sometimes using it in the most monstrous of the ways
we arrive at this conclusion immediately and without hesitation thanks to all the hard work of men thorought history.
you say this like women have ever had rights to the point that being ogled at “would be bad” the one argument here would be the “daughter is her fathers property” and that’s not really a gender thing, that’s a social custom about gender more than anything.
Thanks for the lecture, professor.
My god damn pleasure sub
The hot tl;dr of this that is going to get you a lot of angry boys sending you incoherent diatribes is that we haven’t decided as a species that we will stop sexualizing youth.
Yes there are biological imperatives for the sexually aggressive sex to seek out mates that are young, healthy and capable of producing offspring before they become too old to reproduce. That’s all a thing that’s real, but it’s as far distant in our past as most other ancient instincts that we’ve put to rest. We just keep this one alive because we want it to continue broadly. The whole notion of older men predating and sexualizing youthful appearances or “innocence” as standards of femininity is absolutely something that if we all decided together was no longer acceptable, it would end tomorrow. (Or realistically in one generation.) This is not a more natural part of us than anything else we choose to follow or not, because we are well above using any natural response system as an excuse to allow dangerous social norms to continue.
The reason I say this is because there are a lot of men who will secretly or overtly hold the position that since we have biological urges, then it must be natural and acceptable. Meanwhile, ya’ll fuckers completely ignore the thousand other biological drives and standards that we’ve abolished because they’re unproductive, hurt people or just have gone out of style.
For example: body odor. Do you really think we were using soap and perfume when we were packed together in huts and caves for the last thousand millennia? You are genetically identical to the people who used to bury their faces in each other’s armpits to identify each other in the dark, but the thought makes you gag now because you were socialized to feel repulsion at this. (Fetishes aside.) We can socialize ourselves to believe and internalize almost anything, we are far, far beyond the forces of natural selection and are now choosing our evolutionary path. Wouldn’t it be nice if we chose good paths that respected others and protected children.
(Fetishes aside.)
damn, you got me on that one.
Removed by mod
Maybe we should encourage suicides in boys starting in schools, would that work for you? Edit: if you are going to down vote me the offer an idea the left will actually do. Otherwise I guess we are bringing up more republican rapists. ‘50% of the world population would feel safer if you died’ is the messaging the left offers so lean I to it or change the messaging
username checks out.
Yes.
And why do we think that might be different? Anyone?
The assumed innocence of women and the assumed guilt of men.
Yes. And why was that?
Misandry and the belief that anything with a penis is evil, even if the individual in question doesn’t even want to have a penis
No, but that is a compelling narrative.
It’s because men sexually assault women a lot. Like, an awful amount. Children, relatives, the whole thing: 1 out of 3 women have been sexually assaulted. That’s why it’s different.
You are absolutely right and this so obvious, yet, I see that you get about 50% downVotes and those might be from people I usually block.
As a male victim of TWO count 'em TWO sexual assaults perpetrated by TWO count em TWO different women, “fuck me, I don’t matter.”
You gonna bring up that I “obviously wanted it because I’m a man” next? Go ahead and block me for downvoting both that comment and yours, make my lemmy a better place.
Thanks for your important testimony. I have come to believe that your case in is an exception but I have no means of knowing this for sure and I apologize for being triggering.
Because the overwheling majority of sexual assault convictions are of men. It’s true.
Laughing at a child’s penis still sucks though.
Because the overwheling majority of sexual assault convictions are of men. It’s true.
OHHH because the women who sexually assaulted me didn’t get convicted in a court of law, because I didn’t report them, because nobody cares about male victims, we should use that to further invalidate the experiences of future male victims? My mistake, how silly of me.
I’m sorry to hear that happened to you. I do not think that the statistics of abuser demographics should be relevant to their prosecution. That is a different thing to the thing I was talking about.
It would seem you think that women should be presumed innocent and men presumed guilty based on the number of people in each respective demographic that have been convicted of sexual assault in a court of law, based upon this thread here.
I think no such thing, and if you got that impression from what I wrote then I must have expressed myself extremely badly.
Sexual assault sucks, no matter who does it, nor to whom. You deserve justice for what happened to you.
Here is the point I was trying to make:
-
More men are convicted for sexual assault than women.
-
Sharing pictures of a child’s penis without consent sucks. Maybe it’s sexual assault. Even if not, I believe it is a bad thing to do.
-
Some women do it anyway, and they get away with it because they’re not seen as the sexual assault demographic. This sucks.
-
It’s a leftist thing. I am liberal but I do not have any dillusions on how I am viewed by my ‘fellow’ liberals.
¿Que?
deleted by creator
I don’t know how you mean, but okay.
Because nobody cares when double standards negatively impact boys or men.
No, but very men’s rights there.
No, just equality. Isn’t that what feminism is about?
Dead right.
So close
Because they are sitting in a pink colored train, and not in the blue colored one.
Also no, but interesting point
Situation also matters. This appears to be on a bus and between acquaintances. Do this same thing at home toward the adult child’s significant other and it becomes a funny thing parents do to embarrass their kids.
funny thing parents do to embarrass their kids
And what is funny about that?
Funny for the parents
Le small pp
That’s parents’ favorite move! “Ha! You used to be smaller! And naked!” ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I just wouldn’t bring my significant other around if my parents were like that. That’s absolutely gross behaviour.
