Jul. 21st, 2009

conuly: (Default)
One article on sunspots.

Read more... )

And one on cell phones in Japan as compared to the US

Read more... )

It is July 21st out there, 68 degrees and rainy. God, I loathe California's heat and blaring blazing sun, but I'm looking forward to it just to stop being so cold.
conuly: Picture taken on the SI Ferry - "the soul of a journey is liberty" (boat)
I'm reading through the comments now.

It's a pity some of the examples chosen are so... weird, like the kid who peed in the friend's yard and whose mother was surprised he wasn't invited back.

Read more... )

There's a wide range of comments, but there are a few that keep coming up that I wanna reply to. (Alas, comments appear to be closed now, so I can't do so there.)

1. There's the "I don't want to sit where your kid's (potty-trained) naked butt has been" argument. This makes a lot of sense as a personal squick, but as a rational "because of germs" argument it fails. If your pants and underpants can't prevent the terrible germs from eating you from the bottom, why would the kid's pants and underpants have prevented the germs from getting on the seat in the first place??? Unless you're both naked on the same seat, in which case you're being a little hypocritical. (And it's not like kids are bastions of hygiene anyway. I'm more worried about sitting where their hands have been than their butts!)

I can only assume these are the people who, uh, sprinkle when they tinkle.

2. There's the "OMG! Pedophile! They'll hurt your kids!" argument which makes some more sense... except where it doesn't.

For most people, nudity is less alluring than a certain type of clothing. I don't know, I guess pedophiles could be different, but I suspect that most of them would also be more attracted to clothed kids (especially in, say, "grown-up" outfits that are vaguely sexualized) than naked ones.

2a. There's also the "I don't want pedophiles seeing my kids and not going near them!" argument, which is another one that works as a personal squick (and one I wouldn't argue with) but that probably doesn't harm the kid at all. I can only repeat my earlier argument and say that if they're getting off watching your kid, they're probably doing it no matter what your child is wearing. (Best not to think about it too much.)

3. There's the "If you don't clothe them fully from the time they're born, they'll never learn social norms!" argument, which is just nonsensical. We all learn things as we get older. (And just because somebody allows their child more freedom in this area does not mean that they never discipline their child. Logic, plz.)

4. And there's one more pedophile argument (we sure do have a lot of them) which runs "If you don't make them wear clothes, they'll have no idea something is wrong if an adult tries to harm them!"

That also makes no sense. Surely you can teach a kid about not touching private parts without making them wear clothes inside your own home? Or teach them that it's okay for KIDS to be naked but not grown-ups? Or, if you're a naturalist, teach them that some types of behavior are okay when naked, but not others?


conuly: (Default)

October 2017

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 17th, 2017 07:45 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios