Is it bad for a baby to see you masturbating?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (336 of them)
but it isn't everyday life now that people jerk off next to you when you were a baby is it??!!?!

No, but the baby isn't aware of things like a teenager is.

Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:54 (9 years ago) Permalink

yeah but they might FIND OUT when they grow up!

ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:55 (9 years ago) Permalink

why does the occurence of 'concrete physical harm' change the essential moral question?

Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:57 (9 years ago) Permalink

I'm not a moral relativist, for example I'm strongly against female circumcision. I don't necessarily think, however, that being aware of sexuality is harmful to children, and I definitely don't think sexuality is harmful to children who aren't aware of it.

Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:57 (9 years ago) Permalink

Tuomas, it's demonstrably the case that children who're exposed to adult sex acts process the information somehow - it doesn't just "go right past them": nothing "goes right past" children - and any clinician who's worked with children can tell you how the damage manifests itself: in acting out. Again, the threadstarter probably hasn't done any damage; and, again, it's probably not a good idea to jack off with babies in the room.

Jesus Christ, man, for sure society could stand to loosen up about sexuality a little, but exposing infants to adult sexuality is surely not the place to start.

xpost Tuomas you really, really ought to check out some of the available research about what infants are & aren't aware of

Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:57 (9 years ago) Permalink

it's not "sexuality" Tuomas - it's ADULT sexuality! children have their own world, which take enough work to navigate, without the thorny world of adult things getting in the way

heh heh "things"

Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:58 (9 years ago) Permalink

Okay, let me ask you all a question. How many of you were, as kids, aware of your parents having sex? And did you think that awareness has somehow hurt you? Because I was, and I certainly don't think it did any harm to me.

Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:00 (9 years ago) Permalink

I've never seen A2M referred to as A2M before, it's always been ATM. Which is funnier, cos then it means I get to giggle whenever anyone says "is there an ATM anywhere around here?" or "sorry, I'm a bit busy ATM".

JimD (JimD), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:00 (9 years ago) Permalink

I think most children are aware of adult sexuality as well.

Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:01 (9 years ago) Permalink

Sure they're aware, and I'm not suggesting a shield, but I am saying that there's a big difference between "mom and dad are doing something private and I have some ideas about it" and "dad has his cock out." "Aware" isn't the same as "exposed to."

Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:03 (9 years ago) Permalink

e.g.
the year is 2018, just another day in the life for young Mika Kolehmainen, a 12 year old nephew of Tuomas, until curiousity took him to looking up "masturbating" and "baby" on google.

He finds a thread called "Is it bad for a baby to see you masturbating?", curious by the moral implications of this question, young Mika clicks. The words "ADULT CONTENTS" appeared on the screen, and the computer asked Mika whether he was old enough to view the contents, "well, in ancient greece i would have been buggered by a dude by my age, so i guess so!", as he clicks, he finds in horror that his uncle Tuomas thought in 2005 that masturbating next to babies are okay and any concepts of wrongness are purely based on social conditioning. Then he remembered his mother told him that, when he was young, uncle Tuomas used to babysit for him. Cold sweat started the roll down Mika's face.

He went to confront his uncle Tuomas.

Mika "hi uncle Tuomas"
Tuomas "yo! Mika wassup"
Mika "erm, you know you used to babysit me right when i were a baby?"
Tuomas "oooh yeah. good times"
Mika "did you ever get lonely on your own with me?"
Tuomas "mm sometimes"
Mika "do you like, ever grow a boner whilst babysitting me?"
Tuomas "er.. what an odd question!"
Mika "just answer me!"
Tuomas "well, sometimes. i was above social taboos and so i had boners whenever i damn well pleases"
Mika "what do you do when you get the boners"
tuomas "i jerk off of course!"
mika "arrrrrrrrrrrgh"

ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:04 (9 years ago) Permalink

"dad has his cock out."

hahahahahaha!

JimD (JimD), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:04 (9 years ago) Permalink

And I still wonder if there's a difference in how people view masturbating in a room where there is a baby, and having sex in such a room. Because, even though masturbation is considered okay these days, there's still a special stigma attached to it that enhances the "yuck"-factor.

Sure they're aware, and I'm not suggesting a shield, but I am saying that there's a big difference between "mom and dad are doing something private and I have some ideas about it" and "dad has his cock out." "Aware" isn't the same as "exposed to."

Okay, what it boils down is, can an infant less than a year old thgink "dad has his cock out", and be somehow traumatized by it? If you think so, I guess there's no point in further debate.

Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:06 (9 years ago) Permalink

I think that the issue for the law - and it is against the law - is one of consent. By wanking in front of *anyone* you are involving them in a sexual act. If you do this without their consent, there's an issue.

Mädchen (Madchen), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:10 (9 years ago) Permalink

Back in ye olden days when large families lived in a single room, parents would pack their kids off to Sunday school.

Mädchen (Madchen), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:11 (9 years ago) Permalink

Of course I'm willing to admit that the cultural conditioning would stops most people (me included) doing it, but I just wanted to question the inherent immorality some people seem to think lies in such an act.

(x-post)

Mädchen, do you think that, for example, parent who have sex in their bedroom while their baby is in the crib in the same room should be put to trial?

Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:13 (9 years ago) Permalink

so the priests can get to jerk off in front of the kids.

xpost

ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:13 (9 years ago) Permalink

I have to go now, you can go on telling wank jokes... ;)

Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:14 (9 years ago) Permalink

tuomas, are *any* acts 'inherently' immoral? i would think not. i don't understand your line of reasoning here.

Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:14 (9 years ago) Permalink

this is so wrong.

Sailor Kitten (g-kit), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:15 (9 years ago) Permalink

POLL: where is tuomas off to?

ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:15 (9 years ago) Permalink

(In that sentence, "inherently immoral" = something considred automatically immoral without taking into consideration the possible consequences [or he lack thereof].)

Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:16 (9 years ago) Permalink

POLL: where is tuomas off to?

And to what?

(Tuomas: the infant doesn't have language, so it can't think "dad's playing with his boner." But he/she does know something's going on, and saves the information its its little brane. This theory can be taken to ridiculous ends of speculation - $c13n+0l0gy for example - but the core's true: infants are aware, and the things you see shape your opinion. It is not healthy to see your father masturbating at any age, unless you paid cash money for it and are allowed to film it, in which case it's cool.

Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:22 (9 years ago) Permalink

("opinion" isn't the word I'm looking for there obviously, dunno what happened)

Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:23 (9 years ago) Permalink

This is retarded.

Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:27 (9 years ago) Permalink

next up: "incest: is it ever justified?"

J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:28 (9 years ago) Permalink

"sweatshops: are they necessary?"

J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:28 (9 years ago) Permalink

"do we really need to brush our teeth?"

Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:30 (9 years ago) Permalink

We've already done that one, Enrique.

Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:32 (9 years ago) Permalink

fucking hell tuomas, why do i always get sucked into these arguments? you bastard.

Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:35 (9 years ago) Permalink

"no-brainers -- should we waste hours of our lives on them?"

Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:36 (9 years ago) Permalink

"is it just cultural conditioning that keeps us from shooting ppl who look at us the wrong way?"

J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:36 (9 years ago) Permalink

.... with semen?

ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:37 (9 years ago) Permalink

"do we really need to brush our teeth?"

Have an apple, it's Nature's Toothbrush.

Laurel (Laurel), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:40 (9 years ago) Permalink

Holy crow....that you're even having a question about this is crazy.

Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:06 (9 years ago) Permalink

We're not Finish, we don't understand. I bet in Finland they bonk as a way to learn kids where they came from.

Nathalie (stevie nixed), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:08 (9 years ago) Permalink

In Belgium they cut out the middleman in that equation and just bonk kids?

Ronan (Ronan), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:09 (9 years ago) Permalink

next up: "incest: is it ever justified?"

-- J.D. (aubade8...) (webmail), December 5th, 2005. (Justyn Dillingham) (later)

"sweatshops: are they necessary?"

-- J.D. (aubade8...) (webmail), December 5th, 2005. (Justyn Dillingham) (later)

If people really can't see the any difference between what I'm saying and justifying incest, then I guess there's no point at all in having this conservation.


Tuomas: the infant doesn't have language, so it can't think "dad's playing with his boner." But he/she does know something's going on, and saves the information its its little brane. This theory can be taken to ridiculous ends of speculation - $c13n+0l0gy for example - but the core's true: infants are aware, and the things you see shape your opinion. It is not healthy to see your father masturbating at any age, unless you paid cash money for it and are allowed to film it, in which case it's cool.

I don't think there's any clear consensus on development psychology on what the child is aware of (a small infant probably is aware of movement, but how on earth can it attach a concept like "masturbation" - or any concept at all - to it, which would be necessary for it to "remember" dad wanking later on), and especially on whether and how things in our infancy affect us, so you're only presenting one theory here.

Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:13 (9 years ago) Permalink

In Belgium they cut out the middleman in that equation and just bonk kids?

That was just in the 90s with Dutroux. He's locked up now.

Nathalie (stevie nixed), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:16 (9 years ago) Permalink

i am totally not down with this.

S!gmund Freud (Amateur(ist)), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:17 (9 years ago) Permalink

If people really can't see the any difference between what I'm saying and justifying incest, then I guess there's no point at all in having this conservation.

so in brief, it's all cultural conditioning, except for when it isn't.

Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:17 (9 years ago) Permalink

???

Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:18 (9 years ago) Permalink

Tuomas, it looks to me like there hasn't been any point in quite some time, and that's speaking as someone who more or less AGREES WITH YOU. But then I can't take a single Ken C post seriously; from where I'm sitting it looks like several people on here have been taking the piss since before I got into the office at 9am EST.

Laurel (Laurel), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:19 (9 years ago) Permalink

Lolz and seriousness are not mutually exclusive. The question is still begged, what earthly reason would there be for you not to take the necessary steps to stop the baby watching you wank?

Amity Wong (noodle vague), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:30 (9 years ago) Permalink

At least wait until the baby's napping -- IN ANOTHER ROOM, for cryin' out loud.

Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:33 (9 years ago) Permalink

"B-b-b-but I have to wank right now or I'll DIE!!"

cf. Exploding Testicle Syndrome

Amity Wong (noodle vague), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:39 (9 years ago) Permalink

Lolz and seriousness are not mutually exclusive. The question is still begged, what earthly reason would there be for you not to take the necessary steps to stop the baby watching you wank?

Because wanker needs the baby there to get hottttt.

Sick Mouthy (Nick Southall), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:42 (9 years ago) Permalink

taking the piss and being correct isn't mutually exclusive either!

although i reckon one can be cultually conditioned to think otherwise.

ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:42 (9 years ago) Permalink

you don't need to be able to attach a concept to something to be affected by it, Tuomas - if you did, there would never be any learning ever. while there are various theories of infant learning (I don't think we're in disagreement as to whether infants learn), all of them involve stimulus and response. The stimulus in question here (seeing an adult masturbate) isn't really something whose effect we'd want to see tested, not even once if we could help it, is it?

Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:48 (9 years ago) Permalink

"it would have no idea of what masturbation is, so all it would see is someone moving his/her hand."

with their genitals growing bigger and then stuff squirting out of it.

You know some very special women, Ken.

Dan (SHE'S GONNA BLOW!!!) Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:52 (9 years ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.