Dilemma: Sheltering children or controlled exposure

[Archaea]

In the spirit of inoculation, how far does one go in sheltering versus controlling exposure to thoughts and emotions.

I know in some successful LDS households, with a fundy bent, much of our modern world in terms of entertainment is excluded. Films are controlled and television forbidden. Not necessarily a bad thing.

In some households no supervision is had, and that is IMHO not the answer.

OTOH, other households believe in exposing children to thoughts and matters faithfully even if they open up questions.

For example, if children read many of the great epics of humanity, many concepts such as sex will be displayed in a nonMormon format. However, if we can present these things in a semi-controlled but faithful environment, does seem to bring things into a perhaps healthier context?

For example, those familiar with the Sumerian legend of Gilgamesh can read many mature concepts of an ancient civilization.

Extending it to a more modern context, are we saving our children if we forbid them from seeing things like "The Golden Compass"?

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Archaea

In the spirit of inoculation, how far does one go in sheltering versus controlling exposure to thoughts and emotions.

I know in some successful LDS households, with a fundy bent, much of our modern world in terms of entertainment is excluded. Films are controlled and television forbidden. Not necessarily a bad thing.

In some households no supervision is had, and that is IMHO not the answer.

OTOH, other households believe in exposing children to thoughts and matters faithfully even if they open up questions.

For example, if children read many of the great epics of humanity, many concepts such as sex will be displayed in a nonMormon format. However, if we can present these things in a semi-controlled but faithful environment, does seem to bring things into a perhaps healthier context?

For example, those familiar with the Sumerian legend of Gilgamesh can read many mature concepts of an ancient civilization.

Extending it to a more modern context, are we saving our children if we forbid them from seeing things like "The Golden Compass"?

I'm not sure which is worse the nonMormon format on sex or the Mormon format on sex.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by jay santos

I'm not sure which is worse the nonMormon format on sex or the Mormon format on sex.

Mormon format on sex is worse and less healthy but the other can be extreme as well.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by Archaea

In the spirit of inoculation, how far does one go in sheltering versus controlling exposure to thoughts and emotions.

I know in some successful LDS households, with a fundy bent, much of our modern world in terms of entertainment is excluded. Films are controlled and television forbidden. Not necessarily a bad thing.

In some households no supervision is had, and that is IMHO not the answer.

OTOH, other households believe in exposing children to thoughts and matters faithfully even if they open up questions.

For example, if children read many of the great epics of humanity, many concepts such as sex will be displayed in a nonMormon format. However, if we can present these things in a semi-controlled but faithful environment, does seem to bring things into a perhaps healthier context?

For example, those familiar with the Sumerian legend of Gilgamesh can read many mature concepts of an ancient civilization.

Extending it to a more modern context, are we saving our children if we forbid them from seeing things like "The Golden Compass"?

Like I said, rent Animal House and watch it with your kid. That will address sex in a less anachoronistic way than Gilgamesh. Plus, Mandy Pepperidge is hot.

Unless your kid is planning on roaming the forest cutting down trees and slaying demons on his way to a wedding, Animal House will at least have a context to which he can relate. Plus, Gilgamesh doesnt have a food fight scene.

[Archaea]

maybe the best approach to sex is to take the frigid Mormon approach and by parental discussion liberalize it. This will counter the excesses in pop culture.

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by Archaea

maybe the best approach to sex is to take the frigid Mormon approach and by parental discussion liberalize it. This will counter the excesses in pop culture.

Naturally this is the best. The sin is upon the parents, not The Church.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by Archaea

maybe the best approach to sex is to take the frigid Mormon approach and by parental discussion liberalize it. This will counter the excesses in pop culture.

Now you are talking. Why use ancient Sumarian poetry for context? It makes as much sense as using American Pie to teach your kids.

Just talk to them openly. 10 bucks says you wont be telling your son much that he doesnt know (by way of mechanics). Your counsel gives him context and perspective. You dont need Gilgamesh for that.

If you are not going to implement my Mandy-ladder scene advice, then consider 2 other scenes that were seminal in every non-LDS boy's childhood:

1. The "Trading Places" Jamie Lee Curtis gets into the bed scene. Barring that scene, I would have NEVER guessed. And I have never looked at her the same since. When she was shilling for T Mobile and kept saying "Get More," I couldnt never focus.
2. The most important scene in pubescent cinematic history......Phoebe Cates in Fast Time in Ridgemont High. This scene needs no explanation, backstory, or introduction.

As a matter of fact, I think I am going to start a CG poll about this very scene.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by myboynoah

Naturally this is the best. The sin is upon the parents, not The Church.

It is in the end.

But we have two polar opposites.

We have the do-anything excesses of pop culture, and the frigid, "sex is for offspring" approach of fundies. And because we know most parents won't converse as much as they should, there needs to be ameliorating factors, otherwise Mormon kids have about a snowball's chance in hell of being functional in marriage, because they will not know normal, healthy sexuality.

Mormon guys have a better chance than Mormon gals, who have the worst examples in some of their fundamentalist leaders.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

Now you are talking. Why use ancient Sumarian poetry for context? It makes as much sense as using American Pie to teach your kids.

The poetry's purpose is not sexuality, but it's other messages, showing how loss can tenderize and add wisdom, among other things. It is moving from that perspective.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by Archaea

The poetry's purpose is not sexuality, but it's other messages, showing how loss can tenderize and add wisdom, among other things. It is moving from that perspective.

Aha... loss tenderizing and adding wisdom. Got it.

Lose Gilgamesh and stick to Animal House with your kid if you dont want to shelter him.

He will learn that wanting to look at topless girls is pretty normal, what is a hand job, college kids often have pre-marital sex, and sex with older women can be a turn on.