Let's have an intelligent discussion

[Coolydudey]

After all, it's the reason why many claim to be on the forum. Name a topic you've been thinking about recently that warrants some debate and that's exactly what we'll do. Do wait until the previous is finishing to start your own.

I'll start: I was thinking about the prison system. Well, we don't have our expert DaBlob here, but I've always thought it was pretty terrible. Instead of conditioning inmates to bring their characters more in line with society (I'm merely stating this as the objective, not supporting its validity), they are simply put in prison to keep them away from all the "innocent people", where they often become worse. To achieve this goal, inmates have to want to improve, while not being exposed to negative influences. The second is easy: more aggressive segregation into groups.
As for the first, let's ask ourselves a question: what do all inmates want to do? Escape? What if we gave them additional incentives to be able to leave early, assessing their behaviour in the process? Essentially: conform or stay here. There could also be a period of controlled introduction into society, whereby (for example), inmates stay at the prison but start working and so on again. There could be various ways of preventing their premature escape (including massive extra time if caught, given they are so close to freedom by now). And for the hardened or more dangerous ones, place trackers on them once they leave so as to keep them under "relative control".

It's not perfect, but I think it's better than what we have.l

 

[Duxwing]

That's exactly what we have, actually:
--Inmates are sorted into low, medium, and maximum security prisons depending on their degree of violence
--Parole for good behavior can be granted to inmates in certain states; albeit, federal sentences offer no parole.
--Escaping from prison is a crime
--Some prisons even provide education in the trades to their inmates
--Some defendants awaiting trial are given ankle bracelets; a TASER system and additional sensors--like microphones--could be integrated into them.

-Duxwing

 

[Coolydudey]

It's exactly what we have, in an extremely dysfunctional manner.

 

[Jennywocky]

Well, one issue with incentives and behavior is that it's easy to get people to conform in order to chase the carrot on the stick, but it doesn't mean they won't revert as soon as they leave the prison structure and reenter the chaotic mainstream... even when they're trying to do better. How do you know all that progress that you think you've made with certain prisoners will actually persist when they're free to do what they want? I don't consider that a pessimistic question, it's just a realistic one based on what's happened in the past.

Putting trackers on dangerous criminals and then releasing them back into the wild as some kind of solution? I guess we find them quickly enough, after they've brutalized and killed again, but that doesn't do the new victims much good, does it?

I mean, your intentions are good, but these kinds of problems are harder than they seem. If they were easy to solve, they would have been fixed a long time ago. It doesn't help either that society can't agree on the purpose of punishment: Is prison a cage to keep predators away from the prey, or is it a school that attempts to reform the individual into a better person?

Do you have a more detailed plan of how this could work?

 

[Architect]

I'm watching "Orange is the new Black" and it's quite entertaining. Plus they manage to have naked females in every episode, or their isolated parts at least.

 

[The Introvert]

I agree with OP.

Without getting into too many details, a family member of mine was a victim of the prison system (and will continue to be for the remainder of his life).

Rather than genuinely keeping up with the prisoners and making sure that they are doing well/ rehabilitating, the exact opposite is done in many instances. He was mistreated, mismanaged, and eventually lost any hope of ever returning to the outside world.

Now that's not to shift all of the blame from him to the system. However, because I personally know the guy, I think that he could have been easily diagnosed (complete schizophrenic), treated properly, and a bunch of havoc and the eventual slaying of an inmate could have been avoided. The system not only failed to protect its own prisoners, but in fact aided in the complete downfall of one, and the death of another.

I know this is just one horror story, but it's true, and it happens more often than you would think.

 

[Foxman49]

Discipline and Punish by Foucault is especially related to this topic. Read the first chapter. It's dense, but insightful. (after two read throughs at least)

 

[Coolydudey]

Well, one issue with incentives and behavior is that it's easy to get people to conform in order to chase the carrot on the stick, but it doesn't mean they won't revert as soon as they leave the prison structure and reenter the chaotic mainstream... even when they're trying to do better. How do you know all that progress that you think you've made with certain prisoners will actually persist when they're free to do what they want? I don't consider that a pessimistic question, it's just a realistic one based on what's happened in the past.

Putting trackers on dangerous criminals and then releasing them back into the wild as some kind of solution? I guess we find them quickly enough, after they've brutalized and killed again, but that doesn't do the new victims much good, does it?

I mean, your intentions are good, but these kinds of problems are harder than they seem. If they were easy to solve, they would have been fixed a long time ago. It doesn't help either that society can't agree on the purpose of punishment: Is prison a cage to keep predators away from the prey, or is it a school that attempts to reform the individual into a better person?

Do you have a more detailed plan of how this could work?

The incentives are just there to make them want to. How you ensure it hasworked is a completely different story (the evaluation I mentiooned).

The trackers are for after they have finished their sentence.

Prison is both the things that you mention, more the latter if possible.

I am not bothered to post a more detailed plan. It would be PAGES Long.

 

[The Introvert]

Discipline and Punish by Foucault is especially related to this topic. Read the first chapter. It's dense, but insightful. (after two read throughs at least)

God, Foucault is like hitting yourself in the head with a brick. He takes really interesting material and makes it dry, unappealing, and tiresome.

 

[Nezaros]

I agree that the current prison system is awful but I disagree with your proposed solution. It needs to be scrapped. First of all, anybody sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of parole (Actually, the sentencing bit of the justice system [The entire justice system, actually] should be reworked as well, but let's keep it simple) or anybody who has been determined to be a threat to society with no possible chance of successful reintegration, should be executed. Quick and cheap. Don't have to worry about those people anymore.

Everybody else, those who have committed crimes but had reasons for doing so (That is, they committed the crime due to something other than a chronic mental condition, such as crimes of passion or desperation) and can be reasonably assumed to not be in danger of committing a similar crime again, should be free, but under watch for a certain period of time, depending on the offense. During this time they should receive counseling to address the issues which caused their actions in the first place, and prevent any further crimes.

I'm not pretending to have any detailed understanding of the justice system of any country but I know for a fact that prison isn't an effective method of punishment. For that matter, punishment isn't an effective method of crime prevention.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

I'll take up the unpopular position that the prison system should be abolished entirely and replaced with a system of exile and asylum.

Incarceration is little more than a profit mechanism through modern day slavery and a system tailor-made for the abuse of political power.

First of all, anybody sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of parole or anybody who has been determined to be a threat to society with no possible chance of successful reintegration, should be executed.

I agree with everything except this. Murderers et al remain free.

 

[Nezaros]

I agree with everything except this. Murderers et al remain free.

Why?

 

[Jennywocky]

I'll take up the unpopular position that the prison system should be abolished entirely and replaced with a system of exile and asylum.

Where do you propose we send all the convicted criminals? Australia? Antarctica?

This could be interesting -- setting up an entire nation of convicted felons where the leaders would the creme de la creme, breeding with each other to produce a race of viable superpeople.

 

[Nezaros]

Where do you propose we send all the convicted criminals? Australia? Antarctica?

This could be interesting -- setting up an entire nation of convicted felons where the leaders would the creme de la creme, breeding with each other to produce a race of viable superpeople.

Arrakis?

 

[Jennywocky]

Arrakis?

Yeah.... either that or Star Trek's Botany Bay.

In any case, asylum might just be postponing societal destruction vs just letting the criminals run free and unorganized in the current moment.

 

[Duxwing]

I agree that the current prison system is awful but I disagree with your proposed solution. It needs to be scrapped. First of all, anybody sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of parole (Actually, the sentencing bit of the justice system [The entire justice system, actually] should be reworked as well, but let's keep it simple) or anybody who has been determined to be a threat to society with no possible chance of successful reintegration, should be executed. Quick and cheap. Don't have to worry about those people anymore.

Yet holding someone in prison until they die is actually cheaper than executing them because the court, recognizing the severity of the sentence in the manner of the hero of Twelve Angry Men, often permits multiple, long, drawn out appeals whose legal fees cost more than the total incarceration process (its legal fees included). Moreover, an execution, unlike an imprisonment, cannot be undone, and time and time again new evidence exonerates dead convicts. The mental agony felt by an innocent person awaiting execution and the injustice of their death aside (as if such matters could ever be forgotten) being able to adjust to new information is a general principle of sound justice.

Everybody else, those who have committed crimes but had reasons for doing so (That is, they committed the crime due to something other than a chronic mental condition, such as crimes of passion or desperation) and can be reasonably assumed to not be in danger of committing a similar crime again, should be free, but under watch for a certain period of time, depending on the offense. During this time they should receive counseling to address the issues which caused their actions in the first place, and prevent any further crimes.

Some people are deterred from crimes of passion by the fear of prison, which can, in some cases, cut through anger or jealousy or desperation. We must weigh the additional wrongdoing done by such people in the absence of the deterrent of prison against the suffering of such people whilst in prison.

I'm not pretending to have any detailed understanding of the justice system of any country but I know for a fact that prison isn't an effective method of punishment. For that matter, punishment isn't an effective method of crime prevention.

Why do you think that prison is an ineffective deterrent?

-Duxwing

 

[Solitaire U.]

Speaking of threats to society...

Couple months ago, two students at my school, an 11 year old 5th grader and 10 year old 4th grader, were caught 'examining each others private parts' in one of the boy's bathrooms.

Apparently, another kid who was using the bathroom saw them committing their filthy act and reported it to a (female) teacher, who then burst into the (boy's) bathroom and caught them 'red handed'.

The 4th grader was my student. The older kid wasn't, but I knew him.

Oh my fucking god, the commotion that ensued. Of course, the parents were called, and the mother of the younger boy accused the older boy of 'coercing' her child into the bathroom to 'sexually abuse' him. This escalated to a physical brawl between both mothers, right there in the office. The police were called.

When I went down to the office to find out what the hell happened to my student, both boys were crying, the mothers were out in the parking lot screaming obscenities at each other while the director stood off to the side, out of harm's way and watched, and the office staff were standing around with their thumbs up their asses, not knowing what to do. I bailed out of there and back to my class.

So, as the story was told to me, the police arrived shortly thereafter and managed to calm down the two mothers. Of course, because of the complaint of the younger kid's mother, they had to perform an investigation, whereby both boys were interrogated to determine who, if anybody, molested who. Apparently, after interrogating the boys, the cops decided that there wasn't any reason (for them) to pursue the matter further, and left, leaving the matter in the hands of the director.

The director, in all her...formally...trained...wisdom...regarding...preteen...male...behavior decided that, because the older boy was, well...a little older, that he should be expelled, 5 weeks before he was to graduate. The younger kid was suspended for three days, but didn't return to class until a week and three days later. I was surprised he returned at all, though I'm sure he only did so under the command of his mother.

I can't even fathom the depths of humiliation that boy must have felt having to walk back into a school where everyone knew he had 'touched another boy's penis'. Really depressing, he'd been one of the most active English speakers in the class, always bouncing around and babbling away, up until this incident, then just clammed up and stayed at his desk for the last 4 weeks of school.

Overreaction sparking panic sparking aggression sparking insanely oppressive consequences. You'd think primary schools would be safe havens from this repetitive cycle, but they're just as infected as anywhere else. Hell, from what I've seen, the Dogma starts here, folks. That's why all those prisons are overflowing, probably. I've seen teachers and staff get in over their heads while attempting to 'referee' altercations between students, and admittedly, I've found it somewhat amusing to watch those adults dive right down to the level of bickering 8 year olds, but this was not funny at all.

It's fun and easy to engage in bourgeois discourse about the flaws of Lady Justice...

...but who are the real criminals?

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Why?

The prison system is based on ethics, yet objective morality doesn't exist.

Where do you propose we send all the convicted criminals? Australia? Antarctica?

This could be interesting -- setting up an entire nation of convicted felons where the leaders would the creme de la creme, breeding with each other to produce a race of viable superpeople.

The interesting facet is that there wouldn't be a designated area. Criminals are free to be "anywhere but here," anywhere except places from which they've been excluded. This would quite literally set up an ethical gradient, wherein those with shared ethics would group together, following the same "rules" set by attractors in physics.

From there would stem competition between states. NetLogo's MaterialSim demonstrates this effect:

Spoiler

Each colored dot represents an agent with a specific ethical construct. Dots who commit crimes are banished, and their space occupied by the color of the dot against which the crime was committed. Dots of the same color share the same ethics and therefore cannot commit punishable crimes against each other, and dots can be converted after banishment, i.e. a murdered can return if they are accepted back into the same community having accepted their standards.

Spoiler

In time groups begin to form based on shared morality. Competition has moved up a level of organization and will continue to do so.

Spoiler

Communities continue to compete until they become large states.

Spoiler

Eventually, assuming the process continues, one or a very few states will persist and dominate.

If, however, ethics spontaneously change within states and communities, the system may stabilize at a more complex level, with more communities overall.

 

[Duxwing]

@THD What happens if the wronged is dead or cannot move?

-Duxwing

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

@THD What happens if the wronged is dead or cannot move?

The space formerly occupied by the dead individual becomes the color of the killer. At a larger level, an open space is quickly occupied by the "winner," regardless of whether the winner won by forcing out or converting the loser, or killing them.

 

[Jennywocky]

...I can't even fathom the depths of humiliation that boy must have felt having to walk back into a school where everyone knew he had 'touched another boy's penis'. Really depressing, he'd been one of the most active English speakers in the class, always bouncing around and babbling away, up until this incident, then just clammed up and stayed at his desk for the last 4 weeks of school.

Overreaction sparking panic sparking aggression sparking insanely oppressive consequences. You'd think primary schools would be safe havens from this repetitive cycle, but they're just as infected as anywhere else. Hell, from what I've seen, the Dogma starts here, folks. That's why all those prisons are overflowing, probably. I've seen teachers and staff get in over their heads while attempting to 'referee' altercations between students, and admittedly, I've found it somewhat amusing to watch those adults dive right down to the level of bickering 8 year olds, but this was not funny at all.

I am not sure what the fuck people were thinking in the debacle you describe. As if peers have never in the past ever examined each other's private parts? What do they think kids do outside school or when they're just out on their own cognizance? They're curious, they want to see what things are and how they work. Based on how you described it, and the police response, this was just two peers and not a matter of coercion of any sort. As far as I'm concerned, this was a matter for the parents to deal with separately each with their own child, if they had an issue with what their own child had done. I'm totally with you in that how it was handled immensely shamed the kids and will likely have far worse and longer-lasting psychological repercussions than the actual bathroom incident did.

The US is just fucking crazy when it comes to sex. We don't know what to do with anything sexual; it seems like we glamorize it at the wrong times and stigmatize it at the other wrong times, instead of getting it in some kind of reasonable perspective.

...but who are the real criminals?

Probably the kids who buy an extra chocolate milk at lunch or who run down the hall instead of walk, in this country...

 

[Nezaros]

Yet holding someone in prison until they die is actually cheaper than executing them because the court, recognizing the severity of the sentence in the manner of the hero of Twelve Angry Men, often permits multiple, long, drawn out appeals whose legal fees cost more than the total incarceration process (its legal fees included). Moreover, an execution, unlike an imprisonment, cannot be undone, and time and time again new evidence exonerates dead convicts. The mental agony felt by an innocent person awaiting execution and the injustice of their death aside (as if such matters could ever be forgotten) being able to adjust to new information is a general principle of sound justice.

I should clarify, I don't mean that anybody who would currently have been convicted of a death-or-life-imprisonment-worthy offense should be executed. Only people who are deemed fully incapable of being a part of society without being a danger to others. Frankly guilt is irrelevant. The issue shouldn't be whether or not somebody committed a crime, it should be whether they will ever do so again. A person who kills somebody, but would never again harm anybody else, should be set free. Of course, this is somewhat difficult to judge, but that is why any major offenders should be on watch for some period of time. Easy access to psychological care (For anybody, really) would also be beneficial.

Why do you think that prison is an ineffective deterrent?

The recidivism rate in the US is ~60%, and as was said the conditions in prison are unlikely to improve a person's behavior following release. Positive reinforcement is more effective at shaping behavior than punishment. Prison is also expensive, but as you pointed out, it isn't the only component of the justice system at fault.

The interesting facet is that there wouldn't be a designated area. Criminals are free to be "anywhere but here," anywhere except places from which they've been excluded. This would quite literally set up an ethical gradient, wherein those with shared ethics would group together, following the same "rules" set by attractors in physics.

This is effectively how humanity has operated since the dawn of civilization. There's a reason it hasn't worked.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

This is effectively how humanity has operated since the dawn of civilization.

Not really. It's not unreasonable to assume that the urge to punish is as old as man himself.

There's a reason it hasn't worked.

...because we developed prisons, punishments, and preposterous amounts of morality?

 

[Brontosaurie]

let's rename this thread

 

[Coolydudey]

I agree that the current prison system is awful but I disagree with your proposed solution. It needs to be scrapped. First of all, anybody sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of parole (Actually, the sentencing bit of the justice system [The entire justice system, actually] should be reworked as well, but let's keep it simple) or anybody who has been determined to be a threat to society with no possible chance of successful reintegration, should be executed. Quick and cheap. Don't have to worry about those people anymore.

Everybody else, those who have committed crimes but had reasons for doing so (That is, they committed the crime due to something other than a chronic mental condition, such as crimes of passion or desperation) and can be reasonably assumed to not be in danger of committing a similar crime again, should be free, but under watch for a certain period of time, depending on the offense. During this time they should receive counseling to address the issues which caused their actions in the first place, and prevent any further crimes.

I'm not pretending to have any detailed understanding of the justice system of any country but I know for a fact that prison isn't an effective method of punishment. For that matter, punishment isn't an effective method of crime prevention.

why could the prison system not become such a system of rehabilitation and reintroduction? It's effectively what I'm proposing.

And no, anyone who has commited murder must at least be ensured to be mentally stable before being released again. Also, there has to be some deterrent against crime.

 

[Coolydudey]

let's rename this thread

No, cause I'm about to start a discussion about how **** the schooling system is if nobody else does...

 

[Solitaire U.]

No, cause I'm about to start a discussion about how **** the schooling system is if nobody else does...

...and the parenting system, while we're at it.

 

[Montresor]

In Canada, those deemed "dangerous offenders" can be held indefinitely. This actually means you might serve a longer sentence here for multiple violent assaults than you would for murder in Mexico (60y) or the United States (40y). Kind of exactly like that movie "Bronson" except for the ending.

I'm for exile.

Spoiler

I hope I have my facts straight.

...but who are the real criminals?

I assume you put forth your best rationalization of the facts to highlight that the boys were curious and playing and it was harmless fun, and that no punishment should be administered to anybody except the adults who threw fists and violated the sacred privacy of humiliated children...


that might sound sarcastic but it is not.

The prison system is based on ethics, yet objective morality doesn't exist.

The interesting facet is that there wouldn't be a designated area. Criminals are free to be "anywhere but here," anywhere except places from which they've been excluded. This would quite literally set up an ethical gradient, wherein those with shared ethics would group together, following the same "rules" set by attractors in physics.

I like it.....

 

[BigApplePi]

After all, it's the reason why many claim to be on the forum. Name a topic you've been thinking about recently that warrants some debate and that's exactly what we'll do. Do wait until the previous is finishing to start your own.

Okay. Let's pick a topic. How about anything BUT crimes and punishments? I pick the "Riemann Hypothesis." I say it's a very difficult problem requiring some thought ... I'll wait until the current topic is finished though.

I'll start: I was thinking about the prison system.

Oh my. I'll have to change my mind. Well there must be different types of crimes and different kinds of people who carry them out.

1. Professional criminals who favor self-interest.
2. Political criminals who are in the minority of some arbitrary social policy.
3. Neurotics/sometime psychotics who have difficulty conforming.
4. Crimes of passion.
5. BAP types who r the worst.

If we lump all these together we won't know what to do. Shall we punish these criminals all the same way or take the time to squeeze some value out by looking at each particular type?

Well, we don't have our expert DaBlob here, ...

Was he one of those unrehabilitatable criminals without any socially redeeming value?

 

[Jennywocky]

...and the parenting system, while we're at it.

Parents should be graded and held back if incapable of performing at expected levels.

Also, bad behavior of parents will result in potential suspension/expulsion from the parenting system.

Any questions?

 

[Duxwing]

I should clarify, I don't mean that anybody who would currently have been convicted of a death-or-life-imprisonment-worthy offense should be executed.

I know that I'll sound like an INFJ in the following paragraph, but forgive me:

Matters of law aside, you could rule every irredeemable person unfit to live and hold mass executions of re-examined prisoners, sending death squads out after stragglers and lethally injecting sociopathic children; the feeling of power and control over scary people felt upon considering such an act should be remembered whilst considering it lest passion blind us to better alternatives, if they exist.

Only people who are deemed fully incapable of being a part of society without being a danger to others. Frankly guilt is irrelevant. The issue shouldn't be whether or not somebody committed a crime, it should be whether they will ever do so again. A person who kills somebody, but would never again harm anybody else, should be set free. Of course, this is somewhat difficult to judge, but that is why any major offenders should be on watch for some period of time. Easy access to psychological care (For anybody, really) would also be beneficial.

The premise of preventing crime above all else--including the question of guilt--implies not only considering whether a convict will commit another crime, but whether, beyond a reasonable doubt, any given person ever will; your system has the logistical problem of literally putting everyone in therapy forever as an early warning. Moreover, unless the aforementioned therapists are to be the judges of who lives and dies, the court would ultimately determine who is 'dangerous and irredeemable' leaving the accused fighting for their lives with the same resulting legal fees as found in capital murder cases in death penalty states; moreover, since the pool of accused in your state is no longer limited to convicts, even more death penalty cases would have to go through the courts than under the current system, leading to even larger legal fees. Ultimately, we would lose a huge amount of money by adopting your system.

The recidivism rate in the US is ~60%, and as was said the conditions in prison are unlikely to improve a person's behavior following release. Positive reinforcement is more effective at shaping behavior than punishment. Prison is also expensive, but as you pointed out, it isn't the only component of the justice system at fault.

What about the people who never offend because the of fear of prison, but not of therapy? We have to weigh the suffering of the people whom they have harmed against the suffering of people who are harmed by the prison system.

-Duxwing

 

[Solitaire U.]

Any questions?

Just one...

Are we allowed to touch each others' pee-pees? It's kind of hard to be a parent if you can't touch each others' pee-pees.

 

[Jennywocky]

Just one...

Are we allowed to touch each others' pee-pees? It's kind of hard to be a parent if you can't touch each others' pee-pees.

 

[Oblivious]

None of you are aloud to touch my pee pee.

 

[Oblivious]

This is my idea of intelligent discussion.

 

[Jennywocky]

None of you are aloud to touch my pee pee.

This is my idea of intelligent discussion.

Well, I do have to hand it to you -- you didn't spell ALL the words wrong.

 

[Oblivious]

That would be too obvious. You know, with all these intelligent people flouncing aorund here.

 

[Jennywocky]

That would be too obvious. You know, with all these intelligent people flouncing aorund here.

Oh, oui, it wood be, how you say, way too ob-vee-us?

 

[Cherry Cola]

The US is just fucking crazy when it comes to sex. We don't know what to do with anything sexual; it seems like we glamorize it at the wrong times and stigmatize it at the other wrong times, instead of getting it in some kind of reasonable perspective.

Yeah, this became even more so blatant after I started reading discussions about films on MBTI, there's a huge cultural difference between the US and EU in how sex is viewed. So many great films being called weird and creepy because the way they portray sex doesn't go along with the US's narrow and paradox ridden way of doing it.

@Solitaire: Damn, that story got me irl mad
The worst part is those fucking parents and the whistleblower probably wont even realize all the unnecessary suffering their stupid, stupid behavior caused but will just get on with their lives.

 

[BigApplePi]

Couple months ago, two students at my school, an 11 year old 5th grader and 10 year old 4th grader, were caught 'examining each others private parts' in one of the boy's bathrooms.

This problem can be solved by requiring all areas of privacy to be covered up. Use clothing. Post signs over the area. This should discourage people from looking. After all any parts which are private mean just that: private. You yourself should be allowed to look but only to attend to business. Professionals will be allowed as exceptions and that just to ensure everything is in working order. They should be licensed. We don't want amateurs playing around.

 

[Duxwing]

That story got me, too, Cherry. Those kids deserved a quiet talking to and a psychological examination, not an explosion of parental anger and 'zero tolerance' (read: zero intelligence) policies.

-Duxwing

 

[redbaron]

That story got me, too, Cherry. Those kids deserved a quiet talking to and a psychological examination, not an explosion of parental anger and 'zero tolerance' (read: zero intelligence) policies.

They didn't need anything or deserve anything at all.

If two kids people want to have a harmless swordfight, it's not anyone's business to intervene or tell them they're not allowed to.

 

[Duxwing]

They didn't need anything or deserve anything at all.

If two kids people want to have a harmless swordfight, it's not anyone's business to intervene or tell them they're not allowed to.

The point is that they're kids; those kinds of moments can have long-lasting reverberations.

-Duxwing

 

[Hawkeye]

edited: I dun goofed.

 

[Jennywocky]

The worst part is those fucking parents and the whistleblower probably wont even realize all the unnecessary suffering their stupid, stupid behavior caused but will just get on with their lives.

Oh, actually, even worse -- they'll blame any issues the boys faced on the fact they touched each other before people could stop them, and also blame the culture that somehow must have led those two boys to doing something so heinous.

(Remember, we're the culture that for quite some time kicked gay people out of our families, condoned violence towards them, told them they were going to hell, had them removed from jobs and positions of authority and otherwise treated them like lepers, barred entry into the country, shipped off to asylums... and then blamed any psychological/PTSD issues from that kind of cultural experience on how psychologically bad it inherently must be to be gay -- "just look at how messed up they are! They're obviously disturbed. We can't let them raise kids.")

Rationalization makes the world go 'round.

 

[redbaron]

The point is that they're kids; those kinds of moments can have long-lasting reverberations.

Well, no. I think you missed the most important part of the story: which is that an initially innocuous curiosity was turned into a full-blown spectacle that has conceivably affected both children's long-term development.

The only way these kinds of moments have, 'long-lasting reverberations' is if people make an issue of them. All the teacher needed to do was tell them that it wasn't acceptable to do it where they did it, and send them along to their respective classes.

They weren't doing anything wrong, they were just doing it in the wrong place.

It's important for young people to be able to explore and understand their sexuality. No one benefits from pushing dogmatic values onto young people and trying to dictate how they, 'should' express it.

 

[Coolydudey]

Since i've noticed some people talk about it, i'll give you guys the European perspective.

Sexuality isn't a topic discussed from a very young age. That's not different to anywhere else. However, as children grow up, especially reaching the middle teens, people become more and more open about sexuality. Around 15-17 there's a pretty standard discussion both with parents and at school about contraception. And by this age, children have already been encouraged by their parents to think along the lines "there's nothing wrong with it, it's human nature and it should be enjoyed", along which lines they do mostly think. The goal here in the EU is to make kids accept it, embrace it, and be safe about it. No prejudices or false preconceptions involved. I am of course speaking generally.

And that's where it starts really, in childhood.

 

[Duxwing]

Well, no. I think you missed the most important part of the story: which is that an initially innocuous curiosity was turned into a full-blown spectacle that has conceivably affected both children's long-term development.

I agree that it shouldn't have; however, I also think that different response would have been better.

The only way these kinds of moments have, 'long-lasting reverberations' is if people make an issue of them. All the teacher needed to do was tell them that it wasn't acceptable to do it where they did it, and send them along to their respective classes.

Or if one molested of hurt the other: we don't know what happened until we calmly, quietly, and privately ask the kids and find out. If they were just playing doctor, then I have no problem with it, and if one kid got hurt, then tell the other one not to do whatever they did again and get the hurt kid some treatement. What happened in this case was that the fear of trauma caused a spectacular reaction that may have caused a great deal of it.

They weren't doing anything wrong, they were just doing it in the wrong place.

How do we know that one kid wasn't hurting the other? And yes, the bathroom is no place for that.

It's important for young people to be able to explore and understand their sexuality. No one benefits from pushing dogmatic values onto young people and trying to dictate how they, 'should' express it.

I agree.

-Duxwing

 

[Montresor]

Or if one molested of hurt the other: we don't know what happened until we calmly, quietly, and privately ask the kids and find out. If they were just playing doctor, then I have no problem with it, and if one kid got hurt, then tell the other one not to do whatever they did again and get the hurt kid some treatement. What happened in this case was that the fear of trauma caused a spectacular reaction that may have caused a great deal of it.

Just a little naive I think.

I'm inclined to side completely with Red Baron that this is an incident that didn't need to leave the bathroom. Obviously you can't find privacy in there so a private conversation would have to take place elsewhere,

..which would cause that overwhelming sick tummy feeling of adrenaline that pumps through the veins of children caught, sometimes for days on end, before any tolerance is built


"I'm not telling anybody about this, k boys. You're doing this in the wrong place, this is school, and you're lucky I respect your privacy. Now get the fuck out!" Without the last part obv.

 

[Hawkeye]

Imagine if it were a unisex toilet.

Spoiler