Where do Babies Come From? A Scientific Explanation for Curious Kids

[zomgwtf]

Hypotheses:

1. People who's parent(s) weren't affectionate with them don't see affection until their first love (or sex partner) so they associate affection with sexuality from then on.

2. The words "date" and "couple" mean different things in different regions. I wonder if it's west coast vs. east coast or what? I would be considered west coast and this doesn't bother me. The article was written out of WA.

3. The particular father-daughter relationships of participants of this thread may be strained. For instance, if a mean, teenage daughter always acts disgusted and embarrassed by her father, her father might react in the way his daughter generally does, by being disgusted and embarrassed at the thought of a date night (as a defense mechanism).

Yes, I'm taking abnormal psych right now, I apologize in advance.

Lol, I was thinking along the same lines when I first posted. I just didn't want to start making assumptions about peoples personal lives :tongue:. The word 'couple' in my opinion is pushing the boundary but calling it a 'date night' I see no harm done. I would assume that a lot of the negativity towards this has to do mostly with your hypotheses 1 and 3. Maybe add number 4.

4. Some people while younger longed for 'good' familial bonding yet their parents never gave it this way. So now, not because they associate it with 'sex', but because the associate it with 'what they never had' they are disgusted by the idea.

It's the same thing for how some people are spoiled. Many people automatically hate people who get everything they want before they even know them as people. I think it has to do more with the fact that the person hating as a child didn't get everything they wanted.

 

[Chi Meson]

I think this is why I hate psychology, actually. I secretly wanted to be psychoanalyzed when I was a pre-teen, and now I am disgusted by people trying to read more into a situation than is actually there.

 

[Proton Soup]

the more i think about this, the more i think it "depends". for those that are overly prudish and don't allow their 16-year-old daughters to date or have boyfriends, i think this tips a bit over into generally creepy and poorly conceived. for preteen girls, it seems more like an innocent fun thing. but in a framework of discipline and control, it gets weird.

 

[Klockan3]

I think this is why I hate psychology, actually. I secretly wanted to be psychoanalyzed when I was a pre-teen, and now I am disgusted by people trying to read more into a situation than is actually there.

Actually psychologists aren't taught anything that have to do with Freud except the history of him as a founding father of psychology as a science. It stopped like 50 years ago, modern theories are much more sane and accurate.

 

[ideasrule]

but in a framework of discipline and control, it gets weird.

Well said. If your dad only talks to you to criticize or to offer "adult guidance", and never to have fun or play, of course you'd think a daddy-daughter date night is weird. If your parents don't let you date until after high school--and this is the case for many, if not most, Chinese parents--of course any kind of affectionate relationship would seem unnatural.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

... why assume that all fathers want to take their daughters out for a nice night intend to molest them afterwards or ever...

It is not a matter of believing all such father daughter relationships involve molestation. The mental connection is formed by personally knowing people who have suffered. It becomes a reminder and conjures up the concern I felt for those I care about. I do not think less of these fathers or wonder if they are molesting their daughters and I am happy for them that they have such a relationship. I make no assumptions only it makes me feel somewhat uncomfortable to remember and so my feeling (as opposed to rational perspective) about such things is that they are kind of "weird"/"creepy". And concern about such things is not really something one would generally deprogram themselves of but merely learn to not over play the significance.

How many fathers do you seriously think abuse their daughters, anyway?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse#Incest
Wiki gives an approximate 15% of women are sexually abused as minors and the most often reported tend to be abuse from the father or stepfather. Its not really common but it isn't exactly rare.

 

[Char. Limit]

You don't know that all of those women are telling the truth. Women are people, and people lie.

That said, 15% seems like a reasonable number, especially considering that familial abuse would seem, to me, to be the hardest to catch. Also, in my mind (I've never been one) a stepfather would be more likely to sexually abuse his daughter than a blood father. I don't mean to offend, I just see a relationship by blood in the latter case.

 

[zomgwtf]

You don't know that all of those women are telling the truth. Women are people, and people lie.

That said, 15% seems like a reasonable number, especially considering that familial abuse would seem, to me, to be the hardest to catch. Also, in my mind (I've never been one) a stepfather would be more likely to sexually abuse his daughter than a blood father. I don't mean to offend, I just see a relationship by blood in the latter case.

I think that the number would be more than likely accurate, since although people lie, people don't always come forward. I think that if anything more people do not come forward about these events, or possibly even supress or 'forget' them, which would make the percentage even higher.

@stat I didn't mean to imply that you thought 'less' of those fathers I just think that it is not logically sound to say 'well I know such and such got molested after her father brought her out on dates so this is creepy.' It is true that your feelings of something are not always logical. However I think when applying the word 'creepy' to a father who would think he's doing a nice thing to build a relationship with his daughter one should put more logically consistent thought into it. That's a pretty hurtful thing to say about what some people would consider to be a 'good time'

@proton, I agree entirely that if the father is only using this time to enforce a sort-of 'discplinary' action or as a way to hinder them from dating or being with other men that it is kind of weird... even unnecessary. I would like to assume however that most men who are fathers do this with their daughters simply for the enjoyment of having a close relationship with their father which from experience in my family is something that a lot of men would like to have. (not in a weird sexual way... in a 'fathers pride' sort of way.)

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

However I think when applying the word 'creepy' to a father who would think he's doing a nice thing to build a relationship with his daughter one should put more logically consistent thought into it. That's a pretty hurtful thing to say about what some people would consider to be a 'good time'

I am not intending to label such fathers 'creepy' either. Its the situation as opposed to the people. Similarly I am claustrophobic and not discomfited by the actual people near me so much as my perceived confinement by their proximity.

 

[Evo]

The event is not creepy, it's the name that's creepy.

 

[GeorginaS]

I'm absolutely and firmly in the squick camp, here. My father and uncles taught me how to partner dance too while I was small enough to stand on their feet and hold onto their hands while we moved around the dance area. And that was at weddings and family gatherings. It was fun.

But this event? Even the wording is designed in such a way to induce major spine shivers.

This event is the perfect opportunity for fathers, grandfathers, uncles, or big brothers to take their special little girl out for a night she will never forget.

Emphasis mine.

Pardon?

And then this:

The night will begin with a momentous photograph of the couple. Dancing, dinner and dessert is included in the $45 per couple registration fee

Emphasis mine.

I realize that, yes, two people constitute a "couple" of people. Within this context, and the context of "dating", which is generally defined as adult or almost-adult pairings enjoying social outings together for the purposes of developing or forming an intimate relationship.

I recognise that they were extending the "Daddy" concept to any older male in the young girl's life, because not all kids have daddies present, so they wouldn't want to exclude anyone. But the whole "couple" "date" wording (and associated photograph) suggests a whole bunch of stuff that's wildly inappropriate. At the very least, they could have thought their presentation through a bit better.

Didn't we have a thread similar to this not too long ago, but it entailed men "dating" their teenaged daughters? Wasn't there some sort of pretext or concept behind it about young women learning from their fathers what proper treatment on a date is supposed to entail?

For whoever in this thread wants to keep insisting that women/girls lie about being sexually assaulted (although why they'd do that, I don't know -- my experience and reading tells me that large numbers of girls and women don't ever tell anyone out of shame, if anything, it continues to be under-reported) they might be interested to hold in their minds that the majority of women under the age of 18 who are sexually assaulted have it happen at the hands of someone known to them. A family member, a friend of the family, a neighbour. The majority of the time, it's not a stranger.

I don't see anything at all wrong with dads and daughters spending exclusive time together doing things they enjoy. I have fond memories of my father spending time with me teaching me stuff and playing with my sister and me. It wasn't formalised or contrived. He just demonstrated that he was interested and wanted to be involved. That meant the world to me.

This event, though? Girls from the ages of 4 to 10 on a "date night"? Nope. That's placing them squarely in an adult oriented context. Four-year-olds don't "date". And they don't "date" their daddies.

 

[GeorginaS]

I'm still in my teen years (yay!) and I can say that the last comment is right: I would never be caught dead taking my mother to a date night.

I'm not female, so it might be a different story for fathers and daughters.

If a father is sexually molesting his daughter, I doubt he'd take her out in public on a "date night". He would have to be stupid as well as sick to do that.

How many fathers do you seriously think abuse their daughters, anyway?

Away from the abuse, my high-school is having a mother-son tea thing for seniors (I'm one of them.) I'm going, as my mom wants to, but I wouldn't go if it was labeled a "mother-son date night".

Let me give you some facts, Char.Limit, as it seems you're flying by the seat of your pants and what "seems to make sense" to you rather than what is.

Stuff:

The statistics are shocking

1 in 4 girls is sexually abused before the age of 18. (96)

1 in 6 boys is sexually abused before the age of 18. (96)

1 in 5 children are solicited sexually while on the internet. (30, 87)

Nearly 70% of all reported sexual assaults (including assaults on adults) occur to children ages 17 and under. (76)

An estimated 39 million survivors of childhood sexual abuse exist in America today. (1)

Even within the walls of their own homes, children are at risk for sexual abuse
30-40% of victims are abused by a family member. (2, 44, 76)

Another 50% are abused by someone outside of the family whom they know and trust.

Approximately 40% are abused by older or larger children whom they know. (1, 44)

Therefore, only 10% are abused by strangers.


http://www.darkness2light.org/KnowAbout/statistics_2.asp"

Google for more information. It doesn't matter if you check with sexual abuse hotlines or government stats. They'll tell you pretty much the same thing. Children are most vulnerable in their own homes with with people associated with their family. Truly scary but true.

 

[edpell]

A parent and a child doing an activity together sounds great. Calling it a date and calling the two a couple sounds sexual to me. How about instead I and my daughter went to Ruby Tuesday's for dinner last night. Or I am my son went to see Avatar in Kingston last night.

 

[edpell]

1 in 4 girls is sexually abused before the age of 18. (96)

I am not disagreeing in any way with the statistic. I would like to know what level of abuse counts as "sexual abuse" for the purposes of this statistic.

 

[edpell]

On the language usage question. I am east coast and am surprised by those (of both genders) who use the word girl to refer to all woman regardless of age. At 51 I do not view myself as a boy.

 

[Pythagorean]

Actually psychologists aren't taught anything that have to do with Freud except the history of him as a founding father of psychology as a science. It stopped like 50 years ago, modern theories are much more sane and accurate.

Yeah, neuroscience is becoming more and more integrated with it. But to be fair to Chi Meson, there's still a lot of philosophy in it. I'm only in it as part of a neuroscience degree, myself (particularly, I'm interested in studying brain region functionality by studying cases that have a known neurological component).

Here's an example of where I think they're a little fast on their feet though:
One of our assignments is to do community service somewhere in mental health and keep a journal and basically psycholanalyze the people we're helping. It seems kind of weird to me, since none of us are licensed clinicians.

I'm really not interested in clinical psychology at all. I keep on pushing on doing my community service project in neuro and I wanted to give my presentation on synesthesia, but my prof wants me to go more for clinical-based disorders.

I think this is why I hate psychology, actually. I secretly wanted to be psychoanalyzed when I was a pre-teen, and now I am disgusted by people trying to read more into a situation than is actually there.

it sounds like somebody's overcompensating ;P

 

[edpell]

Actually psychologists aren't taught anything that have to do with Freud

Psychologists have a fear of emotions (and maybe ignorance?) and so are limited as therapists. They are great for cognitive issues.

 

[Char. Limit]

@Georgina: Why would girls and women lie about being sexually assaulted? Well, see the Duke lacrosse rape case. Great example.

I agree that sexual abuse is bad. But I don't think that if a father is sexually abusing his daughter, he's going to go out in public with her and call it a date.

 

[DaveC426913]

Why is it scarier and/or creepier for a pre-teen girl to go out for a night with a known loved one than with a teenaged virtual stranger that she or her parents know nothing about except that he's likely raging with hormones?

If we're talking sexual assault (or mere sexual corruption), which is, in reality, more likely?

 

[GeorginaS]

Why is it scarier and/or creepier for a pre-teen girl to go out for a night with a known loved one than with a teenaged virtual stranger that she or her parents know nothing about except that he's likely raging with hormones?

If we're talking sexual assault (or mere sexual corruption), which is, in reality, more likely?

Age 4 to 10 is not "pre-teen", although technically it is, but not in the sense that I think you're referring to. And I think it's creepy/squicky because it's sexualising the parent/child relationship.

 

[Evo]

Age 4 to 10 is not "pre-teen", although technically it is, but not in the sense that I think you're referring to. And I think it's creepy/squicky because it's sexualising the parent/child relationship.

I agree.
I really don't know how people can't see that the way that event was described contains inappropriate sexual inuendo in the language. I'm not saying that they were *acting* inappropriately, I'm saying the choice of wording was stupid.

It is not appropriate to describe an outing with a father/father figure as a "couple on a date". You can't pretend that "a couple on a date", in our society, doesn't mean a romantic relationship. Even adult friends would not describe going out together as "a couple on a date".

 

[DaveC426913]

It is not appropriate to describe an outing with a father/father figure as a "couple on a date". You can't pretend that "a couple on a date", in our society, doesn't mean a romantic relationship. Even adult friends would not describe going out together as "a couple on a date".

OK but still, parents are supposed to walk their children through rights of passage. Isn't it better that a young girl learn under controlled circumstances what going out in public with a boy is all about?

It seems to me you are approaching it from the idea that it is a romantic date, as opposed to a learning opportunity.

I'm not saying this is a great way to do it, I'm saying I'd give it the benefit of the doubt.


'course, I did ont realize the age limits 4-10.

 

[ideasrule]

I don't think anybody needs guidance on what going out with a boy is all about: that's plainly obvious to anybody smarter than a frying pan. What teenagers do need guidance on is how to ask for a date, where to get good porn (as opposed to virus-infested or psychologically damaging porn), and how to have a good sex life. I don't think many parents or teenagers have the bravery to discuss these things with their parents/children.

 

[Char. Limit]

Bravery? You'd need a tower of Babel full of bravery to get me to ask my dad where I can find good porn. Also, afterwards, you'd have to find me a new place to live.

Sometimes, it's not cowardice that prevents teenagers from asking these questions. It's intelligence.

 

[DaveC426913]

I don't think anybody needs guidance on what going out with a boy is all about: that's plainly obvious to anybody smarter than a frying pan.

This is naive.

How do you think it becomes plainly obvious? Some people are not content with leaving their child's sexual education to the schoolyard and the TV.

 

[ideasrule]

How do you think it becomes plainly obvious?

Magic? No, I'm kidding; it becomes plainly obvious by observation, just like how nobody needs to teach a grade 8 student what it's like to be in grade 8: it's obvious by observation.

Some people are not content with leaving their child's sexual education to the schoolyard and the TV.

The schoolyard and the TV are much better teachers when it comes to sexual education. Parents, like the Chinese parents I was talking about earlier, may have little idea what modern culture is like or what's considered sexually appropriate/inappropriate by society. What better way to learn about romance than to see it in action?

 

[Evo]

This is naive.

How do you think it becomes plainly obvious? Some people are not content with leaving their child's sexual education to the schoolyard and the TV.

Most children learn from peers. Schools have sex edcuation, so even if a parent can't bring themselves to having "talks" with their kids, they will have a pretty good idea of what is acceptable, unless they are home schooled and isolated.

 

[ideasrule]

Bravery? You'd need a tower of Babel full of bravery to get me to ask my dad where I can find good porn. Also, afterwards, you'd have to find me a new place to live.

Sometimes, it's not cowardice that prevents teenagers from asking these questions. It's intelligence.

Exactly what I meant.

 

[Proton Soup]

This is naive.

How do you think it becomes plainly obvious? Some people are not content with leaving their child's sexual education to the schoolyard and the TV.

i have to agree. if anything, the expectations can be quite different for each

 

[DaveC426913]

...it becomes plainly obvious by observation, just like how nobody needs to teach a grade 8 student what it's like to be in grade 8: it's obvious by observation.

You've got to be kidding.

We're talking about going on dates here. What are they going to do? Shadow a couple and record their conversations? Their dancing skills? Watch how they order their food and eat it? Keep a checklist for ensuring they powder their nose instead of picking it?

Look, I'm not saying it cannot be done by observation, what I'm saying is: clearly this website appeals to a group of people who are not satisfied with what happens when kids learn their dating behaviour by observing their peers.

The schoolyard and the TV are much better teachers when it comes to sexual education. Parents, like the Chinese parents I was talking about earlier, may have little idea what modern culture is like or what's considered sexually appropriate/inappropriate by society. What better way to learn about romance than to see it in action?

I've got to be clear here. You and I may feel that this is a good way for our children to get their sexual education. But once you grant that there are people who - justifiably - have decided that society at-large is not the best teacher, then the responsibility rightfully falls to the parents.

Most children learn from peers. Schools have sex edcuation, so even if a parent can't bring themselves to having "talks" with their kids, they will have a pretty good idea of what is acceptable, unless they are home schooled and isolated.

Because some or even most parents find that acceptable does not mean they all must.

Again, it is not our place to decide for them that society should educate their kids.

 

[Evo]

You've got to be kidding.
Look, I'm not saying it cannot be done by observation, what I'm saying is: clearly this website appeals to a group of people who are not satisfied with what happens when kids learn their dating behaviour by observing their peers.

These are babies, aged 4-10. How much dating do they do?

I don't think interacting with a father figure at this point (father figure being a source of authority) would have anything to do with romantic dating. I can see it being harmful. A toddler being thrown into a situation that is related to stirring feelings of sex being associated with their father? EEEWWWWWW

 

[DaveC426913]

These are babies, aged 4-10. How much dating do they do?

Well, clearly it is a pre-cursor. How much algebra do they use at that age, yet they still learn it in school.

And if you wait till >10, it's likely too late. Because of the whole peer thing.

 

[MotoH]

You have to teach the kids things before it becomes awkward to do so. Getting the sex talk at 8 years old was a lot easier then at 14.

 

[GeorginaS]

OK but still, parents are supposed to walk their children through rights of passage. Isn't it better that a young girl learn under controlled circumstances what going out in public with a boy is all about?

It seems to me you are approaching it from the idea that it is a romantic date, as opposed to a learning opportunity.

I'm not saying this is a great way to do it, I'm saying I'd give it the benefit of the doubt.


'course, I did ont realize the age limits 4-10.

Huh. Okay then. I'll go with believing that 4 is a little bit young to be indoctrinating a girl into the the subtleties of dating. I'll even go so far as saying that 10 is too young.

I'm with Evo in that, Dave, it's not us who is approaching it from the idea of it being a romantic date, it's the wording associated with the event. We didn't write the ad copy. The ad/article presents it as a romantic date.

One last. I can teach kids about sex and love and responsibility and respect and how those things are all tied together without walking them through it personally before they get involved with some relative stranger with raging hormones. I don't have to do it with a child to give them an outline and understanding of how it should go.

 

[DaveC426913]

Getting the sex talk at 8 years old was a lot easier then at 14.

You got it twice? What? Like a refresher?