No, and I'd prefer if you try to take what I say in good faith, it'll make this discussion easier and maybe even productive - those are silly questions to ask.

I'm taking what you are saying in as good faith as possible - that is believing that you believe it. These questions are only as silly as your own premise - So incredibly silly. They serve to highlight the fault in your belief. The fact that you so readily dismiss them (combined with your previous debatebrobehaviour) shows you are not acting in good faith.

Its about how and when a child learns about any aspect of this topic, and their learnt perspective on it.

Again you are here implying that the teacher somehow presents the OF content for the children. That's sick.

Again, two bad things don't make a good thing.

smuglord

Fuck I unblocked you because I thought you might just've been an idiot, goes to show how far good will gets you, I guess.

[–] Carguacountii@hexbear.net 13 points 9 months ago (5 children)

ok, well I'll assume I'm unblocked... thanks, I'm glad you don't think I'm just an idiot.

I said it wasn't in good faith, because nowhere have I explicitly or implicitly stated anything to do with the subject of your questions - I'm talking about pornography, and a pornographer teacher, being an issue. Of course it goes without saying that the worst of it (that you brought up) is an issue, and I wouldn't expect that would need to be stated or implied in this discussion, or I'd hope any other. So it looked to me like you were trying to accuse me of making a connection that I haven't. Good faith is not simply assuming your interlocutor believes what they say, its also not putting words in their mouth or arguing with something they haven't said or implied.

I'm not implying that the teacher presents their pornography for children - if that were the case I'd expect they'd be more than simply fired, but also prosecuted. Its rather that when this becomes public knowledge, it is widely known in the community, and there is a risk that children could have access to it, and/or simply be aware that their role model & authority figure is a pornographer. With children, because they are different from adults, we have to be very strict with our risk assessments and eliminate all possible and actual sources of harm. With this subject, there is a high degree of risk and potential harm.

[–] D61@hexbear.net 14 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (4 children)

So why should a teacher be fired from their job if their students decided to sexualize them and actively search for pornography that they might be in?

The students in this particular instance are elementary school kids. So ... if they're searching for porn at that age... what's going on with the parents?

[–] Carguacountii@hexbear.net 9 points 9 months ago

Yes, because they're the responsible adult, by virtue of their job and you'd hope their age and experience, and its their actions that allow it to become a possible risk. Children of course should be taught properly, but they're also impulsive and not wise and lack education, so we don't treat them as responsible for their actions (with caveats) in the same way we do adults.

Small children can have older siblings or friends who might show them that, and sometimes parents aren't responsible or good parents, sometimes children themselves are innapropriate because of harmful upbringing - this might be unusual or unlikely, but with children (and an institution entrusted to care for people's children) any small risk must be treated very seriously.

load more comments (3 replies)