Mother walked in...uh oh... - Page 2 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Cervantes · 11-29-2003, 10:25 PM

I think your mom's rule is stupid to say the least. Kids have sex, it's better they have sex in the home than out in a car or at some party. It gives better control, they will be more likley to use a condom and practice safe sex, and voila, less risk of teen pregnancy and STD's..

Walking in on someone having sex is not just mean but it's down right rotten. She should get a better hobby than to harass her kids for having a life of their own.

GakFace · 11-30-2003, 08:09 AM

Cervantes, regardless of WHERE it may be safer to fuck, the point being is that its the Mother's house and she didn't want people fucking in her house. So are you saying that if you have kids someday and you find them fucking in your house, that you'll be HAPPY? I sincerely doubt this. Look at it from the mother's view.

Quote:

Originally posted by ninety09
I think that what your mother did is very disrespectful, especially since she knew what they were doing. The least she could do was wait for them to get dressed.
If that happened to me, I would feel very humiliated and disrespected. I don't understand why any parents would want to make their children feel like that.

THATS THE WHOLE POINT!!!!! You would feel very humiliated and disrespected. If I owned a place then if anyone was fucking in plain view, they will have lost my respect. The parents wanted them to feel like they because they were having sex IN THE MAIN ROOM! Shit, this all probably would have been avoided if they would have done it in the Sister's room! And yes, the mother was in the right to do so. Its her house, are you saying that if its your house, and someone else is doing the dirty in there, that you should be "locked" out of your house? Come'on geez.

james t kirk · 11-30-2003, 08:17 AM

Is your sister hot? Do you have any photos of her going at it with johnie that you could post?

Just kidding.

The rules are the rules and all parents are different in that respect. It's a form of denial though if your mother knows that your sister is sexually active, but she attaches the "not under my roof" rule.

But, i am a big believer in the right of the property owner, so my advice to your sister and johnie would be to rent a room, do it in a parked car (like i used to), a park (like i used to), the university (like i used to - god i miss those days).

My neighbour has two very hot late teen, early 20's daughters and they let these girls' boyfriends sleep over with their daughters. Very progressive. And these sisters are both fucking gorgeous too. The older one is in med school. Brains and beauty, but i digress.

Cervantes · 11-30-2003, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by GakFace
[B] Cervantes, regardless of WHERE it may be safer to fuck, the point being is that its the Mother's house and she didn't want people fucking in her house. So are you saying that if you have kids someday and you find them fucking in your house, that you'll be HAPPY? I sincerely doubt this. Look at it from the mother's view.

Not happy but calmer or rather I wouldn't care one way or the other, it really isn't my buissnes. After the age of consent it is their bodies and they do what they want to do with it, theyr'e gonna do it no matter what I say or do about it so it's better to encourage them to do it in a calm and safe enviroment.

Sure, her home, her rules. My point being:
If the rule is an attempt to stop her from having sex then it is stupid. If it is just a rule that she made up because she would find it disgusting to clean the sheets afterwards then I can understand her, but not sympathize with the way she handles it.

But in my opinion, no matter what her rules are, it gives her no right to intrude on her daughters privacy despite it being her house.

GakFace · 11-30-2003, 08:29 AM

the rule was "No fucking in the house" To any person's mind that sounds a lot like... "Anywhere but here" She broke the rule, and so she got caught red-handed. See if the mother didn't catch 'em when she did, then it would have been like letting them do the deed even though she told them not to do it in her house. See if she waited, then they would have realized they could do it again and again and again in the house as the mother would always wait until AFTER they were done. But if it was instilled in your head that you would be walked in on when you were in the act, wouldn't that make you want to follow the rule?

Cervantes · 11-30-2003, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by GakFace
the rule was "No fucking in the house" To any person's mind that sounds a lot like... "Anywhere but here" She broke the rule, and so she got caught red-handed. See if the mother didn't catch 'em when she did, then it would have been like letting them do the deed even though she told them not to do it in her house. See if she waited, then they would have realized they could do it again and again and again in the house as the mother would always wait until AFTER they were done. But if it was instilled in your head that you would be walked in on when you were in the act, wouldn't that make you want to follow the rule?

I see your point.

But I still don't agree with the method of terrorising you children as a means of getting through to them.

I don't think there is any good solution to it, it is just that the method described is the kind of intrusion on the daughters privacy that would most likley scar her for life.
Women are having trouble as it is relaxing and enjoying sex, should parents really put another hand of gravel in that machinery?

Rules are rules but to use rules to (even though not intentionally) hurt people is using rules the wrong way.

/begin edit

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html

...

Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

...

/end edit

streak_56 · 11-30-2003, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by feelgood
My mom was telling me this story on MSN earlier:

She and her husband was out shopping since like 5 this morning and they got shitload of presents and stuff and came home to drop it all off before going out again to get more. My sister was out with her bf and my brother was at hockey. But it turns out that my 17 yrs old sister wasn't out with her bf, they were still home. Mom found that her dog was sitting outside of my sister's bedroom waiting to be let in. She notices that the door is locked and she knocks on it and somehow gets in to find that my sister is buck naked and her boyfriend is shocked while putting his pants on. She kicks him out and she's so mad that once she cools down, she's gonna have a talk with my sister.

Now, I can understand my mom being pissed off about what happened. Her rules are no fuckin in the house. Whose parent doesn't have that? But, the problem is this: She knew that they were having sex! It's just plain stupid to walk in a room that you know a couple is having sex in it. My dad once walked in on me without knocking but he was like, whatever and left the room. Perhaps its because of the fact that I was 19 and he couldn't do squat about it.

I know there's both parents and some kids on this forum, what's your take on this?

Hey Bro.... I was sleeping in the next room.
I am seriously disappointed in my sister.. doesn't she know about the back seat? Or how about a hotel room. Kids today what are they learning these days. Hehehe how do you get caught I can't understand.

phaedrus · 11-30-2003, 05:08 PM

The bottom line is your sister needs to get a better lock. Perhaps a bolt.

Was your mom right? Yes and no. Since you sister knew the rules, (no sex in the house) then it was not unreasonable for your mom to enforce the rule.

Is the rule stupid? Absolutely. If the girl is allowed to have sex, why force her to do it away from the house? Because your mom wants to pretend like it isn't happening? She can do that by just no walking in on her. If she wants to live in denial, she can live in denial. But there is no reason to force her daughter to waste money on hotels or risk incarceration for sex public areas.

Sapper · 11-30-2003, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sexymama
At that time I learned that it is illegal for "children under age 18" to have sex, period.

Really?

This must be a state thing - local to your state ... Up in Canada, it is legal for kids as young as 14 to have sex - the condition is that both parental parties are aware. The legal age without parental consent is 16 - as long as it is with another minor.

Quote:

Originally posted by sexymama
Also, every parent has a right to make their own rules. They own the house -- every room in it -- and have a right to access whatever room they wish too when the wish too.

Actually ... it is not a "right" per-se. Furthermore, the "rules" must be lawful - otherwise they are a gross breach of rights and freedoms. Consider it a privilage - as most things are in life.

I guess I am being a little more liberal than I would be if I had children of my own - I can openly admit that. I do however understand the greater importance of raising the kids to understand that sex is great - but has a great deal of responsibility attached to it. I think that the important messages regarding sex are lost when sex is outright banned.

Perhaps parents need to talk more openly?

streak_56 · 11-30-2003, 07:14 PM

OMG you can tell the children from the adults. The children say its ok to have sex while the adults say its my moms house. And yes my brother left the original thread. The fact was that she has been diesprespecting my mom and my family for a while. That wasn't really left in the original message. But I truely was in the next room. I awoke to my mom telling my sister bf to go home.

So on the whole I agree with the fact that its my moms house and its her rules. You can say whatever you want but my mom is right.

feelgood · 11-30-2003, 07:27 PM

My sister may be immature but that's not the issue at hand here.

BigGov · 11-30-2003, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sapper
I find it absurd that parents try to manipulate such a natural thing.

Natural? The purpose of sex is for procreation. They were probably doing it for pleasure. If they were doing it for natural reasons, then it's damn well the parents' business. They don't want to become the youngest grandparents on the block.

Quote:

Originally posed by feelgood
My sister may be immature but that's not the issue at hand here.

No, that IS a major issue. Sex has consequences, and odds are your 17 year old sister doesn't realize that well enough because she blatantly ignores the rules set out by her mother.

streak_56 · 11-30-2003, 08:45 PM

Everyone is missing the issue. The issue is that my mom asked specifically that nothing like sex is to take place under her roof. My sister broke that rule, and is paying the consciences. It'll teach my sister that she needs to grow up and that she needs to follow rules. There is no 'laws' that state that she needs to follow what my moms rules. But my mom can legally kick her out of the house b/c the law says she can. And if she continues to do so its not going to be long for it to happen. Yes it is screwed up that I'm not defending my sister but when I am in the next room listening to it that bring me into the situation. You know what the mature people here say 'my moms house my moms rules,' the immature people say 'she can have sex in the house b/c its safer at home.' Sex is never safe. There is no 100% method to preventing it. Yes condoms, and the pill may help but she may become pregnant. My mom is looking out for my sisters bests interests b/c she wants to see her daughter go to college and make something of herself. Not to skip college and go nowhere in her life.

Cervantes · 11-30-2003, 10:28 PM

Yes she is allowed to create what rules she wants, but that kind of rule is a simple powertrip. It has no other purpose than to exert power over you and your sister, simply because she can.

Since when did holding on to ancient moral anekdotes become "mature" behaviour? That is stagnated behaviour.
Mature behaviour is to see the errors our parents made and correct them in our own children, it is to constantly evolve our thoughts and ideas as well as moral values. Our parents are far from perfect when it comes to morals. It is up to us to improve it and to pass them on to our children so they can continiue to improve them. It is never done or finished.
To call us who think that your sister is right immature, is trolling.

There are no sure things in life, getting you kids to avoid sex is not safe either. there are no such thing as a 100% degree if certainty in anything in life. She might get hit by a car on her way to the library, she might get cancer, she might get killed in a random gunfight. To say that sex is more dangerous in any way is preaching ignorance. It's free, its fun, it is safe compared to many of the risks most people take, without even thinking about it, in their everyday life.
What your mother should do is sit down with your sister and really explain to her what sex is about. Both the negative and the positive side. Not to make rules she knows she will break and then give her shit for it. What's the point of making yourself into your kids enemy?

Just out of curiosity;
Does sex immediatly rule out college and making something of yourself!?! Is it really impossible to have sex and a lucrative career?

Regziever · 11-30-2003, 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by streak_56
OMG you can tell the children from the adults. The children say its ok to have sex while the adults say its my moms house. And yes my brother left the original thread. The fact was that she has been diesprespecting my mom and my family for a while. That wasn't really left in the original message. But I truely was in the next room. I awoke to my mom telling my sister bf to go home.

So on the whole I agree with the fact that its my moms house and its her rules. You can say whatever you want but my mom is right.

So your sister isn't a part of your family????????

BTW.
To use terms such as adult, mature etc. in a moral debate is not very smart. People have different moral, the younger generations have a different moral than the older genreation. Different parts of the older generations have different morals from each other aswell. To attempt to put lables such as mature or immature on these morals is flaming.
Keep to the topic buddy, don't start any namecalling, it never turns out good. (just a friendly advice).

goobster · 12-01-2003, 07:45 AM

Sounds like a just rule to me.....

iamjero · 12-01-2003, 10:55 AM

Busted. Plain and simple. Your sis can bitch and moan all she wants about privacy, but your moms pays the cost to be the boss. In fact not only odes your mom have the right to break into any room in her house, she could have legally shot and killed the guy.

streak_56 · 12-01-2003, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Regziever
So your sister isn't a part of your family????????

BTW.
To use terms such as adult, mature etc. in a moral debate is not very smart. People have different moral, the younger generations have a different moral than the older genreation. (just a friendly advice).

My sister is part of the family. The rules apply to me as well and I think that I'd be a little more discreet than she was. I think that using the terms mature and adult should be used becuase my sister made the desicion that sex would be correct for her to do. And to me sex is an adult desicion. Plus she has only been going out with him for about 3 months. And if you have met him hes a real big loser, but I'm a big brother I'm not suppose to like him. Anyways back to the topic at hand. Sex is an adult desicion and I think that you have to have certain level of maturity and I don't think that my sister has that maturity.

If she was 18 it would be different. I think that when your 18 you reach a certain level where you can be trusted with more stuff than you were if you were younger. But you know everyone is never going to agree on this issue its never going to be straightened out. It all depends on how you were raised among other things.

water_boy1999 · 12-01-2003, 11:38 AM

I think that your sister is still a kid. Kids don't like rules, nor do they listen to them when told they can't do something. I don't have kids, I just speak from experience. Your sister didn't do anything wrong other than being a kid. Yes, sex is a serious subject, but she is just pushing the boundaries as kids do. I think a responsible parent would understand this, reprimand her for doing it, then have a nice discussion about safe sex and the rules of the house again. Better that she is safe and doing it at the parents place (even though she isn't supposed to) rather than at some college keg party in some other parent's bed.

Regziever · 12-01-2003, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by streak_56
I think that using the terms mature and adult should be used becuase my sister made the desicion that sex would be correct for her to do. And to me sex is an adult desicion. Plus she has only been going out with him for about 3 months. And if you have met him hes a real big loser, but I'm a big brother I'm not suppose to like him. Anyways back to the topic at hand. Sex is an adult desicion and I think that you have to have certain level of maturity and I don't think that my sister has that maturity.

If she was 18 it would be different. I think that when your 18 you reach a certain level where you can be trusted with more stuff than you were if you were younger. But you know everyone is never going to agree on this issue its never going to be straightened out. It all depends on how you were raised among other things.

Okay I see your point in this, there is just two things i have objections about. Maturty doesn't come from age it comes from experience (which your sister were after), adulthood has nothing to do with age and everything to do with responsibility (which your sister lacked). But enough about that.

Yes I agree that this is a subject with as many opinions as there are humans, there is no way we will ever find a middle path in this methinks.

The thing I was aiming at in the previous post was that you called those who though your mother was wrong children and those who agreed with her adults. That's the namecalling I was aiming at. As well as those who yells puritan. I just don't think that those kinds of personal attacks belong here.

shakran · 12-02-2003, 05:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Cervantes
I see your point.

But I still don't agree with the method of terrorising you children as a means of getting through to them.

I don't think there is any good solution to it, it is just that the method described is the kind of intrusion on the daughters privacy that would most likley scar her for life.

Aww give me a break. If that scars her for life, she already has mental problems and should check into a hospital right now. In the first place, opening her door is NOT terrorizing her. Telling her boyfriend to go home when he's naked with her in her room is NOT terrorizing her.

Are you saying that parents should set rules, but when the kids break them we should ignore the transgression for fear of terrorizing the kids? I seriously hope you never become a parent if that's the case, 'cause your kids are gonna be total monsters.

In the first place, children are not considered to be protected under the constitution. In the second place there is nothing in the constitution that guarantees your right to have sex in your mom's house. And in the third place, I don't care if the sister is 45. If she's still living in mom's house without paying rent, then she's subject to the rules of the house no matter what they are. If she doesn't like it, then she should move out. I guarantee that getting 3 meals a day and having a warm, comfortable place to sleep is more important to her than screwing her boyfriend wherever she wants to.

cj22009 · 12-02-2003, 06:15 AM

I agree with him and his mom i have two kids there not old enough to do any thing yet 6&3 but thats going to be the rule in my house for sure you can call me what ever but when im putting a roof over there heads feeding there asses and having it where they have heating and ac and all the other amenities hell yea there going to abide by my rules its not the point of being puritain hell i dont even go to church but as long as there living under my roof they follow my rules same as I did for my parents they had the same rule and I respected it thats when I didnt like those rules any more I moved out

Cervantes · 12-02-2003, 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by shakran
If that scars her for life, she already has mental problems and should check into a hospital right now. In the first place, opening her door is NOT terrorizing her.
Are you saying that parents should set rules, but when the kids break them we should ignore the transgression for fear of terrorizing the kids? I seriously hope you never become a parent if that's the case, 'cause your kids are gonna be total monsters.

In the first place, children are not considered to be protected under the constitution. In the second place there is nothing in the constitution that guarantees your right to have sex in your mom's house. And in the third place, I don't care if the sister is 45. If she's still living in mom's house without paying rent, then she's subject to the rules of the house no matter what they are. If she doesn't like it, then she should move out. I guarantee that getting 3 meals a day and having a warm, comfortable place to sleep is more important to her than screwing her boyfriend wherever she wants to.

It is truly terrorising you child since that is a far more agressive way of handling it than is needed. You obviously don't know much about psychology since you doesn't seem to understand how big importance our parents had to us when we were 17, and how damaging it is to us when they violate our trusts and privacy.

Last time I checked USA had signed the UN's universal decalaration of human rights, which means that it is a valid right for everyone.
What you seem to miss completly here is that children, no matter how young, are still HUMAN BEINGS! Which entitels them to the right of, among other things, privacy. Just because someone is paying the bill doesn't give them the right to do what they please with one who is forced (by society and it's demands) to live under her roof.
If children weren't protected under the law it would be pedophile heaven in the US now wouldn't it??

What I'm saying is that her mother has no right to terrorise her childs privacy, but she has the right to set the rules. She has a right to enforce these rules but not the right to violate her daughters privacy to do so. Her daughter is neither a slave, nor a pet, she has her rights and she has her obligations.

The issue is not wheter her daughter has any right to have sex in her mothers house (that was just me expressing my personal view on her mothers rules) it is wether her mother was right or wrong in the way she handled it.
As I see it she overdid it bigtime. Thereby showing her daughter that she doesn't respect her. If the mother doesn't respect her daughter why the he*l should the daughter respect her and her rules?
Bringing up children is nothing like bringing up a dog.

I did not appreciate your personal attack, it was very rude but says more about you and your capacity to think than any response I could ever give you.

Plaid13 · 12-02-2003, 09:43 AM

She was wrong to walk in on them even if it is her house and all. i can understand wanting to stop it and being mad but she should of just banged on the door and scared the crap out of them. who knows what kinda mental damage that could do to someone having there mom walk in on them on purpose. It wouldnt be a good thing to have her be afraid of sex the rest of her life cause she wasnt comfortable somewhere in the back of her mind about who might walk in.

dr_clocker · 12-02-2003, 03:12 PM

She took the chance of having sex in the house. Thats just plain stupid, if there is a chance of parents coming home.

NickKell · 12-02-2003, 03:15 PM

Yeah, what was your mom thinking? That's just not cool and it could have been handled differently.

Force 10 · 12-02-2003, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by feelgood
I'm asking if what my mom did was right. Nobody should just walk in a room where there's a couple having sex, especially when he/she knew that was happening...

Bullshit. Your damn right your mom is right. When's the last time your sister put groceries in the fridge or paid the mortgage?

Your mom had every righ in the world to open the door.

That's not to say what your sister did was wrong, just wrong in your moms eyes.. and rightfully so.

shakran · 12-02-2003, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Cervantes
It is truly terrorising you child since that is a far more agressive way of handling it than is needed. You obviously don't know much about psychology since you doesn't seem to understand how big importance our parents had to us when we were 17, and how damaging it is to us when they violate our trusts and privacy.

Funny you should say that, 'cause I have my undergraduate in psychology. Pop psychology - the kind of crap you read in Psychology Today - is all about the "feel good" psychology. Don't tell little Johnny he can't color on the wall because that will stifle his creativity. Don't tell Suzie not to scream her lungs out in the store because that might damage her feelings of selfworth. Don't catch your teenager in the act of breaking rules because that'll scar her for life. I've heard it all and it's all bullshit. Unless there's something that wasn't included in the original post, mom didn't beat her daughter. She didn't tell her daughter she's a slut, or a whore, or any other derogatory term. All she did was catch the daughter in the act of having sex when the daughter was specifically told not to have sex in the house.

Children have no expectation of privacy, nor should they. As another example, maybe if Dylan Kliebold's parents had "invaded his privacy" by going into his room from time to time, he would have been caught building his arsenal and the Columbine tragedy could have been averted.

If the kid's breaking the rules, then the kid should accept the consequences. Arguing that mom had no right to come into her room is crap. 1) yes, mom did have the right to go into the kid's room. It's mom's house. Not the kid. If the kid moves out and buys her own house, then the kid can tell mom which rooms mom is not allowed in. 2) now that we've established that mom has the right to enter the kid's room, then the kid should not expect to have privacy when she's blatantly flaunting the rules.

Quote:

Last time I checked USA had signed the UN's universal decalaration of human rights, which means that it is a valid right for everyone.

Last time I checked the Universal Declaration of Human Rights said nothing about whether children should be allowed to have sex in their mom's house. It also said nothing about whether moms have the right to go into their kids room. Please don't take a document meant to keep people from being tortured and try to apply it to parenting.

Quote:

What you seem to miss completly here is that children, no matter how young, are still HUMAN BEINGS! Which entitels them to the right of, among other things, privacy. Just because someone is paying the bill doesn't give them the right to do what they please with one who is forced (by society and it's demands) to live under her roof.

OK, first off are you saying that the daughter wants to and has the means to leave mom's house, but is being held back by society? I didn't get that at all from reading the post.

Quote:

If children weren't protected under the law it would be pedophile heaven in the US now wouldn't it??

They are protected under the law. Child molestation is illegal. Parenting your child is not. Parents have the right to parent their child, which is what mom was doing in this case.

You seem to be arguing that children can and must enjoy the same freedoms and rights as adults do. According to that, 5 year olds should be allowed to buy and smoke cigarettes. They should be allowed to buy and drink alcohol. They should be allowed to drive cars. They should be allowed to vote, and to hold political office. They should have final say in all medical decisions regarding them (no mom, I don't want braces, so you can't get them for me. No mom, I don't like shots so you can't allow the doctor to give me penicillin to cure my strep throat. And no vaccinations either.) They should be allowed to make all life decisions for themselves (I don't want to eat anything but chocolate and you have to feed it to me.) That argument is patently absurd. The girl is a minor. She therefore is still being rasied by her parents and what they say goes. No-sex-in-the-house is not an abusive rule, nor is it abusive to enforce it.

Quote:

What I'm saying is that her mother has no right to terrorise her childs privacy, but she has the right to set the rules. She has a right to enforce these rules but not the right to violate her daughters privacy to do so.

OK, so you're saying that any time the kid's in her room she can do anything she wants because in order to stop her, mom has to come in the room, which is violating her right to privacy. That's crap. As I've said, it's not HER room, it's mom's room. Mom is letting the daughter use the room. the daughter isn't paying for it. Mom is. Mom has the right to do anything she wants in that room, including opening the door. If the daughter doesn't like it, she should either move out or stop having sex in it.

Quote:

Her daughter is neither a slave, nor a pet, she has her rights and she has her obligations.

Chief among those obligations is to obey her parents, which she wasn't doing. Children do not automatically become slaves just because their parents look at what they're doing. BTW, according to your argument, parents who suspect their 10 year old of using crack can't check the kid's room to see if there are drugs there.

Quote:

The issue is not wheter her daughter has any right to have sex in her mothers house (that was just me expressing my personal view on her mothers rules) it is wether her mother was right or wrong in the way she handled it.
As I see it she overdid it bigtime. Thereby showing her daughter that she doesn't respect her. If the mother doesn't respect her daughter why the he*l should the daughter respect her and her rules?

Because the daughter is living under mom's roof, eating mom's food, going to mom when she gets in trouble, and generally being fully supported by mom. That is why the hell the daughter should respect her and her rules. As for overdoing it, you're wrong, plain and simple. Parents have the right to raise their kids, and they have the right to catch their kids when the kids are breaking the rules.

Quote:

I did not appreciate your personal attack, it was very rude but says more about you and your capacity to think than any response I could ever give you.

It wasn't a personal attack, it was a fact. If you as a parent don't discipline your child for fear of damaging them, then the child will be a monster. It's been proven time and again.

teshadoh · 12-02-2003, 06:29 PM

Once I jacked off on my bed & my mom walked in & placed the clothes besides my jizz.

Cervantes · 12-02-2003, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by shakran
Funny you should say that, 'cause I have my undergraduate in psychology. Pop psychology - the kind of crap you read in Psychology Today - is all about the "feel good" psychology. Don't tell little Johnny he can't color on the wall because that will stifle his creativity. Don't tell Suzie not to scream her lungs out in the store because that might damage her feelings of selfworth. Don't catch your teenager in the act of breaking rules because that'll scar her for life. I've heard it all and it's all bullshit. Unless there's something that wasn't included in the original post, mom didn't beat her daughter. She didn't tell her daughter she's a slut, or a whore, or any other derogatory term. All she did was catch the daughter in the act of having sex when the daughter was specifically told not to have sex in the house.

(To again plagiarize one of my buddys) you missed the point entirely.
I did not say (in any of my messages) that you shouldn't foster and dicipline your chilren. What I am saying is that using too harsh methods of doing it damages your child. Mental abuse has the same longterm affects on the mind as physichal. Proven fact.

Quote:

Children have no expectation of privacy, nor should they. As another example, maybe if Dylan Kliebold's parents had "invaded his privacy" by going into his room from time to time, he would have been caught building his arsenal and the Columbine tragedy could have been averted.

What would probarbly had happend was that he would have shot them. There was something wrong with that kid in his verry core. Really bad example, she didn't kill anyone, she didn't do anything unlawful, she just broke a rule that her mother had set.
Children do have expectation of privacy, the different peroids of defiance that they have during their upbringing (first around 4 secound aroud 7 the next one around 13 the last one around 17) is the kids need of privacy that manifests itself. (Basic child psychology, i'm sure youv'e had a test or two in this).

Quote:

If the kid's breaking the rules, then the kid should accept the consequences. Arguing that mom had no right to come into her room is crap. 1) yes, mom did have the right to go into the kid's room. It's mom's house. Not the kid. If the kid moves out and buys her own house, then the kid can tell mom which rooms mom is not allowed in. 2) now that we've established that mom has the right to enter the kid's room, then the kid should not expect to have privacy when she's blatantly flaunting the rules.

First of, I agree that she has a right to state the rules and enforce them, but she doesn't have the right to intrude on her daughters privacy since there was nothing illegal goin on in there.

Quote:

Last time I checked the Universal Declaration of Human Rights said nothing about whether children should be allowed to have sex in their mom's house. It also said nothing about whether moms have the right to go into their kids room. Please don't take a document meant to keep people from being tortured and try to apply it to parenting.

Just because the document is used to stop people from being torture doesn't mean that it is not valid in other situations aswell. (duh).

Quote:

OK, first off are you saying that the daughter wants to and has the means to leave mom's house, but is being held back by society? I didn't get that at all from reading the post.

Okay, maybe I didn't explain that enough. A 17 year old has a very slim chanche of making it in the world on her own. That is because the society demands education, experience so forth and so on. Since everyone, to some degree, has the instinct of self presarvation she understand that by living at home she get's a better chance than if the would be alone. Thus she is "forced" to live at home. (Basic social economics).

Quote:

They are protected under the law. Child molestation is illegal. Parenting your child is not. Parents have the right to parent their child, which is what mom was doing in this case.

Abusing your child is illegal, parenting is not. What her mother did was to use harsher methods of discipline than needed, therfore she was abusing her.

Quote:

You seem to be arguing that children can and must enjoy the same freedoms and rights as adults do. According to that, 5 year olds should be allowed to buy and smoke cigarettes. They should be allowed to buy and drink alcohol. They should be allowed to drive cars. They should be allowed to vote, and to hold political office. They should have final say in all medical decisions regarding them (no mom, I don't want braces, so you can't get them for me. No mom, I don't like shots so you can't allow the doctor to give me penicillin to cure my strep throat. And no vaccinations either.) They should be allowed to make all life decisions for themselves (I don't want to eat anything but chocolate and you have to feed it to me.) That argument is patently absurd. The girl is a minor. She therefore is still being rasied by her parents and what they say goes. No-sex-in-the-house is not an abusive rule, nor is it abusive to enforce it.

What part of universal don't you understand? Have you even read the document?
They do not give her or any other minor the privileges of an adult, the do however give her her the rights of a human being.

Quote:

OK, so you're saying that any time the kid's in her room she can do anything she wants because in order to stop her, mom has to come in the room, which is violating her right to privacy. That's crap. As I've said, it's not HER room, it's mom's room. Mom is letting the daughter use the room. the daughter isn't paying for it. Mom is. Mom has the right to do anything she wants in that room, including opening the door. If the daughter doesn't like it, she should either move out or stop having sex in it.

So what youre saying is that property is more important than humans.. hmm... interesting.. I always though it was the other way aound. Odd.. Where ever could I have gotten such an idea? (note the sarcasm)

Quote:

Chief among those obligations is to obey her parents, which she wasn't doing. Children do not automatically become slaves just because their parents look at what they're doing. BTW, according to your argument, parents who suspect their 10 year old of using crack can't check the kid's room to see if there are drugs there.

Again you miss the point, part of a childs development into a grown human being is to free herself from her parents, that means breaking the rules. This is (and your teacher should have told you this since it is part of the very basics of psychology) normal and the way it should be.
If you suspect your kid of using crack you have an obligation to go into her room and make sure because crack is illegal, if your 17 year old is having sex on the other hand she is not breaking any law she is just exploring some of the better parts of life.

Quote:

Because the daughter is living under mom's roof, eating mom's food, going to mom when she gets in trouble, and generally being fully supported by mom. That is why the hell the daughter should respect her and her rules. As for overdoing it, you're wrong, plain and simple. Parents have the right to raise their kids, and they have the right to catch their kids when the kids are breaking the rules.

So a john has the right to abuse a prostitute simply because he's paying?

Quote:

It wasn't a personal attack, it was a fact. If you as a parent don't discipline your child for fear of damaging them, then the child will be a monster. It's been proven time and again.

Discipline yes, abuse no (very big difference here). My mother and father brought me up on the basis of mutual respect, they respected me and my thoughts and I respected them, their rules and wishes. Nowhere did they use any form of abuse or humiliation. Why do you insist on passing on the abuse and wrongdoings you sufferd as a kid to your own children?

This is my last message, you are obviously not worth having a discussion about human rights with since you apparently can't understand the very basis of them.
Discussion is over.

shakran · 12-02-2003, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Cervantes
(To again plagiarize one of my buddys) you missed the point entirely.
I did not say (in any of my messages) that you shouldn't foster and dicipline your chilren. What I am saying is that using too harsh methods of doing it damages your child. Mental abuse has the same longterm affects on the mind as physichal. Proven fact.

You're right, mental abuse does have devastating effects. But (and this is the point you continue to miss) going in your child's room is NOT mental abuse.

Quote:

What would probarbly had happend was that he would have shot them. There was something wrong with that kid in his verry core. Really bad example, she didn't kill anyone, she didn't do anything unlawful, she just broke a rule that her mother had set.

No, really good example. It points to the fact that involved parents who aren't hung up about this "mental abuse by invasion of privacy" crap are more likely to stop negative behavior before it comes to a head, whether that be shooting up a school or a 17 year old girl getting a few STD's before she gets pregnant.

Quote:

Children do have expectation of privacy, the different peroids of defiance that they have during their upbringing (first around 4 secound aroud 7 the next one around 13 the last one around 17) is the kids need of privacy that manifests itself. (Basic child psychology, i'm sure youv'e had a test or two in this).

Basic law. No, they don't have an expectation of privacy. When I say "expectation of privacy" I don't mean the kid wants privacy, I mean they cannot expect the law to grant them privacy. There is NO law saying a parent can't go into the kid's room.

Quote:

First of, I agree that she has a right to state the rules and enforce them, but she doesn't have the right to intrude on her daughters privacy since there was nothing illegal goin on in there.

what about this is so difficult to comprehend? The daughter was breaking the rules, and you're mad that the mom walked in to catch the daughter breaking the rules. You therefore are saying the mother has the right to set rules, but no right to enforce them unless the daughter breaks them outside of her room. That's absurd.

Quote:

Just because the document is used to stop people from being torture doesn't mean that it is not valid in other situations aswell. (duh).

Again, the document says NOTHING about it being a human rights violation to walk into your kid's room. And I guarantee, the US and probably every other country would never have signed it if it did.

Quote:

Okay, maybe I didn't explain that enough. A 17 year old has a very slim chanche of making it in the world on her own. That is because the society demands education, experience so forth and so on. Since everyone, to some degree, has the instinct of self presarvation she understand that by living at home she get's a better chance than if the would be alone. Thus she is "forced" to live at home. (Basic social economics).

whether you view it as involuntary confinement or not, the fact is that she is living in that house which is not hers and therefore she has to follow the rules of the house.

Quote:

Abusing your child is illegal, parenting is not. What her mother did was to use harsher methods of discipline than needed, therfore she was abusing her.

That, my friend, is complete and utter crap. Walking into a kid's room is NOT abuse by any definition of the word.

Quote:

What part of universal don't you understand? Have you even read the document?

what part of walking into a kid's room is not a human rights violation according to the document don't you understand?

Quote:

They do not give her or any other minor the privileges of an adult, the do however give her her the rights of a human being.

Yes, and she's not being tortured, abused, held in a prison without a trial. . nothing. There is no human rights violation going on here. You're trying to compare her situation to prison camps and genocide, and it's asinine. the human rights declaration has NOTHING whatsoever to do with parenting techniques!

Quote:

So what youre saying is that property is more important than humans.. hmm... interesting.. I always though it was the other way aound. Odd.. Where ever could I have gotten such an idea? (note the sarcasm)

Uhh, no, I didn't say that. I can't even figure out why you think I said that.

Quote:

Again you miss the point, part of a childs development into a grown human being is to free herself from her parents, that means breaking the rules.

and it means consequences when she breaks them. By the way, it is possible to gain independence without breaking the rules. Part of parenting is demonstrating that there are consequences when rules are broken.

Quote:

This is (and your teacher should have told you this since it is part of the very basics of psychology) normal and the way it should be.

So is decent parenting, which includes knowing what the hell your kid is doing.

Quote:

If you suspect your kid of using crack you have an obligation to go into her room and make sure because crack is illegal

Woah, wait a second. I thought it was a violation of universal human rights to go into your kid's room! I thought it was psychological torture and mental abuse! So what if she's breaking the law? She's a CHILD! We can't abuse her!

Quote:

if your 17 year old is having sex on the other hand she is not breaking any law she is just exploring some of the better parts of life.

Uh, no, she's breaking YOUR laws that YOU layed down as a condition for living in YOUR house punishment free.

Quote:

So a john has the right to abuse a prostitute simply because he's paying?

I never said that either. And parenting your child is not abuse.

Quote:

Discipline yes, abuse no (very big difference here). My mother and father brought me up on the basis of mutual respect, they respected me and my thoughts and I respected them, their rules and wishes.

Glad to hear it. Too bad this girl doesn't respect her mom's rules and therefore a different approach is required. And while there is a difference between abuse and discipline, you're not seeing it.

Quote:

Nowhere did they use any form of abuse or humiliation. Why do
you insist on passing on the abuse and wrongdoings you sufferd as a kid to your own children?

I was never abused as a child. Sure, my parents knew what I was up to, but that's their JOB. Did you ever stop to think that perhaps the reason we have so many rotten kids these days is because parents aren't doing their JOB, be it out of laziness or out of this ridiculous fear that discipline (which includes keeping tabs on your children) will scar the kid for life?

Quote:

This is my last message, you are obviously not worth having a discussion about human rights with since you apparently can't understand the very basis of them.
Discussion is over.

That's not a personal attack? Pot. Kettle. Black.

GakFace · 12-03-2003, 01:43 AM

Quote:

But in my opinion, no matter what her rules are, it gives her no right to intrude on her daughters privacy despite it being her house.

--Well actually, she did it in the PRIVACY of the MOTHER'S House. So by doing the act in the house, wasn't she already intruding in on her mother's privacy?

Quote:

Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

-- Again with what I just said, she was interfering with the mother's privacy, and so by this article the mother had every right to get in the way. Ooh! Want a another quote from that article to back up what I'm saying?

Quote:

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his.... home....

-- Wow, what do you know.. the mother's home is part of what the daughter interfered with, is it not?

Quote:

As I see it she overdid it bigtime. Thereby showing her daughter that she doesn't respect her. If the mother doesn't respect her daughter why the he*l should the daughter respect her and her rules?

--Actually, kind sir, by breaking the rules of the house that the mother set before her, didn't the daughter disrespect the mother first? And if this is so, then why should the Mother respect the daughter and her rights?

Quote:

Mental abuse has the same longterm affects on the mind as physichal. Proven fact.

--Yet you have yet to explain to us how opening a door is Mental Abuse.

Quote:

she didn't do anything unlawful, she just broke a rule that her mother had set.

--Um.. can you read your own words? You said she didn't do anything wrong, yet she broke a rule... Hello?

Quote:

First of, I agree that she has a right to state the rules and enforce them, but she doesn't have the right to intrude on her daughters privacy since there was nothing illegal goin on in there.

--Again Law = Rule, Mother's Rule = "No Fuckin' in the house", thus one can deduce she broke a Law of the house. Therefore it is technically illegal to 'fuck' in the house.

Quote:

Okay, maybe I didn't explain that enough. A 17 year old has a very slim chanche of making it in the world on her own. That is because the society demands education, experience so forth and so on. Since everyone, to some degree, has the instinct of self presarvation she understand that by living at home she get's a better chance than if the would be alone. Thus she is "forced" to live at home.

--Sorry, but uh, although I may still be living at home, I am in no way Forced to do so. I do know in fact many people who are living on their own. Its possible, It really is! Heck when I was working at Target, I worked with a lot of peopole 40 and over, and they mocked me because I still live at home, because a lot of them moved out when they were 16. Yet you say 17 means they are "forced" to live at home. (simply showing the error in your judgement.. if it can be done by one person, then it negates it "forcing")

Quote:

Abusing your child is illegal, parenting is not. What her mother did was to use harsher methods of discipline than needed, therfore she was abusing her.

-- What should she have done?

Quote:

she has the right to set the rules. She has a right to enforce these rules but not the right to violate her daughters privacy to do so.

-- Again with this what should she have done question.. my next question: How is she to enforce it?

Quote:

If you suspect your kid of using crack you have an obligation to go into her room and make sure because crack is illegal, if your 17 year old is having sex on the other hand she is not breaking any law she is just exploring some of the better parts of life.

-- Yeah man, you already said opening that door is mental abuse, and you said long term mental abuse is bad. Dont contradict yourself, doesn't help your debate. Again you mention the she's not breaking a law.. yet what is a law? The answer? Its a RULE, and yes she broke a rule. A.K.A. She broke one of the LAWS of the HOUSE.

Quote:

So a john has the right to abuse a prostitute simply because he's paying?

--Prostitution has nothing to do with this debate, although it IS farfetch I see where you are attempting to go with this. Well, renting at your parents house is much like renting an apartment. See once you're paying for yourself you can do whatever the hell you want. But again, if the Landlord catches you doing something against the Rules of the Apartment, he can kick you our or possibly even sue. Shit he could call the police and have THEM catch you in the act.

Quote:

Not to make rules she knows she will break and then give her shit for it. What's the point of making yourself into your kids enemy?

--She knows she will break? Sorry what you may have been led to believe, but rules are not made knowing they will be broken. Ask the her brothers that are here on TFP, are they breaking the rule? Making yourself into the enemy? Its called protecting them. There are times you'll hate your parent, but when you're older you see how much wiser they were than you and then thank them for it.

By Shakran

Quote:

Aww give me a break. If that scars her for life, she already has mental problems and should check into a hospital right now.

-- Precisely. I've been caught watching porn before, yet that didn't give me anything I would call mental abuse. Though I might add it did teach me a lesson. There is no rule in the house about it, but it did teach me to be more careful. It did NOT abuse me in any way other than to feel really awkward.

teshadoh

Quote:

Once I jacked off on my bed & my mom walked in & placed the clothes besides my jizz.

--Thats Freakin' Hilarious man!

Cervantes · 12-03-2003, 03:03 AM

Gakface:

It is obvious that I have had a more liberal upbringing than you and shakran, as Regziever said there is no way we ever will be able to come to terms with this because our viewpoints and experiences are too different.

This discussion has stagnated, it goes nowhere, it is simply a matter of throwing opinions and half bad interpretations at eachother trying to put in as many underlying insults as possible. It is not filling the purpose of enlightening us or others therfore I will not continue this.

Your answers stands for what you belive as well as shakrans answers stands for him, my answers stands for my view of the whole thing. It is impossible for me to "convert" you as it is impossible for you to "convert" me. I am calling it a quits because all that could be said about the subject has been said, continuing it is just to let a flamewar rage.

aphex140 · 12-03-2003, 03:26 AM

I agree with tha fact that rules have been made clear then are broken. ( I support this on a domestic level the Govt can get bent).

I am posting as this thread and a few comment reminded me of a guy in our school- lets call him Clive . He had a story that went like this.

One morning he woke early and had a bone on, so being practical he decided to slap the bishoip and prevent trouser creases. He was there giving his all with his eyes closed picturing some filthy scene.

Once the job was done he opened his eyes and there was a cup of steaming tea on his bedside table. He never found out if it was his dad or mum who left it there.

Headf***k

streak_56 · 12-03-2003, 04:28 AM

Shakran

I totally agree with you. You made some good points and you were the only one who actually stayed with the issue. Other people were trying to make it a legal debate. And as far a Cervantes being a liberal, I'm a liberal too. If normal person no matter what political upbringing happened knows that my sister got caught so she must pay the price for breaking the rule. Personally I don't really agree with how people raise their children now a days but I think that my mom made the right decision.
And my sisters bf was not thrown out of the house naked. All my mom said to him was to leave the house. She never banned him from the house. Hes actually too embarassed to come around the house anymore.
The punishment that my mom gave my sister was that she was grounded up to a month, two week depending how her attitude was and she was not allowed to use the internet in this case. My mom never passed any harsh judgement.

HockeyGuy · 12-03-2003, 05:48 PM

gotta agree with your mum, her house... her rules i'm afraid...

uv7piy · 12-04-2003, 05:28 AM

I have a no fucking rule for the kids in my house, but that is primarily because that are all under 10.

Anyway, she had the right to go into any room she wanted. Your sister was out of line for breaking the rule.

RHix613 · 12-04-2003, 05:47 AM

It all depends on the house rules. But parents should let their kids know the responsibility that comes along with sex, especially at such a young age (17 is young to be having sex).

Dragonlich · 12-04-2003, 10:03 AM

17 young for sex??? Not today it isn't...

BooRadley · 12-04-2003, 10:32 AM

Shit. Todays high school kids get loads more sex than high school kids of even 5 years ago.

11-29-2003, 10:25 PM	#41 (permalink)
Cervantes Psycho Location: Above you	I think your mom's rule is stupid to say the least. Kids have sex, it's better they have sex in the home than out in a car or at some party. It gives better control, they will be more likley to use a condom and practice safe sex, and voila, less risk of teen pregnancy and STD's.. Walking in on someone having sex is not just mean but it's down right rotten. She should get a better hobby than to harass her kids for having a life of their own. __________________ - "Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned.." - "Religions take everything that your DNA naturally wants to do to survive and pro-create and makes it wrong." - "There is only one absolute truth and that is that there is only one absolute truth." Last edited by Cervantes; 11-29-2003 at 10:29 PM..

11-30-2003, 08:29 AM	#45 (permalink)
GakFace Go Ninja, Go Ninja Go!! Location: IN, USA	the rule was "No fucking in the house" To any person's mind that sounds a lot like... "Anywhere but here" She broke the rule, and so she got caught red-handed. See if the mother didn't catch 'em when she did, then it would have been like letting them do the deed even though she told them not to do it in her house. See if she waited, then they would have realized they could do it again and again and again in the house as the mother would always wait until AFTER they were done. But if it was instilled in your head that you would be walked in on when you were in the act, wouldn't that make you want to follow the rule? __________________ RoboBlaster: Welcome to the club! Not that I'm in the club. And there really isn'a a club in the first place. But if there was a club and if I was in it, I would definitely welcome you to it.

11-30-2003, 07:27 PM	#51 (permalink)
feelgood Free Mars! Location: I dunno, there's white people around me saying "eh" all the time	My sister may be immature but that's not the issue at hand here. __________________ Looking out the window, that's an act of war. Staring at my shoes, that's an act of war. Committing an act of war? Oh you better believe that's an act of war

11-30-2003, 10:28 PM	#54 (permalink)
Cervantes Psycho Location: Above you	Yes she is allowed to create what rules she wants, but that kind of rule is a simple powertrip. It has no other purpose than to exert power over you and your sister, simply because she can. Since when did holding on to ancient moral anekdotes become "mature" behaviour? That is stagnated behaviour. Mature behaviour is to see the errors our parents made and correct them in our own children, it is to constantly evolve our thoughts and ideas as well as moral values. Our parents are far from perfect when it comes to morals. It is up to us to improve it and to pass them on to our children so they can continiue to improve them. It is never done or finished. To call us who think that your sister is right immature, is trolling. There are no sure things in life, getting you kids to avoid sex is not safe either. there are no such thing as a 100% degree if certainty in anything in life. She might get hit by a car on her way to the library, she might get cancer, she might get killed in a random gunfight. To say that sex is more dangerous in any way is preaching ignorance. It's free, its fun, it is safe compared to many of the risks most people take, without even thinking about it, in their everyday life. What your mother should do is sit down with your sister and really explain to her what sex is about. Both the negative and the positive side. Not to make rules she knows she will break and then give her shit for it. What's the point of making yourself into your kids enemy? Just out of curiosity; Does sex immediatly rule out college and making something of yourself!?! Is it really impossible to have sex and a lucrative career? __________________ - "Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned.." - "Religions take everything that your DNA naturally wants to do to survive and pro-create and makes it wrong." - "There is only one absolute truth and that is that there is only one absolute truth."

12-01-2003, 10:55 AM	#57 (permalink)
iamjero Insane Location: New Orleans/Oakland/San Diego/Chicago	Busted. Plain and simple. Your sis can bitch and moan all she wants about privacy, but your moms pays the cost to be the boss. In fact not only odes your mom have the right to break into any room in her house, she could have legally shot and killed the guy. __________________ "Ideas are far more powerful than guns. We don't allow our enemies to have guns, why should we allow them to have ideas?" - Joseph Stalin

11-30-2003, 08:17 AM	#43 (permalink)
james t kirk Junkie Location: Toronto	Is your sister hot? Do you have any photos of her going at it with johnie that you could post? Just kidding. The rules are the rules and all parents are different in that respect. It's a form of denial though if your mother knows that your sister is sexually active, but she attaches the "not under my roof" rule. But, i am a big believer in the right of the property owner, so my advice to your sister and johnie would be to rent a room, do it in a parked car (like i used to), a park (like i used to), the university (like i used to - god i miss those days). My neighbour has two very hot late teen, early 20's daughters and they let these girls' boyfriends sleep over with their daughters. Very progressive. And these sisters are both fucking gorgeous too. The older one is in med school. Brains and beauty, but i digress.

11-30-2003, 05:08 PM	#48 (permalink)
phaedrus Insane	The bottom line is your sister needs to get a better lock. Perhaps a bolt. Was your mom right? Yes and no. Since you sister knew the rules, (no sex in the house) then it was not unreasonable for your mom to enforce the rule. Is the rule stupid? Absolutely. If the girl is allowed to have sex, why force her to do it away from the house? Because your mom wants to pretend like it isn't happening? She can do that by just no walking in on her. If she wants to live in denial, she can live in denial. But there is no reason to force her daughter to waste money on hotels or risk incarceration for sex public areas.

11-30-2003, 07:14 PM	#50 (permalink)
streak_56 who ever said streaking was a bad thing? Location: Calgary	OMG you can tell the children from the adults. The children say its ok to have sex while the adults say its my moms house. And yes my brother left the original thread. The fact was that she has been diesprespecting my mom and my family for a while. That wasn't really left in the original message. But I truely was in the next room. I awoke to my mom telling my sister bf to go home. So on the whole I agree with the fact that its my moms house and its her rules. You can say whatever you want but my mom is right.

11-30-2003, 08:45 PM	#53 (permalink)
streak_56 who ever said streaking was a bad thing? Location: Calgary	Everyone is missing the issue. The issue is that my mom asked specifically that nothing like sex is to take place under her roof. My sister broke that rule, and is paying the consciences. It'll teach my sister that she needs to grow up and that she needs to follow rules. There is no 'laws' that state that she needs to follow what my moms rules. But my mom can legally kick her out of the house b/c the law says she can. And if she continues to do so its not going to be long for it to happen. Yes it is screwed up that I'm not defending my sister but when I am in the next room listening to it that bring me into the situation. You know what the mature people here say 'my moms house my moms rules,' the immature people say 'she can have sex in the house b/c its safer at home.' Sex is never safe. There is no 100% method to preventing it. Yes condoms, and the pill may help but she may become pregnant. My mom is looking out for my sisters bests interests b/c she wants to see her daughter go to college and make something of herself. Not to skip college and go nowhere in her life.

12-01-2003, 07:45 AM	#56 (permalink)
goobster Insane	Sounds like a just rule to me.....

12-01-2003, 11:38 AM	#59 (permalink)
water_boy1999 Fly em straight! Location: Above and Beyond	I think that your sister is still a kid. Kids don't like rules, nor do they listen to them when told they can't do something. I don't have kids, I just speak from experience. Your sister didn't do anything wrong other than being a kid. Yes, sex is a serious subject, but she is just pushing the boundaries as kids do. I think a responsible parent would understand this, reprimand her for doing it, then have a nice discussion about safe sex and the rules of the house again. Better that she is safe and doing it at the parents place (even though she isn't supposed to) rather than at some college keg party in some other parent's bed. __________________ Doh!!!! -Homer Simpson

12-02-2003, 06:15 AM	#62 (permalink)
cj22009 On the edge of control Location: Ga	I agree with him and his mom i have two kids there not old enough to do any thing yet 6&3 but thats going to be the rule in my house for sure you can call me what ever but when im putting a roof over there heads feeding there asses and having it where they have heating and ac and all the other amenities hell yea there going to abide by my rules its not the point of being puritain hell i dont even go to church but as long as there living under my roof they follow my rules same as I did for my parents they had the same rule and I respected it thats when I didnt like those rules any more I moved out Last edited by cj22009; 12-02-2003 at 06:17 AM..

12-02-2003, 09:43 AM	#64 (permalink)
Plaid13 I want a Plaid crayon	She was wrong to walk in on them even if it is her house and all. i can understand wanting to stop it and being mad but she should of just banged on the door and scared the crap out of them. who knows what kinda mental damage that could do to someone having there mom walk in on them on purpose. It wouldnt be a good thing to have her be afraid of sex the rest of her life cause she wasnt comfortable somewhere in the back of her mind about who might walk in.

12-02-2003, 03:12 PM	#65 (permalink)
dr_clocker Insane Location: ND	She took the chance of having sex in the house. Thats just plain stupid, if there is a chance of parents coming home. __________________ You cant help from growing old, but that doesnt mean you have to grow up.

12-02-2003, 03:15 PM	#66 (permalink)
NickKell Insane	Yeah, what was your mom thinking? That's just not cool and it could have been handled differently.

12-02-2003, 06:29 PM	#69 (permalink)
teshadoh Insane	Once I jacked off on my bed & my mom walked in & placed the clothes besides my jizz.

12-03-2003, 03:03 AM	#73 (permalink)
Cervantes Psycho Location: Above you	Gakface: It is obvious that I have had a more liberal upbringing than you and shakran, as Regziever said there is no way we ever will be able to come to terms with this because our viewpoints and experiences are too different. This discussion has stagnated, it goes nowhere, it is simply a matter of throwing opinions and half bad interpretations at eachother trying to put in as many underlying insults as possible. It is not filling the purpose of enlightening us or others therfore I will not continue this. Your answers stands for what you belive as well as shakrans answers stands for him, my answers stands for my view of the whole thing. It is impossible for me to "convert" you as it is impossible for you to "convert" me. I am calling it a quits because all that could be said about the subject has been said, continuing it is just to let a flamewar rage. __________________ - "Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned.." - "Religions take everything that your DNA naturally wants to do to survive and pro-create and makes it wrong." - "There is only one absolute truth and that is that there is only one absolute truth."

12-03-2003, 03:26 AM	#74 (permalink)
aphex140 Psycho Location: northamptonshire	I agree with tha fact that rules have been made clear then are broken. ( I support this on a domestic level the Govt can get bent). I am posting as this thread and a few comment reminded me of a guy in our school- lets call him Clive . He had a story that went like this. One morning he woke early and had a bone on, so being practical he decided to slap the bishoip and prevent trouser creases. He was there giving his all with his eyes closed picturing some filthy scene. Once the job was done he opened his eyes and there was a cup of steaming tea on his bedside table. He never found out if it was his dad or mum who left it there. Headf***k __________________ Computers allow us to make more mistakes at a faster rate than any other man-made thing, with the exception of handguns and tequila. [/QUOTE=BAMF]Do they role a die, with a 1/3 chance of being flacid?[/QUOTE]

12-03-2003, 04:28 AM	#75 (permalink)
streak_56 who ever said streaking was a bad thing? Location: Calgary	Shakran I totally agree with you. You made some good points and you were the only one who actually stayed with the issue. Other people were trying to make it a legal debate. And as far a Cervantes being a liberal, I'm a liberal too. If normal person no matter what political upbringing happened knows that my sister got caught so she must pay the price for breaking the rule. Personally I don't really agree with how people raise their children now a days but I think that my mom made the right decision. And my sisters bf was not thrown out of the house naked. All my mom said to him was to leave the house. She never banned him from the house. Hes actually too embarassed to come around the house anymore. The punishment that my mom gave my sister was that she was grounded up to a month, two week depending how her attitude was and she was not allowed to use the internet in this case. My mom never passed any harsh judgement.

12-03-2003, 05:48 PM	#76 (permalink)
HockeyGuy Psycho Location: London, England	gotta agree with your mum, her house... her rules i'm afraid...

12-04-2003, 05:28 AM	#77 (permalink)
uv7piy Banned Location: Near NYC	I have a no fucking rule for the kids in my house, but that is primarily because that are all under 10. Anyway, she had the right to go into any room she wanted. Your sister was out of line for breaking the rule.

12-04-2003, 05:47 AM	#78 (permalink)
RHix613 Tilted	It all depends on the house rules. But parents should let their kids know the responsibility that comes along with sex, especially at such a young age (17 is young to be having sex).

12-04-2003, 10:03 AM	#79 (permalink)
Dragonlich 42, baby! Location: The Netherlands	17 young for sex??? Not today it isn't...

12-04-2003, 10:32 AM	#80 (permalink)
BooRadley Insane Location: Kentucky	Shit. Todays high school kids get loads more sex than high school kids of even 5 years ago.