working, and MJ
Feb. 23rd, 2003 09:18 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
brightbluegirlWell, it's Sunday, and here I am at work, and I shan't complain, because extra money is good, and Sundays are quiet days.
I'm reading American Gods, by Neil Gaiman. Andrew liked it, but as far as I'm concerned, the jury is still out. I like his portrayal of the gods as they appear in the states... that they're shysters, just a little dirtier than they were "back home". I like how the states has changed them into those different versions of themselves.
Yesterday was a good day. We did the usual bike trip to Wild Oats to get groceries, and then went to see a matinee of Daredevil with our next door neighbours. Not only was the movie itself good, but we got to see a preview of Cradle 2 the Grave, AND Xmen 2. Both of which looked really good. Hooray for summer blockbusters with crazy kung fu action and fun superheros! Yeah.
Is it ok for a man to sleep in a bed with children?
Yes.
This is about MJ, of course. I've been thinking about it, and I'm irritated with how our created taboos interfere with raising children.
I've heard arguments that say that even if he's doing nothing wrong, he's sending the message to others that it's ok, and then more men will share their bed with children, and THAT'S wrong, because it's going to encourage pedophiles.
Last time I checked, pedophiles did stuff even though we don't encourage them. I don't think this is going to change anything.
This taboo assumes two things:
1) children are asexual
2) adults, particularly adult men, cannot be unsexual at any time, even if they're with children.
Bullshit.
I agree that (some) children don't get enough touch and love. And I really don't see any problem with giving children touch and love in a non-sexual way.
I agree with the taboo that states that people in a position of power should not force or coerce the people they have power over to have sex (or do anything, really). As a result, I see pedophilia as being a problem.
However, children are not asexual. I've heard of children as young as 8 searching for and achieving orgasms, merely because it feels good.
In terms of not seeing sex as dirty, yes, children are asexual. Children learn that sex is "bad" from adults. From tv. From our taboos against seeing sex on tv, or against seeing other people have sex. From our taboos against nudity. From our taboos even against kissing our own children on the lips.
Anyway. I think the taboos are outdated. I think they're more hurtful than helpful. Our children will be attachment parented. We'll have a clothing optional house, and children who would like to sleep in the bed with mommy and daddy most definitely can. Or just daddy, if mommy is away, or just mommy, if daddy is away. Our children will recieve many loving touches, and we'll do our best not to teach the abnormal taboos that our society is rife with.
Of course, we'll have to decide which taboos are ok and which we are uncomfortable not continuing (like, for example, I doubt if we'll have sex in front of our children). But we'll be doing our best to do it with our eyes wide open. We'll still, I'm sure, pass on taboos that we haven't noticed, that we still don't know we have, but it'll be a start.
I'm reading American Gods, by Neil Gaiman. Andrew liked it, but as far as I'm concerned, the jury is still out. I like his portrayal of the gods as they appear in the states... that they're shysters, just a little dirtier than they were "back home". I like how the states has changed them into those different versions of themselves.
Yesterday was a good day. We did the usual bike trip to Wild Oats to get groceries, and then went to see a matinee of Daredevil with our next door neighbours. Not only was the movie itself good, but we got to see a preview of Cradle 2 the Grave, AND Xmen 2. Both of which looked really good. Hooray for summer blockbusters with crazy kung fu action and fun superheros! Yeah.
Is it ok for a man to sleep in a bed with children?
Yes.
This is about MJ, of course. I've been thinking about it, and I'm irritated with how our created taboos interfere with raising children.
I've heard arguments that say that even if he's doing nothing wrong, he's sending the message to others that it's ok, and then more men will share their bed with children, and THAT'S wrong, because it's going to encourage pedophiles.
Last time I checked, pedophiles did stuff even though we don't encourage them. I don't think this is going to change anything.
This taboo assumes two things:
1) children are asexual
2) adults, particularly adult men, cannot be unsexual at any time, even if they're with children.
Bullshit.
I agree that (some) children don't get enough touch and love. And I really don't see any problem with giving children touch and love in a non-sexual way.
I agree with the taboo that states that people in a position of power should not force or coerce the people they have power over to have sex (or do anything, really). As a result, I see pedophilia as being a problem.
However, children are not asexual. I've heard of children as young as 8 searching for and achieving orgasms, merely because it feels good.
In terms of not seeing sex as dirty, yes, children are asexual. Children learn that sex is "bad" from adults. From tv. From our taboos against seeing sex on tv, or against seeing other people have sex. From our taboos against nudity. From our taboos even against kissing our own children on the lips.
Anyway. I think the taboos are outdated. I think they're more hurtful than helpful. Our children will be attachment parented. We'll have a clothing optional house, and children who would like to sleep in the bed with mommy and daddy most definitely can. Or just daddy, if mommy is away, or just mommy, if daddy is away. Our children will recieve many loving touches, and we'll do our best not to teach the abnormal taboos that our society is rife with.
Of course, we'll have to decide which taboos are ok and which we are uncomfortable not continuing (like, for example, I doubt if we'll have sex in front of our children). But we'll be doing our best to do it with our eyes wide open. We'll still, I'm sure, pass on taboos that we haven't noticed, that we still don't know we have, but it'll be a start.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-02-23 10:57 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-02-23 12:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-02-23 07:25 pm (UTC)I agree about the importance of coming at taboos with our eyes open and thinking about reasons for them - taboos in general seem like, as with so many other "hard and fast rules", excuses not to think about particular cases.
Still, it's hard to get people to face taboos, just because of what they are - and to distinguish between the many different things that could be lumped under one taboo category. It's easy for people to jump from "you don't think this taboo is universally right" to "you think the taboo is universally wrong".
Categories...
no subject
Date: 2003-02-24 09:49 am (UTC)I wonder - are taboos a useful thing for people of "average" intelligence or less? Is it because we are "more intelligent" that we're able to look past the blanket statements and make our own decisions?
Does that even matter?
Hmmm.
no subject
Date: 2003-02-24 12:35 pm (UTC)I don't really like the hidden assumption you find all over the place, that thinking should be left to professionals. I tend to think that if all people do a bit each, and bring their own experience to these things, and then pass on whatever ideas they have, we'd see things gradually improving all over the map.
no subject
Date: 2003-02-24 01:38 pm (UTC)I think that if everyone thought about things instead of letting other people do their thinking for them (which is a hard prospect because of course, people would then have to do their own research to find out what to base their opinions and decisions on, which is harder work than just thinking), that it would get a lot worse for awhile, before it got better.
Not that I'm saying that's no good.
It's like - every time I see a movie or read a book where the "good" ending is achieved by someone inserting their own opinion into the media (like, say, Hackers), I think that there is no way that would actually work. I mean, really. Ideas are already firmly placed in the majority of people's heads, one subversive message would either be dismissed out of hand, ridiculed, or treated as a threat to the common public.
Sometimes I feel the best way would be to kill our communication network. Get rid of tv altogether, and radio, and internet. Have travelling... messiahs, almost. A network of teachers, teaching people to be openminded and think for themselves and take responsibility for their actions?
But that has it's faults too.
Dayum. I do my best thinking in notes.