NationStates Jolt Archive

A schoolboy told his mother and the principle that he could access pornography on the school's computer. Now all the other little boys are going to kick his ass. They had access to porn and this little snitch ruined it.

www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/EdmontonSun/News/2005/05/27/1058353-sun.html

A schoolboy told his mother and the principle that he could access pornography on the school's computer. Now all the other little boys are going to kick his ass. They had access to porn and this little snitch ruined it.

www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/EdmontonSun/news/2005/05/27/1058353-sun.html

His lunchtime will be spent hiding from his friends turned enemies.

he is going to have to personally provide for the lost lust...

aouuuch...he better bring vaseline.

The little snitch. Meh. Porn at school? Sheesh. What's the problem with that?

Seriously, though, I hope none of these people are "omg i cant believ thiss!!111" over this. Kids are WAY smarter than adults when it comes to computer, so no kidding something like this happened.

Besides, parents shouldn't try to sugarcoat everything.

Usually I'd defend anyone from getting their asses kicked, but in this case, I'd let them get in a punch or two before breaking it up.

Usually I'd defend anyone from getting their asses kicked, but in this case, I'd let them get in a punch or two before breaking it up.
The little narc fucker deserves it. He's not going to have an easy time in school from here on out to highschool graduation.

stupid kid. Ruining it for the rest of us!

My guess is no one is going to trust him with anything "secret".

YES!!! This is proof I need that sexually explicit materials do not harm kids!

These Grade 4 kids looked at porn, probably repeatedly, and guess what? The sky didn't fall! The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse didn't ride forth from the Gardens of Babylon and slay us all! Bush didn't destory the world! There is nothing there that suggests this had any negative effect on these kids or society at all.

You know what that means! If i'm right and these kiddies are fine, there is no basis for half the "morality" crap put on the books. (it's usually there on the basis of protecting our children.)
That leaves one reason they are on the books - they are aspects of the Christian faith. Separation of Church and state - he shoots, he scores! Awesome!

Oh, and that kid, he's gonna take flack for this for the rest of his freaking life. And I'd love to see the "flesh filter" tech that can id "parts of the body" and block em. You'd think if someone is smart enough to do that, they should be working on something more important, like a cure for a disease, or a better way to grow food, or the space program or something, not wasting their time on crap like that, but still, that's high-freakin-tech right there.

LOL

Yeah, the poor kid's going to get battered!

That happened at my high school, someone found a way round the porn filter on google image search, everyone thought it was well funny until someone told a teacher.

That kid wasnt seen for about a week

You people are truly sick. These were fourth grade children; d'you really want your 8, 9, 10 year old kids typing in "cool sex" and having pictures from all ranges of the sexual spectrum showing up? Seriously, sick.

You people are truly sick. These were fourth grade children; d'you really want your 8, 9, 10 year old kids typing in "cool sex" and having pictures from all ranges of the sexual spectrum showing up? Seriously, sick.
As a parent you may object to it, but put yourself in the place of a grade school kid. When I was that age if someone had snitched on my porn I'd have made his life miserable and felt justified in doing so.

Except for serious stuff like heavy drugs or racketting or whatever kids snitching is really ugly--and most of them are keen to do it, too. As a teacher I punish snitching harder than I do the offence reported. They still don't get it.

:headbang:

You people are truly sick. These were fourth grade children; d'you really want your 8, 9, 10 year old kids typing in "cool sex" and having pictures from all ranges of the sexual spectrum showing up? Seriously, sick.

eh, I have the same opinion, but mainly because these people are ridiculing the fact that the child was honest enough to bring it to their attention. Sure.. someone shows the slightest trait of virtue. QUICK! beat it out of him!

As a parent you may object to it, but put yourself in the place of a grade school kid. When I was that age if someone had snitched on my porn I'd have made his life miserable and felt justified in doing so.

If my kid told, and other kids threatened to beat him up, I'd make damn sure that they were all punished before it happened. Threats are just as bad as physical acts of aggression, and I'll be damned if I'll let my kids feel threatened going to school for doing the right thing whether people agree with it or not.

eh, I have the same opinion, but mainly because these people are ridiculing the fact that the child was honest enough to bring it to their attention. Sure.. someone shows the slightest trait of virtue. QUICK! beat it out of him!

Exactly. People are always quick to jump down the throats of those who do the right thing. It's sad.

You people are truly sick. These were fourth grade children; d'you really want your 8, 9, 10 year old kids typing in "cool sex" and having pictures from all ranges of the sexual spectrum showing up? Seriously, sick.

How so? For this to be true, you must subscribe to a certain philosophy which believes that sex is evil and immoral and that it is harmful and shameful.

I do not subscribe to that philosophy. There is no logical arguement behind that philosophy - sex, when done safely, is nothing more than a pleasurable bodily function. Therefore, for me, these kids learning about sex is no different than if they were to learn about cognition, or the immune system, or any other bodily function.

How so? For this to be true, you must subscribe to a certain philosophy which believes that sex is evil and immoral and that it is harmful and shameful.

I do not subscribe to that philosophy. There is no logical arguement behind that philosophy - sex, when done safely, is nothing more than a pleasurable bodily function. Therefore, for me, these kids learning about sex is no different than if they were to learn about cognition, or the immune system, or any other bodily function.

Hear, hear!

And might I add that snitching on your friends is a lot worse than watching porn. Snitching is "not the right thing to do."

We had something like this, although no-one knows who snitched. I found a way around the crappily-designed website filter- simply use the Google cache. But then, a couple of weeks ago, the hole was blocked up. Unfortunate, seeing as we have a draconian internet use policy.

How so? For this to be true, you must subscribe to a certain philosophy which believes that sex is evil and immoral and that it is harmful and shameful.

I don't subscribe to that philosophy either. However, I have seen pictures of what comes up on Google when you type in anything related to sex. While sex may be a beautiful way to come together as two people, do you really want your kids to see a woman being screwed by a horse? Do you really want your kid seeing another man ramming another man? Get the picture?

Sex, in-of-itself, may be a beautiful act. Yes, and kids should be aware of that, but there are some aspects of sex better left for the bedroom... not for them to be getting a view of from school.

Schools in northern ireland now use the C2k system to filter any undesirable content on the internet. The only problem is that i've seen it blocked for the following reasons:

Blocked : Search engine
Blocked : Religion
Blocked : swear words (accidental random generation of swear words on hotmail login)
Blocked : Charity

And it just gets worse from there

And might I add that snitching on your friends is a lot worse than watching porn. Snitching is "not the right thing to do."

So, your best friend kills your mother, you aren't going to tell on him (even if you witness it?) Again, how sick.

So, your best friend kills your mother, you aren't going to tell on him (even if you witness it?) Again, how sick.

Yeah, because murder is as victimless as watching porn.

Hear, hear!

And might I add that snitching on your friends is a lot worse than watching porn. Snitching is "not the right thing to do."

Bull. Besides, he didn't tell on them. He merely informed people that anyone could get porn through the school network.

I'd never be loyal to someone if they had done something that didn't warrant my continued respect.

I take the the side of Tuesday. Most of the things google images show sickens me.

Yeah, because murder is as victimless as watching porn.

This has nothing to do with watching porn. It has to do with the fact that some porn is too graphic for children to be exposed to in such a manner. Kids don't go to school to watch porn, they go to school to learn.

If my kid told, and other kids threatened to beat him up, I'd make damn sure that they were all punished before it happened. Threats are just as bad as physical acts of aggression, and I'll be damned if I'll let my kids feel threatened going to school for doing the right thing whether people agree with it or not.



Exactly. People are always quick to jump down the throats of those who do the right thing. It's sad.
1 My kids (when I have some) won't be snitches.

2 Do the right thing? Since when is taking away a harmless source of fun the right thing?

This has nothing to do with watching porn. It has to do with the fact that some porn is too graphic for children to be exposed to in such a manner. Kids don't go to school to watch porn, they go to school to learn.

Oh, please. My parents never hid porn from me, and I turned out fine. Moralism is not making a good case for you.

That little snitch ruined it for everyone else. He'll see what everyone else thinks of it - no one will be friends with him anymore, as he is untrustworthy.

2 Do the right thing? Since when is taking away a harmless source of fun the right thing?

How about hacking into a persons comp? That is a harmless source of fun, no one gets hurt.

We had something like this, although no-one knows who snitched. I found a way around the crappily-designed website filter- simply use the Google cache. But then, a couple of weeks ago, the hole was blocked up. Unfortunate, seeing as we have a draconian internet use policy.

Our school put so much time and effort into it's blocker that I wonder why these people don't work at NASA. We could be on Mars.

First, there is a keyword lockout, filtering any sites that use those words.
Second, there is a topic blocker, which works similar to above.
Third, there is a forum/chatroom blocker, which sucks when I want to come here :(
Fourth, there is a manual blocker, which administrators can actually pick individually which sites to block, and which to leave unblocked.
Fifth, and best, they have for lack of a better term a Rolling Smart Blocker. It monitors how many times and how many people have gone to certian sites, and when it hits a certian number/popularity, it automatically blocks the site. That's how they take out the good games sites without much effort, and the proxy sites to get around these blockers. The non-forum NS site still works okay though.

More may exist, but this is what I've learned of so far, from loose-lipped administration folks, and experimentation. It's crazy. If half this effort were applied to getting us better supplies and teachers, we'd all be lil Einstiens.

I don't subscribe to that philosophy either. However, I have seen pictures of what comes up on Google when you type in anything related to sex. While sex may be a beautiful way to come together as two people, do you really want your kids to see a woman being screwed by a horse? Do you really want your kid seeing another man ramming another man? Get the picture?

Sex, in-of-itself, may be a beautiful act. Yes, and kids should be aware of that, but there are some aspects of sex better left for the bedroom... not for them to be getting a view of from school.

I agree with the bestiality example... that's really just inappropriate.
But the guy/guy stuff? I don't see why that should be in the same category at all.

(though I do agree that neither should be available at school, just like straight porn shouldn't be available.)

Bull. Besides, he didn't tell on them. He merely informed people that anyone could get porn through the school network.

Yeah, he snitched to his mommy and the principal.

I'd never be loyal to someone if they had done something that didn't warrant my continued respect.

Nice to know. Remind me never to be friends with you and share secrets.

This has nothing to do with watching porn. It has to do with the fact that some porn is too graphic for children to be exposed to in such a manner. Kids don't go to school to watch porn, they go to school to learn.
What a man and a woman and a midget and another man and a donkey do in the bedroom is not filty or disgusting. It's a beautiful display of love.

How about hacking into a persons comp? That is a harmless source of fun, no one gets hurt.
Not true. That's a violation of privacy.

Oh, I care not. Actually, what the hell was the head (principal to you) thinking? That you couldn't access porn at all on the school network? Everyone knows (so I thought) that you can access porn anywhere.

Not that I'm in favour of porn, I'd like to stress, I'm against it in general. Although I don't tell on people who look at porn, I just give them a lecture or two. ;)

1 My kids (when I have some) won't be snitches.

How do you know? D'you have a crystal ball?

Do the right thing? Since when is taking away a harmless source of fun the right thing?

Porn does not belong in schools. Period. That's not what schools are there. If kids want to look at porn, do it at home.

Moralism is not making a good case for you.

I'm not talking about moralism at all, actually. I'm talking about the fact that porn isn't something that should be in the classroom, especially an elementary school.

He'll see what everyone else thinks of it - no one will be friends with him anymore, as he is untrustworthy.

That's such an illogical train of thought. Doing the right thing should never be looked at as being untrustworthy. If this incident proves nothing else, I would surely trust him over any number of posters in this thread who can't see beyond their own little bubble, such as yourself.

What a man and a woman and a midget and another man and a donkey do in the bedroom is not filty or disgusting. It's a beautiful display of love. Beautiful man-donkey love? Not even Caligula "loved" his donkies!

What a man and a woman and a midget and another man and a donkey do in the bedroom is not filty or disgusting. It's a beautiful display of love.

:D :fluffle: :confused: :fluffle: :D

"What a man and a woman and another woman with a penis do to a donkey is their own gosh-darned business!"
- Dave Atell

Not true. That's a violation of privacy.

As said harms no one. Privacy is as useful as a flamethrower on the sun (although you would melt, this is a hypothetical metaphorical type of thing).

I agree with the bestiality example... that's really just inappropriate.
But the guy/guy stuff? I don't see why that should be in the same category at all.

(though I do agree that neither should be available at school, just like straight porn shouldn't be available.)

It was just examples, I'm gay, trust me, I'm not being deragatory. Most kids don't understand what homosexuality is and seeing porn in that fashion, without explanation, would bring up questions that aren't answered in a classroom.

What a man and a woman and a midget and another man and a donkey do in the bedroom is not filty or disgusting. It's a beautiful display of love.

I'm not saying otherwise; I'm merely saying what you said yourself: It's done in their bedroom, not being viewed in the classroom.

Yeah, he snitched to his mommy and the principal.

on who, exactly?

Nice to know. Remind me never to be friends with you and share secrets.

That's fine by me. I'd rather a friend that didn't expect mindless loyalty. Get a dog, perhaps?
obviously I would keep secrets that were a: not illegal, b: not harming someone else by their remaining secret, c: not wrong to the morals I subscribe to.

It was just examples, I'm gay, trust me, I'm not being deragatory. Most kids don't understand what homosexuality is and seeing porn in that fashion, without explanation, would bring up questions that aren't answered in a classroom.


Gotcha. I know that you're gay (I do observe the forums with cultish obession), it was mainly the phrasing that threw me. A matter of misinterpretation.

I'm not talking about moralism at all, actually. I'm talking about the fact that porn isn't something that should be in the classroom, especially an elementary school.

That's up to the school to decide. A little snitch ratting out his friends is a totally different matter.

That's such an illogical train of thought.

No it isn't. I'd never be friends with someone who rats his friends out, especially over something as harmless as this.

Doing the right thing should never be looked at as being untrustworthy.

Snitching and ratting out friends is not the right thing to do.

If this incident proves nothing else, I would surely trust him over any number of posters in this thread who can't see beyond their own little bubble, such as yourself.

Yeah, sure. Someone who rats you out is "trustworthy". You were speaking of illogical trains of thought?

on who, exactly?

His friends, ruining their fun.

That's fine by me. I'd rather a friend that didn't expect mindless loyalty. Get a dog, perhaps?

I have friends to whom I can say anything without them judging me. I hope you're lucky to find such people.

obviously I would keep secrets that were a: not illegal,

Do you rat out your friends who break laws? Know anyone who sped, or maybe littered? Did you call the police on them?

b: not harming someone else by their remaining secret,

As this wasn't.

c: not wrong to the morals I subscribe to.

Some of us think people are more important than our own, feeble sense of false morality.

That's up to the school to decide. A little snitch ratting out his friends is a totally different matter.



No it isn't. I'd never be friends with someone who rats his friends out, especially over something as harmless as this.



Snitching and ratting out friends is not the right thing to do.



Yeah, sure. Someone who rats you out is "trustworthy". You were speaking of illogical trains of thought?

Snitching is always the right thing to do. Even though something may infact seem harmless it leads up to a great falling. A person who saw the porn in the school could say falsly "It ruined my pure, innocent mind." (HA HA HA. Well something like that a kid would say (the kid as in child not a baby goat)), which would help the kid sue the school and the school gets poor then everyone makes fun of it (like to all the other schools. Again the kid refers to a child as will all I will post unless mentioned otherwise.). A kid is suing a school for giving him homework so these kids have more of a case. Ha.

That's up to the school to decide.

Up to the school to decide? I don't think so. It's up to the parents to decide, as they are legally responsible for their children until they're 18.


I'd never be friends with someone who rats his friends out, especially over something as harmless as this.

This isn't harmless, that's the problem. I'm not saying it's moral degrading or gives a bad view of what sex is... what I'm saying is that kids are at school to get an education in the liberal arts, they aren't there to learn the kama sutra.

Snitching and ratting out friends is not the right thing to do.

If my best friend murdered someone, I'd snitch on them in a heartbeat. If that's not the right thing to do, I don't know what is.

So, basically, you're condoning that this kid who "snitched" should be beat up and treated like a complete jerk because he did what was right, eh?

Just out of your curiousity... if the student found kids viewing child pornography, would that be okay with you, too, Fass? Or would he still need to be beat up because he snitched for it?

Just out of your curiousity... if the student found kids viewing child pornography, would that be okay with you, too, Fass? Or would he still need to be beat up because he snitched for it?

Goats can't use the internet :rolleyes:, but a child can not watch/look at porn until the age of 18 in Tusa.

All this chat reminds me of the 2 times I've broken the filters at my school. Once I typed in "How to get out of a trapped elevator" into Google and got onto a site called "Boyrotica". The second time me and a friend typed in "Horse Pimp" and got onto horsepimp.com. Yet they don't allow mavisbeacon.com because of "EXTREMENUDITYSEXVIOLENCE". True story.

Goats can't use the internet :rolleyes:, but a child can not watch/look at porn until the age of 18 in Tusa.

What are you talking about? If it's a joke, I don't get it.

Up to the school to decide? I don't think so. It's up to the parents to decide, as they are legally responsible for their children until they're 18.

No, how the computers are used is school policy. If parents got to decide things like that, you'd see all kinds of sites being banned because "parents don't agree" with them.

This isn't harmless, that's the problem. I'm not saying it's moral degrading or gives a bad view of what sex is... what I'm saying is that kids are at school to get an education in the liberal arts, they aren't there to learn the kama sutra.

Yeah, because porn somehow magically makes their minds impervious to all that other knowledge. Do you even read what you write? Think about those illogical trains of thought once more, please.

If my best friend murdered someone, I'd snitch on them in a heartbeat. If that's not the right thing to do, I don't know what is.

Again, because murder is as victimless as porn.

So, basically, you're condoning that this kid who "snitched" should be beat up and treated like a complete jerk because he did what was right, eh?

I don't condone them beating him up, but had I been a kid in that school, I never would have talked to him again.

Goats can't use the internet :rolleyes:, but a child can not watch/look at porn until the age of 18 in Tusa.

And since I am 16 I am allowed to have sex yet I can't watch people having sex for 2 more years. Makes no sense to me.

Just out of your curiousity... if the student found kids viewing child pornography, would that be okay with you, too, Fass? Or would he still need to be beat up because he snitched for it?

Yeah, because child porn is victimless and not a serious crime, just like regular porn. Ever heard of gradation? The world is not black and white.

Just out of your curiousity... if the student found kids viewing child pornography, would that be okay with you, too, Fass? Or would he still need to be beat up because he snitched for it?
Child pornography is different. It destroys people's lives. Ordinary porn is harmless.

Yeah, because porn somehow magically makes their minds impervious to all that other knowledge.

I didn't say that. Once again, you're trying to convince everyone of things I am not saying. I'm saying that schools are a play to get an education in specific subjects. Sex is not a subject, sex is a lifestyle choice. The only type of sex taught in schools is the actual anatomy and purpose, not the types of images and graphics kids will see when they use Google. That's for their homes, not for their schools.

Yeah, because child porn is victimless and not a serious crime, just like regular porn. Ever heard of gradation? The world is not black and white.

But isn't sex a beautiful thing? So, that must make child pornography beautiful, too, right? :rolleyes: What if those kids were enjoying the child pornography though? At that age, they don't know better, for the most part. So, say that kid cut off their access to that, is that wrong?

(I'm using this is a hypothetical; I'm in no way giving a thumbs up to child pornography. It's sick, disturbing, but you can find it on Google.)

But isn't sex a beautiful thing? So, that must make child pornography beautiful, too, right? :rolleyes: What if those kids were enjoying the child pornography though? At that age, they don't know better, for the most part. So, say that kid cut off their access to that, is that wrong?

(I'm using this is a hypothetical; I'm in no way giving a thumbs up to child pornography. It's sick, disturbing, but you can find it on Google.)
Child pornography is the depiction of rape. At least statutory rape. It's simply not the same as ordinary porn.

I have friends to whom I can say anything without them judging me. I hope you're lucky to find such people.

loaded question, that. I hope I never find such people. I want friends, not robots.

Do you rat out your friends who break laws? Know anyone who sped, or maybe littered? Did you call the police on them?

For speeding? Entirely possible. it's a dangerous, irresponsible thing to do. I'd leave that to what I thought of the situation. Shades of gray, after all. At 3am down a quiet moterway, meh. Down a school road at school hours? Damn straight.


Some of us think people are more important than our own, feeble sense of false morality.


I want friends who share my morality, or those who don't to a limited degree. Morals, are again, shades of gray. I'd never be a friend of someone who hated , oh, lets go with the common one, gays. But someone who disagreed with universal healthcare, well that's acceptable, obviously.

Child pornography is the depiction of rape. At least statutory rape. It's simply not the same as ordinary porn.

It can still be found on Google. Makes it no different in this case. If they were talking about child porn, we wouldn't be having this debate. Porn doesn't belong in the classroom, period, and this is just one other reason why.

I didn't say that. Once again, you're trying to convince everyone of things I am not saying. I'm saying that schools are a play to get an education in specific subjects.

Of course. What does that have to do with a snitch ratting out his friends doing nothing harmful to others?

Sex is not a subject, sex is a lifestyle choice.

Hahahaha! Do you mean to sound like some sort of Christian televanglist, or is it totally unintentional?

The only type of sex taught in schools is the actual anatomy and purpose, not the types of images and graphics kids will see when they use Google. That's for their homes, not for their schools.

Again, how is that relevant to a little snitch ratting out his friends?

But isn't sex a beautiful thing? So, that must make child pornography beautiful, too, right? :rolleyes: What if those kids were enjoying the child pornography though? At that age, they don't know better, for the most part. So, say that kid cut off their access to that, is that wrong?

Was "gradation" a word foreign to your vocabulary?

Do you mean to sound like some sort of Christian televanglist, or is it totally unintentional?

I'm gay, there's no way they'd let me be a Christian televangelist. lol.

Okay, seriously though, let me ask you this, Fass:

If you had a kid, say the same age as the fourth graders in this case, and you found out they were looking at porn at school? What would you do in all seriousness? Now, if you knew they were able to find child pornography through Google, what would you do in that case?

Was "gradation" a word foreign to your vocabulary?

No, I'm an English major and a writer, I know what it means. However, it's irrelevant as dictated by the questions and points I'm making.

It can still be found on Google. Makes it no different in this case. If they were talking about child porn, we wouldn't be having this debate. Porn doesn't belong in the classroom, period, and this is just one other reason why.
Nobody's arguing that it belongs there. We're just saying that since it harms nobody the kid should have minded his own business. There's a difference between telling the principle that Little Johnny Nutjob's about to go on a school shooting spree and ratting out your classmates for doing something that's harmless.

loaded question, that. I hope I never find such people. I want friends, not robots.

I want friends to whom I am more important than their selfish wish to maintain "morality".

For speeding? Entirely possible. it's a dangerous, irresponsible thing to do. I'd leave that to what I thought of the situation. Shades of gray, after all. At 3am down a quiet moterway, meh. Down a school road at school hours? Damn straight.

See, you don't do it all the time. You know when to keep your mouth shut and to not snitch. This kid snitched on something he should not have snitched.

I want friends who share my morality, or those who don't to a limited degree. Morals, are again, shades of gray. I'd never be a friend of someone who hated , oh, lets go with the common one, gays. But someone who disagreed with universal healthcare, well that's acceptable, obviously.

Again, you are missing the point. There are of course cases where going to the police is warranted. And there are of course cases where it is not and where you become a little snitch.

Nobody's arguing that it belongs there. We're just saying that since it harms nobody the kid should have minded his own business.

I understand that, but by sitting here and saying it's harmless in that scenario, essentially you're dismissing the fact that it shouldn't be in schools. How do you know it doesn't harm somebody? That's not your judgment call to make. That's up to the parents of the kids in question, without a doubt, as they are what knows what's best for their children. The kid did was he thought was right, regardless of what his classmates think, and he's being punished for it by them. That's disgusting, sick and intolerable. I hope any kid who lays a finger on him is suspended.

I understand that, but by sitting here and saying it's harmless in that scenario, essentially you're dismissing the fact that it shouldn't be in schools. How do you know it doesn't harm somebody? That's not your judgment call to make. That's up to the parents of the kids in question, without a doubt, as they are what knows what's best for their children. The kid did was he thought was right, regardless of what his classmates think, and he's being punished for it by them. That's disgusting, sick and intolerable. I hope any kid who lays a finger on him is suspended.
1 It is my judgement call to make. Parents can't be trusted. I can.

2 Hitler did what he thought was right too. This kid's a little Hitler.

3 I agree with suspending the kids who beat his ass every day from now until graduation. They should be rewarded with a vacation from school for their valiant effort in teaching a narc to mind his own damn business.

I'm gay, there's no way they'd let me be a Christian televangelist. lol.

And yet you say things like "sex is a lifestyle choice"? As a fellow gay man, you come off as very confused to me.

Okay, seriously though, let me ask you this, Fass:

If you had a kid, say the same age as the fourth graders in this case, and you found out they were looking at porn at school? What would you do in all seriousness?

I would have a talk with my kid about porn and why some of it is bad, and some of it isn't. I wouldn't ban him/her from watching it, I would just talk about moderation and about the people in it, and I wouldn't actually go to the school to report the other kids. I'd talk to my kid about when it is warranted to go to authorities, and when it isn't.

Now, if you knew they were able to find child pornography through Google, what would you do in that case?

They can always find child pornography through google. Them looking at regular porn doesn't mean that they will look at child porn. A kid who wants to look at child porn will do so. Most kids don't, so... if I'd want any possibility of coming across it to be abolished, I'd have them take the computers away. Of course I won't, because I know that that's a risk I'm willing to accept for them being able to learn to use computers, and that most of them won't want to watch child porn.

No, I'm an English major and a writer, I know what it means. However, it's irrelevant as dictated by the questions and points I'm making.

You're not making points. You're trying to draw hyperboles irrelevant to what this kid did.

2 Hitler did what he thought was right too. This kid's a little Hitler.


That's completely and utterly assinine.

That's completely and utterly assinine.
Thanks. That's what I was going for.

And yet you say things like "sex is a lifestyle choice"? As a fellow gay man, you come of as confused to me.

I'm done here. You attack me personally, as you did, and I'm done with this thread. That simple.

First and foremost, I'm a lesbian. I am not confused about my sexuality at all and to suggest otherwise is a horrible use of your time.

Second off, I never said sex was a lifestyle choice. I said sex was a lifestyle; there's quite a big difference in that leap there through barriers of the English language. Sex is not a "subject" being taught. Sex is something that is appliable. Lifestyle meanderings, such as sex, drugs, music, etc. are learned through applying what you know and what you learn as you do it as opposed to reading about it in a textbook. That's the difference failed to understand.

Anyways, I'm done in this thread. Happy debating.

I'm done here. You attack me personally, as you did, and I'm done with this thread. That simple.

I did not say you were confused. I said you came off as that. If you deem that a personal attack, then you need to have your sensitivity adjusted.

First and foremost, I'm a lesbian. I am not confused about my sexuality at all and to suggest otherwise is a horrible use of your time.

Sorry for mistaking you for a man. You wrote "Sex is not a subject, sex is a lifestyle choice." Don't blame me for what you made yourself come across as.

Second off, I never said sex was a lifestyle choice. I said sex was a lifestyle; there's quite a big difference in that leap there through barriers of the English language.

You sure about that? Then how come your post still says

"Sex is not a subject, sex is a lifestyle choice." ?

Please, keep track of what you write before you act so indignant, as it makes a mockery of you if you do.

Sex is not a "subject" being taught. Sex is something that is appliable. Lifestyle meanderings, such as sex, drugs, music, etc. are learned through applying what you know and what you learn as you do it as opposed to reading about it in a textbook. That's the difference failed to understand.

Anyways, I'm done in this thread. Happy debating.

You still continue to deal in the irrelevant.

Ok, I am going to assume this happened in America, cause I forgot the location of the kid's school, and I am from America and can totally see this happening here anywhere. So, first point, I believe pornography is illegal in America, so by all means it should be banned from elementary schools, along with drugs, weapons, etc., etc. Besides, kids 1) aren't old enough to legally have sex, so why be so mean as to give them blue balls before they've even dropped? If they wanna look at porn, they can do it other places besides the school and 2) the kids aren't sexually mature, so they wouldn't get it anyway. I mean, why let them look at it? It's like having a National Condom Week at St. Jude's elementary school. (hypoth. school, not real) Now, back to the subject - this was an elementary school and no one said that this kid even had any friends. Everyone's saying "snitched on his friends" as if every single kid in that school was his friend. Maybe he was getting back at the bullies who he knew found porn on the school comp by ratting them out. A fair trade for daily swirlies and lunch money theft, I think. Also, the kid may have been some innocent little momma's boy who had no hope of not telling his mother everything that happened at school that day. It IS an elementary school, anyway. Thoughts?

And, funny, funny, when I clicked on this thread it said it had 69 posts. Just wanted to throw that out there.

Ok, I am going to assume this happened in America, cause I forgot the location of the kid's school, and I am from America and can totally see this happening here anywhere. So, first point, I believe pornography is illegal in America, so by all means it should be banned from elementary schools, along with drugs, weapons, etc., etc. Besides, kids 1) aren't old enough to legally have sex, so why be so mean as to give them blue balls before they've even dropped? If they wanna look at porn, they can do it other places besides the school and 2) the kids aren't sexually mature, so they wouldn't get it anyway. I mean, why let them look at it? It's like having a National Condom Week at St. Jude's elementary school. (hypoth. school, not real) Now, back to the subject - this was an elementary school and no one said that this kid even had any friends. Everyone's saying "snitched on his friends" as if every single kid in that school was his friend. Maybe he was getting back at the bullies who he knew found porn on the school comp by ratting them out. A fair trade for daily swirlies and lunch money theft, I think. Also, the kid may have been some innocent little momma's boy who had no hope of not telling his mother everything that happened at school that day. It IS an elementary school, anyway. Thoughts?

And, funny, funny, when I clicked on this thread it said it had 69 posts. Just wanted to throw that out there.
Pornography is absolutely not illegal in America.

Pornography is absolutely not illegal in America.

However, it is illegal to view if you are under 18, and in many places, 21.

However, it is illegal to view if you are under 18, and in many places, 21.
I firmly beleive that just because something is illegal doesn't make it wrong.

Sorry for mistaking you for a man. You wrote "Sex is not a subject, sex is a lifestyle choice." Don't blame me for what you made yourself come across as.

I made a mistake. I clarified myself though, so, now I'm done. I apologize for the error. I meant to say sex is a lifestyle.

Pornography is absolutely not illegal in America.

I'm glad. I guess it's all the silly disclaimers they have about minors. That and I was raised by a Christian Right church, so I musta heard it somewhere.

However, it is illegal to view if you are under 18, and in many places, 21.
Ok, last time I checked, elementary schools don't have any 18+ in attendance.

I firmly beleive that just because something is illegal doesn't make it wrong.

That's all well and good, but it's still illegal.

That's all well and good, but it's still illegal.
I'm not disputing that. I'm just saying that the kid should have minded his own business. His classmates were breaking the law, but not hurting anyone, so he should have kept his mouth shut. Let us remember this bit of wisdom passed on from generation to generation, and just as true now as it was before. "Snitches get stiches"

Boy, that school network admin must SUCK. To get out smarted by a couple of 4th graders..oh the shame!!

Boy, that school network admin must SUCK. To get out smarted by a couple of 4th graders..oh the shame!!

Not really. Anyone can find porn given enough time. All you do is type random URL's like www.bender.com (http://www.bender.com) and see what you get. You can also type words into Google.

Schools in northern ireland now use the C2k system to filter any undesirable content on the internet. The only problem is that i've seen it blocked for the following reasons:

Blocked : Search engine
Blocked : Religion
Blocked : swear words (accidental random generation of swear words on hotmail login)
Blocked : Charity

And it just gets worse from there
one of my best mates works for HP, who are in charge of the web filtering, and thats the department he was in. every now and then he would unblock stuff and then block some other stuff, just for a laugh.

they found out and moved him to a different section.

That, and 4th graders are getting way too hooked on computers. I was playing Halo one time and getting my ass whipped by a 3rd grader because he did nothing else but play. And when you spend that much time on a computer, you end up just figuing all the ends and outs of those things.

Hey and guess thanks to who pornographic material got banned on NationStates... :innocent:

So, what - sounds like some people around here'd like to see wee kiddies outfitted with chastity devices. Personally, I was a masturbating wreck by the time I was 10...eight, nine times a day - more after I came across my older brother's secret stash of porn mags.

It's all pretty innocuous. Adults have such a hard time coming to grips with the fact that children are curious, sexual beings in their own right. Immature sexual beings, perhaps even precocious sexual beings - who of course must, to some extent, be left free to make certain personal discoveries about themselves, while at the same time must, as a matter of course, be guided by parental/custodial figures as to their nascent sexuality.

I'd say, sexually speaking, that this kid didn't have nearly as precocious a nature as his classmates. He obviously still has an exaggerated sense of his place in an overall hierarchical structure, though - and the implicit promise of reward for blowing the mischief wide open.

If I were the ringleader, I know I'd vow to toilet-paper this kid's house come Hallowe'en. Is that fair? No. Are kids fair? Hardly ever. But if these porn-poppin' pre-pubescents are anything like I was in those days, I'd harbour no end of enmity for having my titillation tampered with.

I'll let the parents squabble and freak out and pointlessly try to further coccoon their offspring. That's what parents do. As far as the kid is concerned, he might eventually want to transfer to another school rather than put up with the public image he's just created for himself.

So, what - sounds like some people around here'd like to see wee kiddies outfitted with chastity devices. Personally, I was a masturbating wreck by the time I was 10...eight, nine times a day - more after I came across my older brother's secret stash of porn mags.

It's all pretty innocuous. Adults have such a hard time coming to grips with the fact that children are curious, sexual beings in their own right. Immature sexual beings, perhaps even precocious sexual beings - who of course must, to some extent, be left free to make certain personal discoveries about themselves, while at the same time must, as a matter of course, be guided by parental/custodial figures as to their nascent sexuality.
Have you read Brave New World? Just curious.

Have you read Brave New World? Just curious.

Yes...

You people are truly sick. These were fourth grade children; d'you really want your 8, 9, 10 year old kids typing in "cool sex" and having pictures from all ranges of the sexual spectrum showing up? Seriously, sick.

Sure. Why not?

So, what - sounds like some people around here'd like to see wee kiddies outfitted with chastity devices. Personally, I was a masturbating wreck by the time I was 10...eight, nine times a day - more after I came across my older brother's secret stash of porn mags.

It's all pretty innocuous. Adults have such a hard time coming to grips with the fact that children are curious, sexual beings in their own right. Immature sexual beings, perhaps even precocious sexual beings - who of course must, to some extent, be left free to make certain personal discoveries about themselves, while at the same time must, as a matter of course, be guided by parental/custodial figures as to their nascent sexuality.

I'd say, sexually speaking, that this kid didn't have nearly as precocious a nature as his classmates. He obviously still has an exaggerated sense of his place in an overall hierarchical structure, though - and the implicit promise of reward for blowing the mischief wide open.

If I were the ringleader, I know I'd vow to toilet-paper this kid's house come Hallowe'en. Is that fair? No. Are kids fair? Hardly ever. But if these porn-poppin' pre-pubescents are anything like I was in those days, I'd harbour no end of enmity for having my titillation tampered with.

I'll let the parents squabble and freak out and pointlessly try to further coccoon their offspring. That's what parents do. As far as the kid is concerned, he might eventually want to transfer to another school rather than put up with the public image he's just created for himself.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Kids are reaching sexual maturity earlier and earlier these days. Why sheild them from themselves? What do we have to gain from it? Nothing. What do we have to gain if children stop being children? A more mature society.
Ever read Brave New World? If you haven't, then there's a scene where there are hundreds of six-year-olds playing "erotic games" with each other. In this society, it will never happen. With today's biology, it could very well happen within 100 years.

one of my best mates works for HP, who are in charge of the web filtering, and thats the department he was in. every now and then he would unblock stuff and then block some other stuff, just for a laugh.

they found out and moved him to a different section.

Well at least it was fun trying to find the swearing in the hotmail login. Kinda like an adult crossword

Couldn't have said it better myself. Kids are reaching sexual maturity earlier and earlier these days. Why sheild them from themselves? What do we have to gain from it? Nothing. What do we have to gain if children stop being children? A more mature society.
Ever read Brave New World? If you haven't, then there's a scene where there are hundreds of six-year-olds playing "erotic games" with each other. In this society, it will never happen. With today's biology, it could very well happen within 100 years.

Ah, hence Individualnost's earlier question. Now I get it.

Thing is, I'm an avid SF reader, and BNW pales in comparison to some of the stuff I've read down through the years. Technically, some of the things I've read could now theoretically be considered illegal, even pedophiliac material.

Try explaining to someone that a story dealing with the social conventions of perhaps a radically different future society, and all you get is grief - some people just can't seem to wrap their heads around the notion that a future society might have remarkably different values than the one they're living in.

They're unhappy with the idea that the future might actually be something different than the ongoing status quo, albeit with hovercars, maglev trains, and jackbooted authoritarians wielding laser-rifles peppering an antiseptic urban landscape. They'd feel more secure knowing they'll go their graves with no perceptible interruption of the same old dull predictable routine, albeit an old dull predictable routine that allows for just enough innovation to make things look the teensiest bit more like the bland imaginings of a Hollywood set-designer.

A book I picked up recently that I found highly entertaining and would recommend (which involves the taboo of consensual, serial mother-son incest through the agency of time-travel) is Robert Silverberg's 'Up the Line'.

Anyone else have a good, legitimate, risque book they care to mention? Especially any that are far more contentious now under the spoken and unspoken auspices of the emergent neo-puritan ethic than they were when first penned?

Don't be shy now...!

I'm not disputing that. I'm just saying that the kid should have minded his own business. His classmates were breaking the law, but not hurting anyone, so he should have kept his mouth shut.

Okay, it's easy for me to understand what you mean: this is basically a "letter of the law" versus "spirit of the law" issue for the majority of posters here. Illegal but not wrong is something with which I am very familiar, having been busted for possession of microscopic amounts of weed and getting my share of speeding tickets (usually in the middle of desolate places like Utah or eastern Oregon where the cops are, by their own admission, just plain bored). Moreover, I agree with this concept 100%.

But a kid in Grade 4 (as those wacky Canucks call 4th Grade) is what, 9 years old? A nine year old hasn't yet fully attained the level of what developmental psychologists call "concrete operations". They're still figuring out cause and effect, and relative moralism is something a few years beyond them (on the average, at least). The source for this idea, incidentally, is my classes in developmental psych from my BA in Education.

So, when you're telling this thread that at age 9 a kid should be able to know the difference between illegal, period and illegal but not wrong, I have to say that very, very few kids that age will have that ability. All they are familiar with is "no" and "yes"; "right" and "wrong"; "legal" and "illegal" to a great extent. True, shades of grey are entering into their lives, but it's still a black-and-white world to them.

Ironically, this is also why the snitcher is going to suffer a bout of ostracization. Those on whom he snitched will see it as black and white as well. So overall, I'm willing to see this whole situation as a wash -- the snitcher will learn a valuable lesson (unless he's a Frank Burns type who just develops a love of snitching and gets promoted as many sycophants of authority do), and the snitchees will learn to better guard their secrets.

It's sad that a kid who doesn't yet know the subtleties of law vs. morality is going to suffer for his ignorance, but this is, in essence, childhood. As another poster put it, it's hardly ever fair.

I could understand if he reported a serious offence like assault, drug use, possession of unregistered weapon, etc.

But porno, c'mon man, all kids are defiant to at least some kind of rule or regulation, and I bet all my money if I were a bettin' man that most kids about 4th grade have seen porn at least once in their lives.

too lazy to type anything else at the moment.

Ah, hence Individualnost's earlier question. Now I get it.

Thing is, I'm an avid SF reader, and BNW pales in comparison to some of the stuff I've read down through the years. Technically, some of the things I've read could now theoretically be considered illegal, even pedophiliac material.

Try explaining to someone that a story dealing with the social conventions of perhaps a radically different future society, and all you get is grief - some people just can't seem to wrap their heads around the notion that a future society might have remarkably different values than the one they're living in.

They're unhappy with the idea that the future might actually be something different than the ongoing status quo, albeit with hovercars, maglev trains, and jackbooted authoritarians wielding laser-rifles peppering an antiseptic urban landscape. They'd feel more secure knowing they'll go their graves with no perceptible interruption of the same old dull predictable routine, albeit an old dull predictable routine that allows for just enough innovation to make things look the teensiest bit more like the bland imaginings of a Hollywood set-designer.

A book I picked up recently that I found highly entertaining and would recommend (which involves the taboo of consensual, serial mother-son incest through the agency of time-travel) is Robert Silverberg's 'Up the Line'.

Anyone else have a good, legitimate, risque book they care to mention? Especially any that are far more contentious now under the spoken and unspoken auspices of the emergent neo-puritan ethic than they were when first penned?

Don't be shy now...!

Terrific post.

It reminded me of when a teacher "caught" me reading Stranger In A Strange Land in 5th Grade. This censorious harridan took it from me, and received a furious verbal scouring from my mother when I told her about it. This was 1981, and Reagan had been elected, so "morning in America" meant that 10-year-olds shouldn't be reading about multiple partners engaging in unmarried sex freely and without consequence. Ah, the good old days.

I could understand if he reported a serious offence like assault, drug use, possession of unregistered weapon, etc.

But porno, c'mon man, all kids are defiant to at least some kind of rule or regulation, and I bet all my money if I were a bettin' man that most kids about 4th grade have seen porn at least once in their lives.

too lazy to type anything else at the moment.
Dude, I possess unregistered weapons. It doesn't make me a bad guy.

Terrific post.

It reminded me of when a teacher "caught" me reading Stranger In A Strange Land in 5th Grade. This censorious harridan took it from me, and received a furious verbal scouring from my mother when I told her about it. This was 1981, and Reagan had been elected, so "morning in America" meant that 10-year-olds shouldn't be reading about multiple partners engaging in unmarried sex freely and without consequence. Ah, the good old days.

Similar thing happened to me when I wrote "sex" in a jotter, as it was relevant to the story I wrote. I was brought up in front of the Headteacher and given the "verbal scouring", and a letter to take home for my mother. She laughed. Thankfully.

Okay, it's easy for me to understand what you mean: this is basically a "letter of the law" versus "spirit of the law" issue for the majority of posters here. Illegal but not wrong is something with which I am very familiar, having been busted for possession of microscopic amounts of weed and getting my share of speeding tickets (usually in the middle of desolate places like Utah or eastern Oregon where the cops are, by their own admission, just plain bored). Moreover, I agree with this concept 100%.

But a kid in Grade 4 (as those wacky Canucks call 4th Grade) is what, 9 years old? A nine year old hasn't yet fully attained the level of what developmental psychologists call "concrete operations". They're still figuring out cause and effect, and relative moralism is something a few years beyond them (on the average, at least). The source for this idea, incidentally, is my classes in developmental psych from my BA in Education.

So, when you're telling this thread that at age 9 a kid should be able to know the difference between illegal, period and illegal but not wrong, I have to say that very, very few kids that age will have that ability. All they are familiar with is "no" and "yes"; "right" and "wrong"; "legal" and "illegal" to a great extent. True, shades of grey are entering into their lives, but it's still a black-and-white world to them.

Ironically, this is also why the snitcher is going to suffer a bout of ostracization. Those on whom he snitched will see it as black and white as well. So overall, I'm willing to see this whole situation as a wash -- the snitcher will learn a valuable lesson (unless he's a Frank Burns type who just develops a love of snitching and gets promoted as many sycophants of authority do), and the snitchees will learn to better guard their secrets.

It's sad that a kid who doesn't yet know the subtleties of law vs. morality is going to suffer for his ignorance, but this is, in essence, childhood. As another poster put it, it's hardly ever fair.
it may be a "letter of the law" thing for the posters here but if there is one thing that a 9 year old boy in catholic schools knows its that looking at nasty pictures is WRONG. its SINFUL and liable to send you straight to hell

he didnt turn anyone in. he didnt rat out his friends. he probably prayed about it all year long.

he did what he had to do. i find it quite moral. i dont even think hes gonna catch shit from the other kids because they ALL knew it was a sin.

schools need to figure out that the only way to keep kids away from bad content is to have the screen visible to the teacher at all times. AND to have the teacher constantly supervising the children while they are on the net.

I wrote a response but I timed out and it got lost. Real shame 'cause I was talking about some of the stuff I did in grade 4 (brought in Monty Python records for the class to listen to, freaked out the teacher when Michael Palin started tossing around phrases like 'tits, winkle and vibraphone' during some of the sketches).

She worriedly asked us if our parents would approve of us listening to the record, and when we unanimously responded with an emphatic and resounding 'yes', we continued to listen.

If I was in that school, I'd probably want to kick his ass. I probably wouldn't, though.

schools need to figure out that the only way to keep kids away from bad content is to have the screen visible to the teacher at all times. AND to have the teacher constantly supervising the children while they are on the net.

Goddamn I'm glad I'm not a teacher... bad enough having to be around kids all day long, but to have to constantly monitor them? Feh, I couldn't be bothered. Provided no-one's getting mutilated, disfigured or otherwise, I'd let 'em govern their own behaviour.

Terrific post.

It reminded me of when a teacher "caught" me reading Stranger In A Strange Land in 5th Grade. This censorious harridan took it from me, and received a furious verbal scouring from my mother when I told her about it. This was 1981, and Reagan had been elected, so "morning in America" meant that 10-year-olds shouldn't be reading about multiple partners engaging in unmarried sex freely and without consequence. Ah, the good old days.
That's amusing - my parents bought me Stranger somewhere between 5th and 7th grade.

If you're going to kick some kids ass over this, those people who would do that need to get a life. p0rn doesn't belong on school computers. I don't pay taxes so my children can learn p0rn @ school. They can learn it from their own damn computer @ home. *LOL* :D

I was reading Ted Sturgeon, Harlan Ellison, Spider Robinson, Philip K. Dick and Bob Heinlein around that time. Thank goodness for mothers like mine. Of course there was my father's stash of various semi-erotic 'reports on sexuality' dating back from the early 60s... that mighta had something to do with my frequent and frantic onanism jag back when I was a precocious lil' nipper.

'Penthouse Forum' had nothing on the Kinsey report.

Teenage boys don't even need p0rn, the wind blows the right way and they've had a good day. (if ya know what I mean) *wink* ;)

Well in my school the filter is so strong it even gets on teachers cases.

You have to understand that my school is sort of like a totalitarian state

The filter feels that we cannot have access to sites containing,
Entertainment
Search Engines
Shopping
Games
Hate sites ( sometimes they confuse hate sites with hate words)
Groups
Advertising
Television
Historical Reference
General Pornography

Well anyway normally somone would try to just get around the filter, however we use accounts in our school. So everytime a site gets blocked it logs it in your account. The administrator can block your account when he feels that you are beeing blocked too much. Also the admins like to go around the computer labs one and a while and just stand behind somoneone while they're using the computer. Its pretty scary.

schools need to figure out that the only way to keep kids away from bad content is to have the screen visible to the teacher at all times. AND to have the teacher constantly supervising the children while they are on the net.

In my school the teacher can look at anyone's P.C screen via his computer and take over it. He can even diable the Internet if he sees porn (which he has; we tricked this one kid into going onto lemonparty.org). It's handy for demonstrations et cetera.

yea they can do the same thing in my school, its just that only the admins can look at your screen through their comp. They like to just go on somones random account and watch their whole internet session.

yea they can do the same thing in my school, its just that only the admins can look at your screen through their comp. They like to just go on somones random account and watch their whole internet session.

Yup, it's pretty scary. Especially this time where the admin took over a random computer to do some work.
I also have stupid filters at my school. Some are sensible, most aren't. Links. Why is that banned? Most websites have links. Unknown is the worst one by far.

"I think it's important everybody knows about this," said Radosh yesterday.

I think she's on crack.

Any way, my brother did this too. the neighbour boy came over and started looking at porn. my parents fliped cuz my brother was there and baned my brother from the computer for MONTHS. He was about grade 4, maybe younger. Basically the parentals blew the whole thing out of purportion and he's so ashamed of it no ones alowed to mention it. These kids will never be able to live this down. Go to hell. Rodash, go to fucking hell.

I think she's on crack.

Any way, my brother did this too. the neighbour boy came over and started looking at porn. my parents fliped cuz my brother was there and baned my brother from the computer for MONTHS. He was about grade 4, maybe younger. Basically the parentals blew the whole thing out of purportion and he's so ashamed of it no ones alowed to mention it. These kids will never be able to live this down. Go to hell. Rodash, go to fucking hell.

Seconded.

I'm glad. I guess it's all the silly disclaimers they have about minors. That and I was raised by a Christian Right church, so I musta heard it somewhere.

It was in Canada, anyway. I see Tuesdays point, but I still wouldn't have told. And yes when you're looking at porn when you're supposed to be doing WORK on the computer, then you're impeding your work stuff because little kids are incompetent morons who can't handle two things at once because they're minds are too fragile and geared to be idiots.

How so? For this to be true, you must subscribe to a certain philosophy which believes that sex is evil and immoral and that it is harmful and shameful.

I do not subscribe to that philosophy. There is no logical arguement behind that philosophy - sex, when done safely, is nothing more than a pleasurable bodily function. Therefore, for me, these kids learning about sex is no different than if they were to learn about cognition, or the immune system, or any other bodily function.

I disagree. In general, I see no advantage in making children sexually aware before they have begun to sexually mature. Even if there is a reason, this situation is still indefensible because the children are most certainly not "learning about sex." Pornography is not a how-to manual; it is meant for the arousal of the viewer. I'm not sure these 4th-graders are even capable of such a thing - it certainly wasn't on MY mind when I was that age! Moreover, a good deal of porn is misogynist and male-dominant, which is definitely not a healthy thing for a 10-year-old kid to pick up. Finally, I would assert that the sexual act is far more important than the immune system or somesuch. Sex creates new life - that's its purpose, whether or not the individual act is directed towards that goal. IMHO, a 4th-grader is a little too fresh-out-of-the-womb to be worrying about all of this.

I disagree. In general, I see no advantage in making children sexually aware before they have begun to sexually mature. Even if there is a reason, this situation is still indefensible because the children are most certainly not "learning about sex." Pornography is not a how-to manual; it is meant for the arousal of the viewer. I'm not sure these 4th-graders are even capable of such a thing - it certainly wasn't on MY mind when I was that age! Moreover, a good deal of porn is misogynist and male-dominant, which is definitely not a healthy thing for a 10-year-old kid to pick up. Finally, I would assert that the sexual act is far more important than the immune system or somesuch. Sex creates new life - that's its purpose, whether or not the individual act is directed towards that goal. IMHO, a 4th-grader is a little too fresh-out-of-the-womb to be worrying about all of this.

Just 'cause it wasn't going on between your ears and legs at that age doesn't mean that's so for everyone. I was saying earlier in this thread that I was a chronically-masturbating wreck by the time I was 8 or 9 years old.