GirlChat #741033

Start A New Topic!  Submit SRF  Thread Index  Date Index  

A Collection of Responses to Questions (Pt.3) ☺۞ကြ

Posted by Children First! on Sunday, May 01 2022 at 11:02:48AM
In reply to A Collection of Responses to Questions (Pt.2) ☺۞ကြ posted by Children First! on Sunday, May 01 2022 at 11:00:20AM

Hello friends (^_^)

Here is a collection of responses to my questions that I have received so far.

Questions *33-50* followed by Responses to the Questions:


33. During recess in elementary school, could the playground equipment be seen as actually insufficient, too simple, and/or limiting to a child who is bound to become more complex than they are, yet could be held back from becoming so in the best of ways from what options they are by constraint encouraged to participate in during 'free time' -that one must remember adds up to hundreds of hours worth of being alive over years or recess, though possibly not being spent wisely- therefore by default a waste of time to some degree? Contemporary and modern style playgrounds are great for exercising a child's growing body and encouraging pretend-play but not too much else, which is unconsciously deceptive yet at the same time attractive, as to the child it may be much more fun than learning a subject during the rest of the day spent in class. Could this be agreed upon? What all should be available to a child during 'recess'/free time/break time? How about the availability to use a library within the building, a gym/calisthenics equipment, art and/or music departments for example? Or maybe even supervised activities never before seen involving intimacy or sexuality, possibly in the form of games?

Ans: Kids don't needs tons of equipment to have fun. They make up their own games with available resources. Recess is intended to be physical. The library and art etc are scheduled separately.

I think that nudity and even a little sex play could be included in recess at the children's discretion. e.g. If they want to show each other their junk, fine.
It's OK to touch as long as you wash your hands first.

--I think something like that happens in Japan, I could be wrong, don't quote me on that. What you described would be ideal, but it would also be very expensive for state. It would not work in my country, almost certainly.

---Yep, sounds good to me.

---- Play should not be limited in any way, as long as it is not deemed harmful. It should be facilitated by providing as many objects as possible which children could use in their creative and pretend play. Things like chalk for drawing on the ground, jumping ropes, hula hoops, bouncing balls, and so on. They should never be segregated by gender or in any other way. Adults should have no say at all in children's games. Participants in the game should be the only ones inventing, negotiating, coordinating and supervising the rules. If they ever wish to engage in consensual sexual play with some of their peers, they should be allowed to explore this kind of play, too.

=I don't know.

+ I think the problem is that children are too regimented and structured in their leisure activities, and that stifles their creativity. They have plenty of time for that nonsense as adults. I think there’s too little “pretend play”, not too much.


34. Should children learn how everything is 'connected' in reality during school on a deeper level? Subjects such as what 'god', love, the meaning of life, what life actually is, what men and women want, dreams, culture, subculture, politics of all types, the health of humanity and animal kingdoms, environmental sustainability and planetary ecosystems, agriculture, logistics, philosophy, psychology, linguistics, existentialism, free will, who they are as individual people in relation to other individuals of all kinds and what place they could or should have in the future, etc., all in a format that would be easy to understand and truly help them see who they are as earthlings on the planet?

Ans: Figuring out that everything is connected and how it's connected is the entire public school goal. So age-appropriate lessons are given from kindergarten on.
The one I remember is how Butterflies and Bees help the plants.

--That can also be taught in philosophy.

--- " 'god', love, the meaning of life, what life actually is" We do not know these things so we cannot teach them. But as I said in #25, yes, we should teach philosophy in schools.

----Many of the subjects you listed on this question are very subjective, and many adults don't even fully understand them and/or are biased in their judgements (e.g. people believing the Christian god is the one true deity while all the other religions are just fairy tales). We shouldn't shove our own personal beliefs onto children's heads. Let them naturally discover these topics by themselves and form their own opinions on them. If they ever ask you about them, tell them "I think X, but there are also people who think Y and Z. What do you think?".

=It wouldn't hurt

+Yes, I think these are good disciplines to give children broad exposure rather than just obsessing on job preparedness for modern society. For instance, STEM, which is overwhelmingly emphasized in the mainstream media and business narrative, may interest some kids but the kids who are into something different get ignored and fall between the cracks.


35. Would you like to see and/or be a part of a more sexual society and/or community?

Ans: We are already hyper-sexualized. We don't need MORE sex, we need BETTER sex. As in a more wholesome, kind, and shame free view of sex. When you get to watch your older sister and her boyfriend having loving and playful sex you don't need to or want to look at porn.

--That would be nice, but the boundaries must be respected...


----Yes, I'd like to be a part of a more sexually liberal and less prudish society, one that would recognise sexuality as a major part of human nature, and would encourage rather than discourage natural sexual exploration in children.

= I would but not at the cost of other aspects of society. I think a more sexually open society would bring much benefit but I think a society should also encourage other positive aspects of life as much. Charity, empathy, valuing the contributions to society and selfless acts above vanity and fame.

+I think I’d rather be a part of it than just see it (well, probably, it just depends on who is involved.


36. What do you think we as humans can do to prevent the current belief/problem that civilization will collapse and the possible extinction of humanity (the Holocene/ sixth mass extinction)? What are your thoughts on necessary and immediate needs for radical change? Or do you feel there is almost nothing worth doing that we as humans can realistically do, as facing our demise seems inevitable?

Ans: We are courting extinction right now. We are within "a stone's throw" of falling off a climate cliff. Previous equivalent climate events have killed everything larger than a bacteria. Somewhat lesser events have only killed every land animal larger than a mouse.

Our technology will save a few of us but it will be like living on Mars. The outdoor environment will be lethal in minutes. And the few who survive in artificial life support systems will spend the next 1,000 years or so "terra-forming" what used to be Earth.

What we can do right now is get off fossil carbon ASAP and perfect carbon capture technology so that we can force greenhouse gas levels down by installing carbon capture facilities every couple of miles all over the face of the Earth.

We need the carbon capture because there is a 20 year lag in the impact of CO2. In other words, without carbon capture it's going to get a lot worse even if we stopped burning fossil carbon today.

--The deactivation of all nuclear weapons and the abandonment of all mass destruction weapons, plus a serious care for environment. Unfortunately, I can only see the second one happening.

---Things will be bad, but we're not facing our own extinction just yet. We need radical change to avoid that, but it is still possible. In the long term (if we survive the next few hundred years of climate catastrophe) we will need to spread across the galaxy in order to ensure the survival of life from earth. in around the year 1,300,000 HE Gliese 710 will be well within our Oort cloud, we don't know what effect this will have but hypothetically it could send a number of asteroids towards the inner solar system. On the outside chance it wipes out life on earth ... we are already nearly 1% of the way through the Human Era, it's about time we had something to show for it. A society capable of actually surviving the remaining 99% would be a good start. But on the short term, yes, we're going to need to move a lot of resources into renewables, energy storage, kill off most of the livestock so we have more food and clean water for ourselves, more inland housing to handle the eventual mass migration of people away from the coasts ... all of the things.

----I think any suitable answer to the question of how to avoid a mass extinction will inevitably have to —first— be very speculative, and —second— touch upon political, economical and ecological matters, and I do not wish to get into any of these topics, so I will have to abstain from answering this one in any considerable depth.

= I don't believe extinction or collapse is inevitable. It hasn't happened yet so it's unlikely to happen in the future. We evolve as people even if we don't see it. Evolution isn't just biological, it's in every part of our life from spirituality to ethics. If we went back a thousand years we would be confronted with a pretty alien world and if we travelled forward 1000 years we'd be in an equally alien world. We would see those 1000 years ago as savage in comparison, in 1000 years they would see us as savage and we may even see them as savage. I don't think we will become extinct or collapse as a society but I do think we will evolve.

+ I think there are major problems (some made by humans, some made by nature), but I don’t take such a pessimistic view of the future.


37. What aspects of civilization could or should we as a species make sacrifices to keep?

Ans: What we have that can't be replaced is art, books, music, knowledge, history, etc.
Beyond that, saving people from suffering and helping people cope with a damaged world while still experiencing joy, love, fun, and pleasure. All that is worth sacrificing for.

--Never thought about that. Good question.

---The nature of society is making sacrifices in order to survive together. But should make as few as possible. We're going to need laws against littering, laws against (non-consensual) murder, violence, rape, etc. And we're going to need some form of infrastructure to facilitate the exercising of that law.

----Civilisation is mostly fine as it is, and has improved immensely with the passage of time (e.g. with the abolition of slavery, legalisation of same-sex marriage, abortion rights and so on). It feels like humanity has been generally following the right path of getting more and more liberal and open-minded. But we are far from perfect yet. There's still too much bigotry and intolerance in the world, too much separatism and discrimination, too much irrational hate and violence. I would do away with the two major causes of all this prejudice and animosity: religion and patriotism.

=Art, music, story telling. Anything that lifts the spirit.

+Having basic human connections and respect for ourselves and others around us (do unto others as we would have them do onto us), and responsibility for what our actions do to others. Also, laws certainly have their place but we don’t need to litigate every single minor issue that we have a difference of opinion on. Are we proposing to do away with certain aspects of civilization (???)


38. In the human mind, once an active brain creates the notion of 'possibilities' within Consciousness and become a part of someone's constant awareness, do you think we as humans - who specifically have different abilities than our 'animal' neighbors/relatives- should accept that 'controlling consciousness' becomes necessary to prevent world-wide disaster due to what can be called 'reckless homogeneity' (uncritical, ignorant, destructive, contagious and virally-spread behavior ubiquitously present within human occupancy)?

Ans: Controlling consciousness is what religions do. They weave a story that encourages some behaviors and makes others taboo. But the old stories all assumed that the world was infinite, was provided just for us, and we could do anything we want with it. We just need to adjust the stories to provide a more realistic view of the world and our role in it. With the idea that we are gardeners not hunters, lovers not rapists.

--I prefer the way of education to solve this kind of thing, rather than a deliberate attempt at controlling freedom.

---I don't believe in controlling other people's thoughts through coercion or force, no.

----This question was hard to digest. I think what you are talking about here is the main differentiating factor between non-human animals and humans, which is what makes us able to control ourselves and resist our basic impulse of (assuming we are an heterosexual male) killing every male and fucking every female we ever come across. Is this what you are alluding to by "controlling consciousness"? If so, then yes, of course this is necessary for any civilised society to properly survive and prosper.

= I'm not sure that we are more evolved than or more developed than other animals to the extent that we believe we are. Many species can count, problem solve, form relationships. Animals have fight or flight reactions. The trouble is we measure development using ourselves as the measuring stick so we would always be the highest developed. Any other animal doing the same would find themselves ahead also. I think human arogance and our limitations to see beyond our own horizon is what gives us the comfort of feeling superior and entitled to do with the world what we want.
I think we're a pretty basic species, we like to control our environment to feel safe. That instinct isn't easy to shake off. All the wars and hurt in the world are directly resulting from our evolutionary limitations. Maybe in a million years we'll become something greater but for now we're hairless apes barely able to recognise our own limitations and flaws.

+ I honestly don’t know how to answer this. I think this almost needs its own thread (perhaps in “the Lounge”), and maybe you could put it in terms someone who is not heavily entrenched in this kind of topic would relate to. Do you simply mean people the fallacy of thinking cultural norms are the “correct” way to live, even though those norms may be atrociously wrong and oppressive to some, or even most, people?


39. My belief is that the meaning of life is to 'Keep Moving' in every way, and any way that a sentient creature/being desires to do. Would the idea of creating 'community paths' for human pedestrians that span across the continents of Earth give new meaning to humanity itself, where a new goal to achieve as a human is to visit as much of the world as possible specifically on foot? The roads created for environmentally polluting, fragile-ecosystem destroying, energy-resource-devouring automobiles is currently an obvious culprit that propels global warming and unsustainable environmental paradigms; a sign that technological 'progress' has gone too far. So, will such global community paths be the best new safe alternative that should technically have been the only major way to travel since the beginning of man using two legs to get from 'point A' to 'point B'? (Note: bicycles would be acceptable -an invention of worthwhile sacrifice to keep around- with a few other exceptional forms of technologically advanced transportational accessories which should only be used for very needy situations to help conserve energy of all kinds.)

Ans:"Life is change. That's how it differs from the rocks. New worlds to gain. My life is to survive and be alive." - John Windham by way of the Jefferson Airplane

"The sole purpose of life is to accumulate knowledge and pass it on" - From "Lucy"

--It would be nice, but I would have to think harder about it to answer if it would be the best possible course of action.

---No, but it would be kinda cool I guess?

----Everyone has their own idea of what gives their lives meaning. For me, it's mostly little girls, followed by doing things l find enjoyable such as travelling. Not everyone desires to travel around the world, though. But I agree with you that humanity has become too dependent on automobiles, to a point where it is no longer beneficial but detrimental. Thankfully, many nations around the world took notice of this, and have recently begun rethinking and rebuilding their cities by putting sustainable means of transport first (walking, cycling, trams, trains), and conceding them much more importance and priority than cars.

=I agree that as a species we should keep moving. There is biological evolution but also cultural. If moment we stop moving is the moment we will fail as a species. But I don't think technology is to blame for the problems in the world, technology has always been a convenient scapegoat. Ludites smashed printing presses to stop the written world from destroying society. Radio, TV, music, cars, even pockets in womens pants were considered a threat to society. It isn't pockets or any other technology, it's people. Technology gave us medicine, healthcare, the ability to reach out and seek support from other maps, the means to travel to see the world which makes it less threatening, it gives us warm homes, clean water and so much more. If anything, I believe technology generally gives more than it takes which is why we generally live long safe lives today. We are less likely to die in wars today than at any time in history. The world is a safer, kinder, better place, largely a result of technology. Sure, some people abuse it but that'a a problem with us as a species, not the tools we hold.

+It would be wonderful to have the technology to travel more easily and quickly without the destructive side effects. I only get excited about that when it is accessible for those who aren’t just the elite oligarchs who are going on a vanity ride.


40. Three easy-to-remember rules/guidelines to follow for adults desiring to have romantic relationships with children/smaller humans (or vice-versa):
1. Do No Harm.
2. Avoid penetration / Un consensual penetration (with smaller humans) if it will be too painful coming from a larger human.
3. No promoting/advertising/exploitation of child-and-adult type relationships, or of the Natural development of a child's budding sexuality in any way.
-Such relationships will require more detailed rules to follow than just these three major ones, though if one were to think more deeply about each rule (adhering to more than what is said verbatim) and follow them, there really shouldn't be any problems. Do these guidelines seem acceptable?

Ans: The key is kindness and affection. Let the children be in charge. If the child wants romance and sex play then it's fine (morally and ethically). If the child wants and likes penetration then it's fine.

Older persons in such relationships need to sacrifice their own pleasure when necessary in order to love and support the child.

--I think that two should be enough: the child must want it, but you should never hurt a kid with any action, even if the child said "yes" to it. Harm can happen in three levels, though: physical, mental and social. So, "harm" is absolutely not just bodily harm. Making the kid skip classes to have a good time is also harm.

---No, unnecessarily restrictive. Rule 1 needs the word "non-consensual" thrown in. Rule 2 should just be "practice first", and I don't understand the purpose of Rule 3.

----Rule 1 is perfect. Rule 2 is needlessly wordy and restrictive. Rule 3 is needlessly wordy and confusing. That said though, this is already a world of improvement over society's current views, so I would instantly jump all over these rules as a replacement for current legislation if the opportunity was offered. But no, I don't find them good enough because to me it's even simpler than this. There should only ever be two basic rules: do no harm and do it all consensually. Just from this you can derive all of the following corollaries: "if it feels good, it's OK", "if it hurts, it's not OK", "if she doesn't feel like it and I insist, it's not OK".

=A reasonable starting point.

+ 1 is good. 2 is good if that’s the case if it could harm a child instead of bringing them short-term and long-term happiness and pleasure. The rationale for 3 is confusing.


41. I have thought long and hard about these subjects, and over time have conjured a theory that some forms of adult oriented 'paedophilia' could actually be prevented by a child experiencing love with other children (normal paedophilia at a younger age) that are specifically child/child (child with another child) oriented, by satisfying a real child's sexual urges early in life, as much as can be experienced, and therefore not grow old wondering the whole time what it would have been like to experience being another child if they had the chance early on instead. The negative situations an adult paedophile could force upon a child, potentially could be prevented -such as molestation, rape, violence and abuse- simply by allowing and teaching children how to love other children/young humans, precisely when *they are* children. Evidence based data has shown that what a child experiences early in life will alter the rest of their future dramatically, therefore allowing certain sexual activities to be experienced while young under the right conditions should help to improve overall human health if continued as a cycle, starting with the availability of opportunity in Youth Intimacy School Education (Y.I.S.E.). Does this idea make enough sense to be allowed in real life? (Full description of Y.I.S.E. will be thoroughly explained in essay or book, of which is currently a work-in-progress).

Ans: I agree 100%. Children should experience sexual play, sexual relationships and sexual pleasure with their peers as early and as often as they wish. Parents should guide that play to show the children how to kind and caring for their partners.

Ideally, After the child is sexually experienced if they choose to engage in sexual activities with an adult, then it could be OK. The current problem is that laws and social sanctions make adult-child sex very risky and potentially damaging to the child. We adults must prevent that from happening by forbidding adult-child sexual contact.

Ex. So, hypothetically, after a child has learned how to perform fellatio on boys her own age and decides that she likes it and wants to fellate her Uncle (with her parents knowledge and permission), that could possibly be OK morally and ethically but is not OK in the real world because we have to protect the children from the legal and social backlash.

Ex 2. If a small child wants to be penetrated, the parents should step in and offer her a small dildo to practice with to learn whether her body is ready to be penetrated by a penis.

--I disagree. As a child, I had some sexual encounters, albeit superficial, with an adult and with other kids. And I'm still a pedophile.

---I have long thought that it could be a good idea to have programs like that available for some students. But certainly not every child --probably not even most children-- would be into that. Most people are teleio's after all, and despite popular belief, that includes kids. Although proximity is always the most important factor in attraction.

----I take issue with some of the wording on this question, namely when you talk about "preventing" paedophilia in adulthood and about "normal" paedophilia in childhood. I am going to assume you didn't mean anything aggravating with this and it was just a bad choice of words on your part. While I understand where you are coming from, I do not agree with your reasoning that a fulfilling sexual life in childhood could significantly affect your chances of developing paedophilia later on. There are some people on this forum who have had their fair share of sexual experiences when they were kids, and they became child-lovers nonetheless. What I can find easy to believe is the fact that having rewarding intimate relationships in childhood could prevent you from becoming a sexual abuser/rapist/molester. And I'm all for giving children the opportunity to engage in these kinds of relationships, as long as it is in their interest and desire to do so.

= I'm not sure about this. I can only speak from my own experience. My first sexual experience was with another child and we were fumbling around and not getting much from it. I had a more pleasurable experience with an adult who was caring and knew how to guide me. But that won't always be the case. There were popular girls in school with older boyfriends. I think in general, children with children is like kids teaching kids maths. It's less intrusive in a way but they will spend more time scratching their heads, feeling frustrated and wishing some adult would just give them a little guidance at least. But it may be a safer way to start, I don't know.

+ That sounds fine to me as long as the child wants that experience. I think that past childhood advice was that “playing “doctor” is a normal part of sexual development as long as someone isn’t forced to do something against their will. This was before the era when any and all childhood sexual expression became “evil” to a powerful group of decision makers in society.


42. Do you think the separation between male and female public restrooms creates a certain kind of 'positive feedback loop' or 'reinforcement' of each gender role within such a gender-specific space, unconsciously causing people to psychologically and physically acquire, adopt, and be influenced by specific traits that are expected which are considered 'acceptable' by societies' standards within of each of the two main 'genders', over long periods of use?

Ans: Separation makes genitals "forbidden" and creates an artificial attraction. Children in FKK environments are perfectly comfortable being nude in coed environments and it removes sexual tension where there doesn't need to be any.

--Yes, I think so, it does create a feedback loop.

---Gender segregated public bathrooms are by no means the linchpin in the idea of a gender duality, but they are definitely a part of it, yes. Let's get rid of them.

---- I think non-binary, genderless lavatories are the way of the future. It is already like this in many European restaurants and public places. It's really not that big of a deal, though: if you identify yourself as a male, you go to the gents WC; if you identify as a female, you go the ladies WC; otherwise you go to either of them. The world has way more serious problems than gendered washrooms.

=Yes I'm sure it does. Actually, I've been in some offices with unisex restrooms and they seem to function perfectly fine. The main issue seems to be that people feel more self conscious having bio breaks where people of the opposite sex may hear them because even if we don't fancy people in the office, we want to feel attractive from the opposite sex and having a poo where we might be heard shatters that illusion.

+ I think most people fit clearly into one of two genders. There are some who would identify as transgender who don’t really fit one of those molds. Regardless, I think everyone should be respected and valued for their unique attributes. I think we get too hung up on classifying people. It isn’t and shouldn’t be a “one size fits all approach.” While those who clearly identify as male or female make up a much greater proportion of humanity, I think we need to have more dialogue with transgender people and figure out how everyone can be comfortable and feel valued and respected. And people need to let other people be who they are to be happy and stop harassing people just because they’re different.


43. The idea of giving children more autonomy is becoming an increasingly important subject of debate with evidence-based data to back this claim. Do you think it's a better idea to give children a little more autonomy with their time while they are young, therefore carefully selected school class subjects will not need to be taught until later in their life which will be delayed/not occur until the approximate ages between 7-12 [many details about which subjects -and when they could be taught later- is information to be expanded upon in a larger format of writing], where essentially what will be focused on -especially before the age of 7- are teachings of ethics and intimacy while literally being clothed or nude, with brief introductory studies towards reading, writing, art, calisthenics, music, meditation, architecture, food, health, environmental sustainability, etc. [details of subjects and specific times to be expanded upon in book form]. Certain subjects that will be worth teaching to a child at a young age, but not too early in life during school, will be taught once the child has reached an age where they are more mentally prepared and mature, to make the entirety of the learning experience more enjoyable during those years, with emphasis on the freedom to discover what it means to become an individual, what needs to be experienced at a young age to feel satisfied, and which lifestyle direction they need to take afterwards. Would this more autonomous educational system be worthy of replacing our contemporary and modern educational systems?

Ans: Absolutely. Children should be exposed to nudity from birth. Sex and genitals should taught as normal body parts and activities. Children should be encouraged to engage in sexual play and discovery under their parents supervision. Sex games should be incorporated into parties and play dates, And once they understand the rules about kindness and consent, children should be given unsupervised free time to be naked and play sex games with their friends.

--It would be better than what the United States has. I have never heard any good things about the US public education system... I don't live there, but yeah.

----Children should be given more autonomy in many areas of life, education being one of them. Whether your proposed reform to the current educational system would be worthy or not is an empirical question that will need to be decided based on trials, analysis and observation. What I do know is that the current system has many faults, and that children could always use more autonomy, so I would absolutely be in favour of bringing the educational system back to the drawing board for a much overdue redesign, ideally with one or several children also present in the room offering their own helpful input on a matter which will directly impact them.

=To an extent but it's important to be guided at school also. This isn't just for kids, when at university we want our lecturers to guide us, they have knowledge we don't. So guidance but it is also important to teach free thinking. I know a lecturer who said he has found students from China are very different to students coming from Europe or America. Chinese students are very detailed focused and logical while western students tend to be better at thinking outside the box. When the university puts together teams they try to mix both because that leads to the best overall team. Thinking outside the box, autonomy, free thinking are very important characteristics to develop early.

+As mentioned in a previous response, I think children sometimes have way too much structure which stifles their creativity. I also think there are basic items that need to be taught. It depends, but I am open to different ideas on this.


44. As a parent/guardian/caring adult, what do you fear most about what may happen to any child in the future (especially if they are your own)?

Ans: Climate change and wealth inequality will reduce their quality of life.

--Death or permanent injury.

----A child should never have to suffer, be unhappy, be alone and unloved, be denied their sexuality, be deprived of their freedom and independence, be witness of terrorist and violent acts, be killed, raped or trafficked. We as a society are fully responsible for children's happiness and accountable for their suffering.

=Being unhappy. Unhappy with their career, their partner, their family or anything else in life. I worry for my kids all the time, above all else I want them to be happy and safe.

+As a caring adult, I fear a child feeling unloved, as that is a sad state to be in, and the catastrophic fallout that occurs in a person’s life when they do feel that way. That is as essential of a human need as basic needs such as food.


45. Do you make, or have you made, an effort to pass down wisdom to children so that they have answers to difficult questions that normally could take 'too long' (possibly years) to figure out on their own? Do you, or have you, supplied the 'cheat-sheet' to life?

Ans: Yes

-- I have done so. But I never said anything you would find in this board. I prefer to talk to them about things other than sex.

----Question such as…? I have given my viewpoint to children on many matters, but I have never selfishly attempted to influence them or force any particular belief on them. They are sentient beings with minds of their own, and as such should be entitled to form their own personal beliefs.

=I've always tried to explain the why's behind why they're being asked to do something. Rather than say do this, I start by explaining the problem and why they should do this as a solution. Kids are smart. They don't need to know the technical detail behind everything but they can follow logic and reasoning. The upshot is it then helps them to make better decisions in general. My kids exercise and eat healthy, more so than me which they point out to me all the time. Once they understand something they will apply it and not need so much micro management in future.

+If I’m given the opportunity, but I’d be competing with a lot of different influences, including the child’s parents who can get very tribal and testy about anyone telling their child anything.


46. Should incest be acceptable to any degree? I personally think it needs to be avoided at all costs, but who are we to make (all) the rules for everyone, and who they can or can't 'love', even if that person is a (close) family member?

Ans: Incest is just sex. If the rules of kindness, consent, and giving the child agency (the older partner always follows the child's lead) then incest is harmless.

About 1% of people have had some incestuous sexually contact in their lives. Most of those people remember it as a good thing as long as no force, threats, or bullying was involved.

MUST use a condom... incest makes for unhealthy babies.

--Remember when I said I had sexual contacts with an adult...? Well, he was family. And I still liked it...

---I think a better society would allow people to free themselves from their family unit much more easily if they wanted to. In such a world I see no reason why not to allow incsestual relationships, so long as everyone is consenting of course.

----Remember the two basic rules I introduced a few questions above? About not doing harm and doing it all consensually? As long as those two rules are abided by, I believe anything should be permitted, even incest. #loveislove

=I don't think it should be encouraged. I do think it should be discouraged. I don't think it should be criminal. All the problems facing the world today, I don't think the rare situation of two siblings experimenting or falling in love should be a high priority. I'm less worried about a Lanister siblings situation than I am about just about everything else.

+In some societies, it’s been long acceptable to be intimate with a cousin, there are few genetic complications, and possibly you’re more likely to have more things in common, possibly making you more compatible. But parent-child is a different relationship dynamic and I don’t think that’s a good idea.


47. Do you have a good relationship with children and are they willing to obey/follow what you ask of them as an adult figure, for reasons that are caused by previously establishing healthy, mutually caring relationships with deep understanding for each other - rather than unhealthy relationships that would be created through consistent bribery to do something most of the time, where supplying treats/rewards/gifts to a child could be presented if they comply with your demands and basically only act nice when you as a parent are around for example?

Ans: Depends on what they ask. I don't do dangerous or illegal things.

--While I have a good relationship with some kids, none of them is willing to do things I tell them to. I know, because I told one to stop watching porn and wait until he was 18. He never cared. I'm this boring.


=It's a mix for me. My wife is more authoratarian. My kids tend to rebel against her more which really annoys her. She gets so mad that they do things to annoy her and she has said so many times that she doesn't understand why they don't do that to me. She can tell them to "clean the kitchen counter after making brownies" and it doesn't get cleaned then I walk in and say "don't forget to clean the counter so you can relax without thinking about it after" and it'll get cleared. My wife demands, I ask. I've explained to my wife that I try to treat my kids sort of like work colleagues. I wouldn't shout at or make aggressive demands of my colleagues. I respect them, I tell them what I need doing and will tell them as much as I can as to why if its impacting them. Having received respect they generally give it and they want to do what I ask. Treat others how you want to be treated. We've had marriage councilling just as a tune up and the councillor has said much the same. My wife would bring up her frustration with the kids, "why won't they just do what I tell them?" and the advise is to try reasoning and asking.
But I have resorted to bribery before. When I know something will be a hard sell, I've sweetened the deal with a bribe. I know it's not the best approach but in reality I've found that there have been situations where reasoning would work but time is short. Also, I'm training them in business and they've become good negotiators, there have been times I've wished I could get them on our sales team

+I would. However, we are competing with the child’s parents and peers. Even if you have some close relationship with the child’s parents and interact with the parent and the child regularly, parents often get really testy and overly possessive when it comes to even having a simple conversation, especially nowadays. If someone has no close association with a person with kids, they probably won’t even get the opportunity at all.


48. From here on out, will you do your best to help teach all children to become better humans to help stabilize the mental and physical health of humanity which will in turn help promote optimal structures and forms of environmental sustainability (which in a cycle returns to help humans be continuously stable)?

Ans: Doin my best

-- Inside the boundaries of common sense.

----Yes, I do try my best to teach and encourage children to become the best person they can be. I'm not so sure that that is what would be needed to "stabilize the mental and physical health of humanity" as a whole, but if it is then great.

= I'm very much a greenie as are my kids. From renewable energy to electric vehicles, carbon offsetting, vegetarian options and more. Actually I've found when it comes to sustainability it's usually the kids teaching the adults.

+ If given the opportunity, yes.


49. The highly sought after solution that describes what is most necessary to return to a balanced and stable mode of humanity simply by being directly involved with children as the main priority in our lives in a few important incremental steps of which are all to be taken very seriously and worked on until what seems radical becomes normal as this is what is required of the human race to save itself is as follows:
Step 1. Put All Children First: Always think of all the children first before taking any action in the world (no matter what the situation/regardless of the following steps that deal with intimacy, importance of nudity, and complete acceptance of childhood sexuality. Note: This includes the children of Animals -to help them stay healthy, alive, and prevent extinction all the same.)
Step 2. Teachings of Intimacy: A) children learning how to be intimate with other children. B) adults learning how to be intimate with children (and vice-versa!) C) adults learning how to be intimate with other adults if they did not learn initially when they were a child.
Step 3. Nudity: covering the human body with clothing as little as possible to encourage a very real and natural 'back-to-basics' way of living through nudism.
Step 4. Children Playing and/or Playing with Children and Adults: experiencing the joy of life together, intimately when necessary, even when nude.
Step 5. Consensual Sexual Human Relationships: A) adults with adults B) children with children C) children with adults (avoiding penetration by the adult/larger human if necessary). Responsibly intimate, nude, and sexual as an optimal growing experience to keep humanity in equilibrium with all things.
-Do these steps sound respectable enough to be put into action?

Ans: Yes and I have done all those things (at least the legal ones) to the best of my ability

--They seem to take into consideration mostly sexual and physical aspects of the child, but kids are more than that...

--- No, your views are too restrictive. Not everyone wants to live the way you want them to. But we should certainly create an environment where you and others like you (of which I'm sure there are many) can live your lives as you wish.

----Hard to tell how well these would work in practice. In theory they sound sensible, at least.

+In general, they sound reasonable, but it’s always the details that can be the crux of whether they are reasonable.


50. Thank you for your time. At this point are there any questions that I have now asked that you think you could now ask to children/your children to retrieve more direct and personal feedback from these questions? Do you have any questions or comments for me in return? (Please see writing below as well.)

Ans: You're welcome. Question: What is your intention? Are you planning a book?

Suggestion: One thing that is currently missing is a solid scientific understanding of childhood sexuality. We need to encourage Kinsey and Guttmacher to do longitudinal studies on childhood sexuality. Like the earlier Kinsey reports of males and females, it should be primarily from interviews supplemented with some laboratory studies.

If we had that, we would have a better idea what the correct social controls should be.

-- I'm fine, thanks.~

---See comments on numbers: 11,12,15, 27, 34. And in #49 you say "to return to a balanced and stable mode of humanity", clearly we never had a stable mode of humanity, if we did, we would still be there. That is the meaning of "stability" (unless you're suggesting that some outside force broke the balance, and I don't think anything did)

---- Thank you for making this incredibly comprehensive questionnaire touching upon numerous fascinating topics. Still, there were a couple interesting questions that I hoped you would ask but didn't. There were also some question that I felt shouldn't have been here, as they didn't seem to directly relate to the general subject which is that of children and intimacy. Regarding the questions that you didn't ask, I won't reveal them here because I am planning to ask them myself on another thread soon.


Follow ups:

Post a response :

Nickname Password
E-mail (optional)

Link URL (optional)
Link Title (optional)

Add your sigpic?