I didn't bother with your views on the show because I don't consider them valid, since you've never seen it.
SB, to be fair, my argument against the show was its intentions, its concept, its premise. Since those things exist before the show is even made, I can still commment on them. I don't think the show needs to exist in order to make society a safer place for our children. I agree with DVC in that it's not solving the problem; it exists only to feed our bloodlust, our very human need to make criminal perpetrators and threats to our children into victims for
us to humiliate. It's a good indication of how insecure we are as a species, as a society.
As for 12 year olds on the internet, without knowing the full extent of what is said between the two, I certainly can't comment on that either.
As part of the Internet generation, I will make a point that the Internet is a non-governed, fully open and infinitely accessible process. When we allow our twelve-year-old children on it, we're entering an unofficial contract wherein our children have access to anything they may wish. It is down to parental discretion and trust how far they push their safety parameters... if they are to be allowed on the Internet at all. Should they be? As long as chatrooms and open forums are available to them, probably not, to be honest. This might intrude upon basic human rights, to do as we please, but let's not be naive about this: as long as there are good people in this world, there are still bad people.
As for choice, at 12, can they make that choice with a full knowledge of the consequences? I don't think so.
Whether they "can" or not is irrelevant, so long as they are allowed to. Whether a twelve-year-old is mature enough or capable enough to make a decision about that not knowing the possible or probable consequences is irrelevant, because the fact is that they
do.
My daughter is 12, and there are certain message boards that she and her friends "meet" on after school. She has a full understanding that she must never reveal her true name, her location, the name of her school, her age, or any personal information. Although she tends to talk to her friends from school, there are plenty of kids that aren't local as well.
Firstly, her understanding is "full" insofar that you believe it to be. People cannot account for other people's thought process. Secondly, I didn't mean that disrespectfully. Thirdly, may I recommend your daughter use something like MSN Messenger, or AIM? You can only talk to people on there that you already have the email address of - ie. your friends. No strangers, as long as you don't accept their invitations. Unless your daughter is conversing
with the said strangers in those chatrooms.
As for victims having a choice, that is pure rubbish. You have a gun in your face, your choices are limited.
But they are choices, right? Beth E chose the
right choice, but it was still a choice. Denying that is denying that she is human.
