The new grammar

[maestrowork]

A parent's primer to computer slang
Understand how your kids communicate online to help protect them
(published on Feb 04, 2005 -- source unknown)



While it's important to respect your children's privacy, understanding what your teenager's online slang means and how to decipher could be important in certain situations and as you help guide their online experience. While it has many nicknames, information-age slang is commonly referred to as leetspeek, or leet for short. Leet (a vernacular form of "elite") is a specific type of computer slang where a user replaces regular letters with other keyboard characters to form words phonetically—creating the digital equivalent of pig Latin with a twist of hieroglyphics.

Leet words can be expressed in hundreds of ways using different substitutions and combinations, but once one understands that nearly all characters are formed as phonemes and symbols, leetspeek isn't difficult to translate. The following serves as a brief, and by no means definitive, introduction to Leet through examples.

Key points for learning leetspeek
• Numbers are often used as letters. The term "leet" could be written as "1337," with "1" replacing the letter L, "3" posing as a backwards letter E, and "7" resembling the letter T. Others include "8" replacing the letter B, "9" used as a G, "0" (zero) in lieu of O, and so on.

• Non-alphabet characters can be used to replace the letters they resemble. For example, "5" or even "$" can replace the letter S. Applying this style, the word "leetspeek" can be written as "133t5p33k" or even "!337$p34k," with "4" replacing the letter A.

• Letters can be substituted for other letters that may sound alike. Using "Z" for a final letter S, and "X" for words ending in the letters C or K is common. For example, leetspeekers might refer to their computer "5x1llz" (skills).

• Rules of grammar are rarely obeyed. Some leetspeekers will capitalize every letter except for vowels (LiKe THiS) and otherwise reject conventional English style and grammar, or drop vowels from words (such as converting very to "vry").

• Mistakes are often left uncorrected. Common typing misspellings (typos) such as "teh" instead of the are left uncorrected and may be adopted to replace the correct spelling altogether.

• Non-alphanumeric characters may be combined to form letters. For example, using slashes to create "/\/\" can substitute for the letter M, and two pipes combined with a hyphen to form "|-|" is often used in place of the letter H. Thus, the word ham could be written as "|-|4/\/\."

• The suffix "0rz" is often appended to words for emphasis or to make them plural. For example, "h4xx0rz," "sk1llz0rz," and "pwnz0rz," are plural or emphasized versions (or both) of hacks, skills, and owns.


It's important to remember that the leetspeek community encourages new forms and awards individual creativity, resulting in a dynamic written language that eludes conformity or consistency. However, there are a few standard terms. The following is a sample of key words that haven't changed fundamentally (although variations occur) since the invention of leetspeek. The first series is of particular concern, as their use could be an indicator that your teenager is involved in the theft of intellectual property, particularly licensed software.

Leet words of concern or indicating possible illegal activity:

• "warez" or "w4r3z": Illegally copied software available for download.

• "h4x": Read as "hacks," or what a computer hacker does.

• "pr0n": An anagram of "porn," possibly indicating the use of pornography.

• "sploitz" (short for exploits): Vulnerabilities in computer software used by hackers.

• "pwn": A typo-deliberate version of own, a slang term used to express superiority over others that can be used maliciously, depending on the situation. This could also be spelled "0\/\/n3d" or "pwn3d," among other variations. Online video game bullies or "griefers" often use this term.


Other common leet words:

• "kewl": A common derivation of "cool."

• "m4d sk1llz" or "mad skills": Refers to one's own talent. "m4d" itself is often used for emphasis.

• "n00b," "noob," "newbie," or "newb": Combinations synonymous with new user. Some leetspeekers view "n00b" as an insult and "newbie" as an affectionate term for new users.

• "w00t" or the smiley character \o/: An acronym that means "We Own the Other Team," used to celebrate victory in a video game.

• "roxx0rs" Used in place of "rocks," typically to describe something impressive.

• "d00d": Replaces the greeting or addressing someone as a "dude."

• "joo" and "u": Used instead of "you." This is also commonly written as "j00" or "_|00."

• "ph": often replaces "f," as in "phear" for "fear" (as in "ph34r my l33t skillz") and vice versa, such as spelling "phonetic" as "f0|\|371(."

[JanaLanier]

I'd often wondered about all that stuff... I've seen "wOOt" and "newb" and "kewl" used here on the boards.

Boy, it makes me feel old (sigh).

[Rob-rite]

Yeah, it's like we're trying to study and understand an alien species.

Then again ...

[Moondancer]

Yeah, it's like we're trying to study and understand an alien species.

Then again ...

Nah, just kids thinking they can get one over on their parents because old folks are too dumb to understand. It's like once we hit a certain age, our brains are supposed to go south or something... Problem for my kids is I was "around" when most of those "words" were coined, :snoopy: .

[ChunkyC]

Feels like a digital and far more elaborate version of the "pig latin" us oldsters used to (supposedly) confound our parents back in the olden days:

Ancay Ihay avehay ahay ookiecay?

Drove my mom nuts.

[TemlynWriting]

I have a friend who uses "teh" all the time, and she majored in English! I hate "leet!" Yeesh!!!

[Dawno]

Source: http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/children/kidtalk.mspx

[CindyBidar]

as in "ph34r my l33t skillz"

Isn't it easier to type "fear my leet skills" (whatever that means)? I'd be all day trying to have a conversation if I had to type numbers and obscure symbols, too. :Huh:

[Galoot]

Oh, crap! I have some serious rewriting to do.

"She kicked him in the n00bs" and "The gymnast hurt his pr0n while doing the sploitz" don't mean what I thought they did.

[jdkiggins]

http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/images/smilies/EmoteHeadbang.gif The New Grammar

So much for Strunk and White's The Elements of Style.
Joanne

[Dawno]

Isn't it easier to type "fear my leet skills" (whatever that means)? I'd be all day trying to have a conversation if I had to type numbers and obscure symbols, too. :Huh:

Never fear, there's a translator online you can use @ http://www.eskimo.com/~mvargas/hax0r.htm (http://www.eskimo.com/%7Emvargas/hax0r.htm)

:Thumbs: n0\/\/ j00 c@N +r@N$1@+3 y0ur \/\/ri+iNg iN+0
$0M3+hiNg +h3 y0uNg3r g3N3r@+i0N \/\/i11 c0MPr3h3Nd.

[arainsb123]

I've always wondered why people bother with leet, since it takes at least three times as long. As I've said in my Grammar Rants thread, I use perfect grammar in all of my instant messages and in chat rooms.

[Galoot]

Me 2.

[Vipersniper]

:poke: I use the Bubba Do Good theory on grammar in that I stammer but here it is. "Ifn I hasta to fracture somepin it may as well be the English language than somepin on my body." He graduated from Yale and yes that is his name.

[James D. Macdonald]

People have been using language to define inside/outside groups since forever. Slang, cant, argot, jargon ... it's how to figure out who's "us" in "us vs. them."

[JennaGlatzer]

I get the numbers-that-look-like-letters thing, but pwn? Why?

I find it slightly jarring when IMing with my dad that our conversations look like this sometimes:

Him: wat u doin?

Me: I'm working. You?

Him: im trying 2 find green sox on ebay

I think he would have been a leetspeaker if he were still a teen.

I'm such an old fart.

[TemlynWriting]

I get the numbers-that-look-like-letters thing, but pwn? Why?

I find it slightly jarring when IMing with my dad that our conversations look like this sometimes:

Him: wat u doin?

Me: I'm working. You?

Him: im trying 2 find green sox on ebay

I think he would have been a leetspeaker if he were still a teen.

I'm such an old fart.

I'm an old fart, too, Jenna. A fellow English major friend of mine, who has a MA as well, and prides herself on her grammar skills, has a new favorite phrase: "Teh Pretty." She uses this all the time in regard to her favorite celebrities. I know this is "cool" and all, but she is known for her "superiority" complex (can't think of a better way to put it). For her to do this is a double standard, when she'll call others on it any day.

I hate "pwn" too. It looks like a shortened term for "pawn."

I'm afraid of having/raising children in this society. Eek!

[Shiny_Penguin]

Nah, just kids thinking they can get one over on their parents because old folks are too dumb to understand.

Like my kids (5 and 7 yrs old) thought they could say "weiner" and "ding-dong" and I'd have no idea what they were talking about.

[awatkins]

I hate "pwn" too. It looks like a shortened term for "pawn."

What does 'pwn' mean?? *cringe*

And :ROFL: to Laura!

[Fractured_Chaos]

I get the numbers-that-look-like-letters thing, but pwn? Why?



I think it started as a typo, like teh did. 'P' and 'O' are right next to each other.

Of course, I'm embarassed by my typos. Sometimes they come back to haunt me...like the time I was in an IRC chatroom, and typoed "ducks" (What letter is right next to th 'U' on a qwerty keyboard?). And it was in the sentence, "Yer jist cuter'n a bucket o'baby ducks" :Smack:

[Anatole Ghio]

People have been using language to define inside/outside groups since forever. Slang, cant, argot, jargon ... it's how to figure out who's "us" in "us vs. them."

This is exactly spot on. Any complaints about it taking too long to read or to type are missing the point; if it were easy to do leet speak, anyone could do it well, and the whole distinction of who is more in the know would be lost. By being a little difficult to do, those WiD Dahttp://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/images/smilies/EmoteTrophy.gif MaD SKiLLZ CaN SHoW oFF 2 THeiR PeePS HoW CooLZ THeY iZ!http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/images/smilies/emoticonbanana.gif

[KellyS.]

pub1i$h@M3ric@ $ux0rz!

Hah! Looks good like that too.

Had to do it. I did the pig latin thing too. I think this looks like pig latin on drugs. I get the point, but it seems too extreme.

[WVWriterGirl]

We used B language in high school - similar to piglatin, but, well, not.

I-ba wabant tooboo gobo oubut sibed (Translation, I want to go outside)

Drove my mom nuts, too. Unfortunately, when you're active in the Multi-User Dungeon community (precursor of Everquest, just without the pictures) you have to become fluent in l33t since most of the players are teenage geek-boys (nothing against teenage geek-boys...my MUD would've crashed multiple times without them). I enjoyed owning, running and writing a MUD, but man, thank goodness I'm away from the constant l33t!

WVWG

[DeadlyAccurate]

n0\/\/ j00 c@N +r@N$1@+3 y0ur \/\/ri+iNg iN+0
$0M3+hiNg +h3 y0uNg3r g3N3r@+i0N \/\/i11 c0MPr3h3Nd.

What's sad is how easily I can read that.

And yes, "pwn" came from a mis-fingering of "own" due to the key locations of "o" and "p". When you're typing in an online computer game, you have very little time to get your point across before you're attacked. So some of leetspeak came about from that.

For the record, "leet" means "elite." Don't be surprised if "leet" becomes an accepted alternate spelling of the word some day.

[Roger J Carlson]

While it's important to respect your children's privacy... Sez who? Until my daughter turned 18, I snooped at every opportunity. It's not my job to be her friend. My job is to raise her to be an adult.

A few years ago, a boy we know committed suicide. He was from a good, loving family. He was talented and well-liked. To all outward apperances, he was happy. His parents had no idea he was unhappy and to this day don't really know why.

It amazes me that otherwise intelligent adults believe their children would never lie to them, even when they know how they lied to their parents. My parents didn't have a clue, and I determined then and there that I would never be a clueless parent. I would KNOW what was going on in my daughter's head.

Yes, I read her diary. Yes, I read letters from her friends. I installed IM tracking software. I wasn't careful enough and she caught on. She got clever opened a Yahoo email account. I got even cleverer and installed spyware that tracked every keystroke including passwords. She never did discover the extent to which we snooped, and I never told her.

I make no apologies. As a result of this, we were able to track a VERY destructive relationship. We KNEW the difference between the face she showed us and the face she showed to her boyfriend. We KNEW how he constantly manipulated her to break the rules. We KNEW how much he disrespected us AND her. And after it was all over, she thanked us for all the roadblocks we put in her way -- and was amazed that we always knew what was going on.

A child's "right to privacy" is a myth. It is far more important to get them through some of the toughest times of their lives. Studies have shown that the part of the brain that controls decision-making is not fully developed even by the late teens. That's why kids have parents. That's why parents have to snoop.

[Liam Jackson]

<<fear my leet skills>> -Fear my elite skills

I roxxer joo- I rocked you (best you) in a contest

Pwn joo- we had a contest and I owned (beat) your sorry butt

ubEr rOxX0r- super contestant

A few weeks ago, I was standing near a small group of teens when one them said something about "scoring some ganj" One of his buddies told him to keep it down, and the first kid said, "Why? None of these old asses know what Ganja is!"

I laughed so hard, I almost peEd mAh-seF.

[Alphabeter]

I'm such an old fart.

Oh jeez. If Jenna feels old, some of the rest of us are really ancient!

[Galoot]

Sorry to resurrect an old thread, but if you haven't watched Tales for the Leet: Hamlet (http://uninteresting.myby.co.uk/noeffort/hamlet.htm) yet, you must do so.

...

I'll wait.

[Fractured_Chaos]

Sorry to resurrect an old thread, but if you haven't watched Tales for the Leet: Hamlet (http://uninteresting.myby.co.uk/noeffort/hamlet.htm) yet, you must do so.

...

I'll wait.

Oh, Gawd! It hurts and stings. :Wha:

[reph]

Until my daughter turned 18, I snooped at every opportunity....It amazes me that otherwise intelligent adults believe their children would never lie to them, even when they know how they lied to their parents. My parents didn't have a clue....Yes, I read her diary....I make no apologies.
Somehow I know I'm not going to win this argument. I'll speak my piece anyway.

I wonder why your daughter needed so much spying on. Could it be that, when younger, she picked up subtle cues that being a sneak is a normal way to live? Might she have got that impression from being raised by a father who had habitually lied to his parents?

You may not be aware of this, but in some families honesty prevails. Parents don't sneak around watching the kids. Kids don't try to sneak things past the parents. I prefer relationships of that kind. They don't make people nervous. Having nothing to hide means not being afraid of getting found out. It means being able to talk freely and spontaneously with your loved ones because you don't have to step around secrets.

Unhealthy families are full of secrets.

[astonwest]

Sorry to resurrect an old thread, but if you haven't watched Tales for the Leet: Hamlet (http://uninteresting.myby.co.uk/noeffort/hamlet.htm) yet, you must do so.

OMG!
(oops...I watched Romeo and Juliet, not Hamlet...)

:tongue

[Roger J Carlson]

Somehow I know I'm not going to win this argument. I'll speak my piece anyway.

I wonder why your daughter needed so much spying on. Could it be that, when younger, she picked up subtle cues that being a sneak is a normal way to live? Might she have got that impression from being raised by a father who had habitually lied to his parents?

You may not be aware of this, but in some families honesty prevails. Parents don't sneak around watching the kids. Kids don't try to sneak things past the parents. I prefer relationships of that kind. They don't make people nervous. Having nothing to hide means not being afraid of getting found out. It means being able to talk freely and spontaneously with your loved ones because you don't have to step around secrets.

Unhealthy families are full of secrets.First of all, I didn't know were *having* an argument. How I choose to raise my daughter is not up for debate.

Still, you're making some remarkable conclusions about me and my family based on incomplete information. At one time we did have a trusting relationship, but she broke that trust first. The details are no one else's business, but it was important enough at the time for my wife and I to take drastic action.

I'd rather be judged based on results. My daughter is now a happy, healthy college freshman. She's not into drugs, alcohol, or sex. (If you think I'm being naive, remember the point of this thread!) She has a finacee and is planning to be married in a couple of years. I don't really approve of her finacee, but it's no longer up to me. This is her decision. My job was to get her to adulthood. Now that she is an adult (at least legally), I no longer snoop. It's her life to do with as she pleases, although I'll be happy to give her advice if she asks.

My original point was that "privacy rights" for kids is not the most important thing. Parents are not doing their children any favors if they say nothing when they see a train wreck coming. They are doing their kids even less of a favor if they refuse to listen for the whistle. Sometimes parents need to do hard things, even if it hurts them to do so.

It hurt me very much to do the things I did. But I have no regrets, and I'd do them again.

--Roger J. Carlson
www.rogerjcarlson.com (http://www.rogerjcarlson.com/)

Afterword: Interestingly, my Reputation Points for this post are evenly split between positive and negative. Some applaud my courage and others revile my machinations. I've resisted the temptation to respond in kind because, as I understand it, that's not the reason for the reputation system. Still, it shows how different any group of people can be.

[reph]

First of all, I didn't know were *having* an argument. How I choose to raise my daughter is not up for debate....

Afterword: Interestingly, my Reputation Points for this post are evenly split between positive and negative....I've resisted the temptation to respond in kind because, as I understand it, that's not the reason for the reputation system.
I used the word "argument" because I expected that my response to your post would start one. The debate isn't about your choices in raising your daughter; it's about your promotion of principles that would justify those choices, such as that the end justifies the means and that children's privacy counts for nothing. I was trying to speak up for openness.

Whatever your daughter did initially that showed her to be untrustworthy, you could have dealt with it less sneakily by telling her that her parents were partly responsible for her behavior (in the legal sense, if nothing else) and you were going to give her more supervision. You could have told her that you'd be reading her e-mails to friends and then done so. That would have put her on notice. In my opinion, it would have been more honorable than hacking into her computer. Instead, you set an example of how to get what one wants by ducking the radar.

Your job of raising your daughter is done. Accordingly, I offer this opinion not for you but for other parents to consider. I'd like to get you to understand my views about the implications of taking a sneaky approach in general, but I don't believe that'll happen.

I agree that reputation points shouldn't be used to reciprocate points received, positive or negative. I don't even think they should be used just because one agrees or disagrees with someone's message. That's why you didn't get any points from me.

[Roger J Carlson]

I used the word "argument" because I expected that my response to your post would start one. I would like to think this is a reasoned debate rather than an argument.

The debate isn't about your choices in raising your daughter; it's about your promotion of principles that would justify those choices, such as that the end justifies the means and that children's privacy counts for nothing.This requires two responses:

1) "Ends justify the means" -- Yes, absolutely. I will do whatever necessary to raise my daughter into a happy, healthy, and safe adult. I will NOT use means that do not further that end, and so my wife and I VERY carefully considered what we did. We WERE concerned that our activities would alienate our daughter, but we considered that possibility less damaging than where she was headed.

2) "Children's privacy counts for nothing" -- In fact, I never said that. However, I do believe that their right to privacy is far less important than keeping them safe. Children do not have adult rights (legally) because they are not capable of making informed decisions. I would be abrogating my responsibility as a parent if I let her make destructive decisions. And how do I know if she's making destructive decisions if I don't monitor her activities.

Whatever your daughter did initially that showed her to be untrustworthy, you could have dealt with it less sneakily by telling her that her parents were partly responsible for her behavior (in the legal sense, if nothing else) and you were going to give her more supervision. You could have told her that you'd be reading her e-mails to friends and then done so. That would have put her on notice. In my opinion, it would have been more honorable than hacking into her computer. Instead, you set an example of how to get what one wants by ducking the radar.In fact, we did tell her that we would be supervising her more closely including her email. Then SHE got sneaky and started using Instant Messages. As a computer professional, I knew there were products that can record IM and I installed that. Then she tried a free Yahoo email account (to which I did not have the password) which is when I installed spyware to intercept her password. In each case, she upped the ante. I was simply doing what I said I would do, that is monitor her.

As for hacking her computer, you are wrong. She is using MY computer. My employer has the legal and ethical right to monitor my computer usage at work. My employer owns the resource. Should I have any less right with my own computer with my own daughter? As you said, I have legal responsibility for her.

In the end, I believe this is no different than asking where she's going, then making sure she went there. I was not teaching her that sneakiness pays. I was teaching her that sneakiness *does not* pay and that eventually she will be caught.

[reph]

"Children's privacy counts for nothing" -- In fact, I never said that.

In fact, you said: A child's "right to privacy" is a myth. Any difference?

In fact, we did tell her that we would be supervising her more closely including her email. Then SHE got sneaky and started using Instant Messages. As a computer professional, I knew there were products that can record IM and I installed that. Then she tried a free Yahoo email account (to which I did not have the password) which is when I installed spyware to intercept her password....
As for hacking her computer, you are wrong. She is using MY computer.
That it was your computer does make a difference. For instance, you're responsible for making sure no one's using it to do anything illegal (oh, I don't know, maybe conducting a fraudulent business). Nevertheless, confronting her immediately about the IM and the new mail account would have been more straightforward than sneaking around behind her.

[Roger J Carlson]

Originally Posted by Roger J Carlson
"Children's privacy counts for nothing" -- In fact, I never said that.

In fact, you said: A child's "right to privacy" is a myth. Any difference?Sure. I didn't say privacy counted for nothing, I said it was not a right. A child's privacy is important, but it is not the most important thing. And it is not a "right". There is no law anywhere that ensures the right to privacy for a child. Their locker can be searched with permission from the school. Their bedroom can be searched with permission from their parents.

Nevertheless, confronting her immediately about the IM and the new mail account would have been more straightforward than sneaking around behind her.No doubt. But then she would have looked for other means, means that I could not monitor. Remember, she knew that I could monitor her email, so she went to IM and Yahoo. She was doing things that she knew were wrong and that we would disapprove of. I didn't start snooping until she proved to us that she was *not* going to be open and honest with us.

Spying on her was distasteful to me, but a parent who will not do distasteful things to protect their child is not doing their job. Remember my original post. This was on the heels of the suicide of a young man whose parents had no idea he was suicidal. If they had snooped a little bit more, he might be alive today.

[SJB]

I'm astounded that anyone would confess to reading his child's diary.

You say that "in each case, she upped the ante." So you admit that by treating her like a criminal on home detention, to be constantly monitored, you drove her to find new ways of trying to evade your prying? Can't you see how destructive this mutual lack of trust was?

I'm not trying to attack you here- I'm convinced that you thought you were doing the right thing to help your daughter- it's just that I find your post(s) on the subject incredible.

(Is it pertinent that the United States is one of only two nations not to have ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989?)

[Roger J Carlson]

So you admit that by treating her like a criminal on home detention, to be constantly monitored, you drove her to find new ways of trying to evade your prying? Can't you see how destructive this mutual lack of trust was?First of all, I don't admit that I treated her "like a criminal on home detention". Those are your words. She was not on home detention at any time. I do admit that I monitored her. Though this did not "drive" her to find new ways. This implies that she has some right to lie to us, deceive us, and break the rules. She didn't have to do any of those things. All she had to do is be truthful with *us*.

And I *do* see how destructive the mutual lack of respect was. However, I considered it less destructive than the course she was taking. Are you suggesting that I should turn a blind eye to behaviors that I know are to her detriment? She was doing things *she* knew were wrong and lied to us about them. How else could I find the truth? Sometimes you have to choose between the lesser of two evils.

Incidentally, *because* I was sneaky, she never knew I could monitor her Yahoo account. She never did discover that I read her diary. As a result, she never knew how we always caught her doing something that was wrong. Far from teaching her to be dishonest, it taught her that honesty is the best policy, because if she wasn't, she was going to get caught.

Why do you drive the speed limit? It's because you think you might get caught speeding. Isn't it dishonest for the police to set up radar traps? Doesn't that violate your right to go as fast as you want? Sure, except there is no such right and knowing that someone can catch you if you break the rules is the most effective way to enforce them.

(Is it pertinent that the United States is one of only two nations not to have ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989?)
If you look at the Convention, there is not a word about the "right to privacy". In fact, it acknowledges that children cannot make decisions all on their own and require parental guidance:

"Seeks respect for children – but not at the expense of the human rights or responsibilities of others. The Convention on the Rights of the Child confirms that children have a right to express their views (http://www.unicef.org/crc/bg007.htm) and to have their views taken seriously and given due weight – but it does not state that children's views are the only ones to be considered. The Convention also explicitly states that children have a responsibility to respect the rights of others, especially those of parents. The Convention emphasizes the need to respect children's "evolving capacities," but does not give children the right to make decisions for themselves at too young an age. This is rooted in the common-sense concept that the child's path from total dependence to adulthood is gradual. "

Check it out here: http://www.unicef.org/crc/crc.htm

[SJB]

Thanks, but I'm well versed in the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which is law in my country. I only mentioned it because its whole purpose is to promote respect for children as autonomous individuals, and to give them a voice. You're quite right that this is limited to some extent by the "welfare" approach (that is, "I know what's in her best interests, I'll decide for her"), but you're focusing on an exception rather than on the overarching intention of the Convention.

No, it doesn't mention privacy; the decision to read a child's diary involves a moral choice, not a legal one. But you might like to consider this in the context of the Convention: does invading her privacy indicate respect for her as a human being?

OK, I'm bowing out now. Need to do some writing! Take care.

[reph]

Why do you drive the speed limit? It's because you think you might get caught speeding.
Sensible people drive at a safe speed because they know speeding causes accidents. In general, conscientious people behave well because they want to. It's sociopaths who try to get by with whatever they want to do if they think they won't get caught. If getting caught and punished were the only deterrent to destructive acts, society would be in even worse shape than it is.

[Roger J Carlson]

Sensible people drive at a safe speed because they know speeding causes accidents. In general, conscientious people behave well because they want to. It's sociopaths who try to get by with whatever they want to do if they think they won't get caught. If getting caught and punished were the only deterrent to destructive acts, society would be in even worse shape than it is.Of course they do. But I'm not talking about a safe speed. I'm talking about the speed limit. These are two different things. Most people drive at a speed they consider safe. This is rarely the speed limit.

If only sociopaths break the speed limit, the world is full of sociopaths. I drive 80 miles to work (round trip) every day. Most of it is highway. If I drive 5 miles per hour over the speed limit, I am passed by more cars than I pass. Oddly, everybody slows down when there's a speed trap.

Certainly fear of being caught is not the only reason to obey the law, but it does give the law some teeth. For instance, most states have laws requiring people who purchase items over the internet from out-of-state to pay the sales tax. However, since there is virutally no way to enforce this, few people pay such taxes.

Here's another I found the other day that absolutely astounded me:

"Production, transmission, and distribution of obscenity are felonies, yet possession of obscenity in one's home is not a crime. However, use of a phone line or online service to transmit obscenity is a federal crime under current law. Therefore, it is a felony to either upload (transmit from your personal computer to the Internet) or download (copy from the Internet onto your personal computer) Internet obscenity."
(http://www.protectkids.com/dangers/porndefinitions.htm)

and yet:


There are 1.3 million porn websites (N2H2, 9/23/03).
More than 32 million unique individuals visited a porn site in Sept. of 2003. Nearly 22.8 million of them were male (71 percent), while 9.4 million adult site visitors were female (29 percent)
Pornographic web pages now top 260 million and growing at an unprecedented rate (N2H2, 9/23/03).
N2H2's database contained 14 million identified pages of pornography in 1998, so the growth to 260 million represents an almost 20-fold increase in just five years (N2H2, 9/23/03).
The cybersex industry generates approximately $1 billion annually and is expected to grow to $5-7 billion over the next 5 years, barring unforeseen change (National Research Council Report, 2002).
The total porn industry - estimates from $4 billion to $10 billion (National Research Council Report, 2002).
Are all these people breaking the law because they are sociopaths? Or because the chances of being caught are virtually nil?

[Roger J Carlson]

You know what? I've descended into arguing for argument's sake. (Quibbling over speed limits! Good Heavens!) I don't usually do that, so I'm going to call it quits here.

Let's agree that either:

1) I'm a good father who had the courage of my convictions and my daughter is lucky to have me.

or

2) I'm a nasty, suspicious SOB whose daughter is lucky to have survived unscathed.

Either way, she is now a happy, healthy, and well-adjusted adult (well, legally anyway). Everyone must decide on their own how best to raise their own kids. If nothing else, this discussion has give ample food for thought.

As always, I hope we can disagree without being disagreeable.

[reph]

Let's agree that either:

1) I'm a good father who had the courage of my convictions and my daughter is lucky to have me.

or

2) I'm a nasty, suspicious SOB whose daughter is lucky to have survived unscathed.
Fine. I'm willing to agree to one of those propositions.

I don't consider it quibbling. My speed-limit example addressed a more general issue: why do most people behave themselves? Fear of punishment or a desire to do right? Your reply leaves that one up in the air.

As for the sales-tax example, I don't make Internet purchases, but I must have married an eccentric. I say this because when my husband learned of that tax, he went through his checkbook records for five years back to figure what he owed. Then he paid it.

I can't address the porn example, because I don't know what people who upload or download porn are thinking. Uploaders are probably thinking about profit. Maybe downloaders think what they're doing should be legal.

I'm not here "for argument's sake." I find the moral issues engaging.

[JennaGlatzer]

Remind me to post on this thread later, coming from the POV of someone whose dad spied on her most of her life.

Perhaps it'll be an interesting tale. :)

[maestrowork]

1) "Ends justify the means" -- Yes, absolutely. I will do whatever necessary to raise my daughter into a happy, healthy, and safe adult. I will NOT use means that do not further that end, and so my wife and I VERY carefully considered what we did. We WERE concerned that our activities would alienate our daughter, but we considered that possibility less damaging than where she was headed.

"Happy, healthy, and safe" is subjective, I must say. And I'm speaking as a person whose parents snooped around, went through his things, and who never felt he could trust his parents. Nor did they trust me.

I won't argue or tell you how to raise your children, but I'm just telling you the damage you could have done to your kids without you even knowing. My parents had NO IDEA how much that "trust" thing damaged me and our relationship until I told them when I was 27. I'm not saying your children are damaged -- only you and your children would know. Again, I am speaking from my own experiences.

I consider myself happy, healthy and safe -- I don't drink, smoke or do drugs. I'm responsible. But you know what my biggest problem is? I don't trust people. I picked that up from my parents. I have had relationships in my life, but I couldn't trust those who were close to me. And I felt like I had to hide or protect myself. I lied to them when I did something not so good -- and I suspected that they lied to me as well. On the outside I am very well adjusted, but on the inside, at least as far as relationships are concerned, I'm kind of messed up.

Like I said, my parents had no idea until I told them later when I was an adult.

You said your daughter broke that trust when she was a girl/teenager. Well, you can't expect trust if you don't offer, and by snooping around and reading her diary, you are telling her that snooping around is fine, as long as "the end justifies the means." That you're putting out fire with fire. Personally, I really don't think that's a good way to teach our children.

She may not know you snooped around and read her diary now. Sooner or later, she will. I did. Children gets smart, eventually. When she does, you would have hell to pay.

I would just tell you now: my Dad and I didn't talk for 5 years. We're okay now, but those five years was horrible. All because I found out I couldn't trust my dad anymore.

Just my experience.

[JennaGlatzer]

I said I would, so...

My dad was a big-time spy. He tapped my phone, which I discovered when I asked him if he had any blank cassette tapes and he told me there were some in his office. I found some tapes and popped them into the player to make sure they were blank... nope... they were recordings of every phone call on my phone line.

He also read my diary (I stopped keeping one), my school notebooks, etc.

I have forgiven, but never forgotten.

I wouldn't tell anyone how to rear their kids-- each situation is different, I'm sure-- but in my case, there was no good reason for the spying. I was a good kid. Not perfect, but a good kid. (I can see it if you have a reason to suspect illegal activities.)

When I found out, he laughed and told me it was his house and his rules and blah blah. He told me it was because I came home late one night and he wanted a way to always know where I was. (I don't even think that was true.) I moved out and stayed with a friend for a while, and at 17, moved across the country.

One would argue that I turned out "just fine," too... but *not* because I was spied on. That's something that still hurts me to this day.

[Phantom8706]

I could write incessantly on the topic of a child's right to privacy. However, for the sake of my own sanity and not deviating from the topic onto a tangent of my own lack of privacy and respect from my own family, I will keep my thoughts short.

My privacy has been invaded multiple times and as a result I feel as though I must watch every step that I take. Even when the choices I make are nothing but advantageous to myself, I am overwhelmed by a compulsive desire to whirl around and make sure that a member of my family is not standing behind me with a camcorder to prove that I have done something wrong.
I have always considered myself to be a responsible teenager. I lived with my mother until she died when I was fourteen. Then I moved in with my father. Until I was sixteen years old, I was never grounded and never got into serious trouble. Despite the fact that I have known various adults with drinking problems, most members of my family either smoke or have smoked at one point in their lives, and at least eighty percent of my school does drugs, I have never tried any of these substances and never plan to do so. I have been in various honor clubs and volunteer groups, and am considered a model student by fellow classmates and teachers alike. I lied to my parents about one issue in the three years that I have lived with my father and stepmother, and as a result of that lie, I lost all privileges, including my cell phone, home telephone, all social outings, and the chance to be in the ShowChoir and Musical Theatre at my school. These two activities were the only things that kept me feeling a somewhat complete person following the death of my mother. Both have been eradicated. They discovered my lie when going through the text messages and voicemails on my cell phone, and when reading a letter I had written to my childhood friend in another state that I had been planning to send the next day.
I regret deeply the loss of communication with my parents. We have repaired the relationship to a degree, but I am not sure if it will be fully mended in this lifetime.
As I said, I could write for hours on the utter futility of chicanery and how it destroys relationships. However, I decided to simply state my story and make this point:
I do not think that children should be allowed to roam free without any heed of rules or responsibilities. However, I do believe that children should be treated as children and not as subjects of a criminal investigation. Installing a keystroke recording device?
Such subterfuge will, in short, expunge any good memories that a child may have involving their parents.

[aka eraser]

Somebody (pretty sure it wasn't me - too smart) said that children will either rise or fall to the level of our expectations.

No doubt there are exceptions but it's not a bad rule of thumb.

[Galoot]

I come from the opposite end of the scale--total disinterest was the name of the game--so maybe my perspective is different.

Not all secrets are dangerous ones or imply a lack of trust between the child and the adult, but anyone who honestly believes that kids don't keep secrets from their parents (or vice versa) has never read a comic book by flashlight under the sheets, hidden a Playboy magazine between the mattresses, or chosen not to describe their first kiss or sexual encounter to mom and dad. Secrets are a normal part of developing a sense of individuality.

Some secrets are bigger than others, and each family draws the line in a different place, but I think we're jumping on Roger without the benefit of having walked in his shoes. I don't know the details of his family's private life (and I don't want to), but I'm not going to assume the worst because he's taken what he sees as reasonable steps to protect his daughter.

If she's turned out okay because of or in spite of his policy, the end result is the same.

[paprikapink]

The demographics of this thread would be interesting to compile. Everyone here, I'll wager, has been or is a teenager, but is Roger the only contributer who's raised one?

I'm not there yet, myself. I've got one kid who just broke out of single-digits this year. While philosophically I'm in the "trust and honesty are the best policy" camp, I can't say for certain where I'll come down when push comes to shove.

Oh, which makes me think of something. There could be a big difference between a parent who has a "kids lie so I'll spy" approach going into raising a teen vs. one who has a trusting attitude yet is faced with a child in a dangerous situation and responds to it in a less-than-trusting yet loving and supportive way.

-pkpk

[firehorse]

We used B language in high school - similar to piglatin, but, well, not. In high school, my best friend and I wrote notes to each other in Elvish. Can you say GEEK?! :ROFL:

[reph]

...anyone who honestly believes that kids don't keep secrets from their parents (or vice versa) has never read a comic book by flashlight under the sheets, hidden a Playboy magazine between the mattresses, or chosen not to describe their first kiss or sexual encounter to mom and dad. Secrets are a normal part of developing a sense of individuality.
That looks to me like an argument in favor of privacy for offspring. Those aren't the kind of secrets I was talking about as typical of unhealthy families. A bad secret might be "I have bulimia" or "He raped me" or "I'm reading your diary."

Incidentally, as a kid, I never read anything by flashlight or looked at a men's magazine that I can recall (well, girls are less likely to seek out such magazines, anyway). I didn't do anything sexual until I left home, and by then it wasn't my parents' business. It isn't true that all teens have a pile of forbidden acts that they need to hide.

[Fractured_Chaos]

I'm in agreement with Galoot about the fact that we don't know what Roger's life is really like, or what prompted him to do what he did. All we know is he is passionate about protecting his daughter, and I can't fault that.

I don't necessarily agree with his methods, though. But only because of my own experience.

My growing up? I had -NO- privacy. My parents snooped in -everything-, and I was treated like a criminal without committing any crimes. First, it was my Mother, and Step-Father. I would get the third degree when I came home from school, and no matter what I said, there was some hidden meaning that was code for something illegal, or immoral.

I was digusted. I started running away from home, and keeping secrets. After all, I'm not trusted anyway, and I'm obviously evil, and always plotting something I shouldn't be. Even if, before that point, I never did anything that was untrustworthy.

My mother was tired of going down to the police station once a month to collect me. See, I was smart enough to know that running away was a dead end endeavour. So I'd sneak out in the middle of the night, and turn myself in in the morning.

She decided to send me about 1000 miles away to live with my father.

My father...the COP.

If I had it tough before, I had it even tougher with my father. Hell, I got grounded for stuff I just thought about doing. I got grounded for stuff my friends did, when I was nowhere in the vicinity. I got busted for hitchhicking once. By a friend of my father's. He promised not to rat me out. He didn't. But he had to report his location, and where his destination was, when carrying two juvinile females in his car.

Ten minutes later, my father arrived home, and back-handed me. I got the bruise on the other side of my nose. And 20 years later, I had surgery to straighten it out.

Why did I do it? Because my father was convinced I was nothing but trouble and couldn't be trusted. So if I have the name, I may as well play the game.

It started out well enough. And I was a good girl. But my mother told my father what a terrible, untrustworthy animal I was, and he believed her. He snooped around, and made no bones about hiding it, either.

Why should I behave in a trustworthy manner, if I'm NEVER given the benefit of the doubt?

It didn't take long, and I learned how to by-pass his security net. I got away with stuff that would give my father heart failure, if he knew. I let him "catch" me at some things. It took his attention away from the things I would -really- get in trouble for. I learned all his tricks, and how to get around them, IOW. My father was a very intelligent man. I grew smarter.

I vowed never to do that to my kids.

I didn't, either. I made it clear to them that their privacy would be respected unless I had reason to believe they were getting involved in something that was bad for them.

I picked my battles with my children.

I violated that privacy ONE time. My oldest was acting secretive, and suspicious. I took a peek in her diary, because that's not normal for her. I found out her BF was trying to pressure her into sex, and she just wasn't ready for it. I made an effort and talked casually about dating and stuff. She finally admitted to me what was happening. I let her know I knew, and how I knew. She was actually glad, because I was able to broach a subject that she was having a hard time with.

See, I looked at it this way, if privacy was respected, and I didn't teach my kids about being secretive and sneaky, they would never learn -how- to be that way. The more constraints you place on your kids, the better they'll get at defeating them.

I prefer honesty, instead. It worked. My kids (the two oldest), haven't gotten pregnant (or gotten anyone pregnant), they've stayed away from drugs, and avoided illegal activities. I never had a problem with "internet stalkers", because the computer was always in the living room, and I told them how to protect themselves. I've always been honest with them about sex, and drugs, and just about anything else. I kept the lines of communication open.

Now, don't get me wrong, my kids are typical kids, and they did get themselves into trouble now and again. But none of the really bad stuff, and my oldest daughter? She was a handful, I'll tell you! Damn her for being as stubborn as her mother!

[JennaGlatzer]

There could be a big difference between a parent who has a "kids lie so I'll spy" approach going into raising a teen vs. one who has a trusting attitude yet is faced with a child in a dangerous situation and responds to it in a less-than-trusting yet loving and supportive way.

PK, I'm with you on that. I hope that was clear from my post-- there is a line to be drawn, for sure. I have no idea what Roger's situation was, so I wouldn't presume to judge him for it. I'm just making a general statement that spying should be a last resort and should be done only when a good reason has presented itself (i.e., something illegal or dangerous, not just "I think he's looked at porn" or "I think she went out with a boy instead of studying with her girlfriend like she said."). Kids HAVE to learn how to make their own decisions, not just out of fear of getting caught, but for the reasons they discover on their own.

To give the other end of the spectrum...

When I had my first "real" kiss, my first sexual experience, and my first cigarette, my mom was the first person I told. When I threw a party at my parents' house while they were away, I told her. Kids/teens lie when they think the truth will be unacceptable. My mom had told me long before that I could always tell her anything, and she showed me each of those times that she wasn't kidding. Sometimes she'd say things like, "I wish you hadn't [done something], but I'm glad you told me." Never, ever flew off the handle if I had come to her to "admit" something.

As such, I was able to ask her things that make me grin now. I remember after that first kiss, I was just disgusted! I asked my mom if this was what kissing was supposed to be like, because if so, I didn't want to do any more kissing with anyone for the rest of my life.

She also didn't hold anything back from me... she was a "good kid" too, so it's not like there was anything huge to tell, but she told me how she used to climb into the neighbor's tree and smoke cigarettes, and how old she was when she first had sex, etc.

That's a good chunk of the reason I never felt I needed to lie to her.

[Fractured_Chaos]

Your mom sounds pretty darn awesome, Jenna! I hope my kids look back and think of me that way. :)

[Galoot]

The demographics of this thread would be interesting to compile. Everyone here, I'll wager, has been or is a teenager, but is Roger the only contributer who's raised one?Mine are 21, 19, 13 and 12.

Because they are human, not robots, they all have different personalities. Some have chosen to share every last detail of their lives with us (often more than old Dad is comfortable with, but I usually manage not to wince), while others are more closed and private. This isn't alarming, it's normal and expected, and their differences are embraced.

Those normal human differences, though, are why I refuse to generalize or to judge Roger's decision. Some kids will tell their open, loving and interested parents everything, some won't, despite the knowledge that they can. If it ever comes to pass that one seems to be headed for trouble, we will do what it takes to get to the root of it and defuse the situation, privacy be damned. A potentially alienated but living child is infinitely better than a dead one with secrets.

[Roger J Carlson]

When I signed off the thread yesterday, I truly thought I was done. I thought the discussion had run its course and we were simply rehashing.

Sorry Reph, I didn't mean that you were "quibbling" or "arguing for the sake of argument". I meant that I was!

There were several posts that I could reply to, but I'd rather ask a couple of questions and make an observation:

1) How much monitoring is too much?
Most everyone here agrees that some level of monitoring is necessary. Putting the computer in the living room is not all that different from monitoring their keystrokes. One is direct, the other remote. At best, it is a difference in degree but not in kind. Both say, "I don't trust you."

So where would you draw the line?
For instance, Jenna mentioned looking at internet porn as a relatively minor problem. But this CAN be an indication of a much larger problem. There are statistics that say that 1 in 5 children online have been approached by a internet predator. Advocacy groups advise checking the Cookies and Internet Files regularly. But what if a child is savvy to these? Isn't spyware effectively equivalent? Do you wait for it to become a major problem before you act? And how do you know if you don't monitor?

2) How much responsibility does the child bear?
I was genuinely touched by some of the stories here, but remember that we are the protagonist in our own life's stories. We tend to see ourselves in the most favorable light and those who oppose us in the most negative. I DO NOT want to minimize anyone's experience, but I would have you consider that there are two sides to every story. Are you so sure you were so innocent and they were so villianous? Can you turn the tables and see it through their eyes? Are you absolutely certain that given the same circumstances (and without the benefit of hindsight) you would do differently than they did?

Yes, I understand that my daughter has a side to her story as well. I've tried to see it from her perspective and imagine if my parents had done it to me. I still can't see that I had any choice.

Observation:
As parents, we cannot know the future. We do the best we can with the knowledge we have. None of us are experts in child-rearing. Even those of us with several (like Galoot) have to start all over with each one because they are all different. What worked with one may not work with another. What worked for me may not work for you and vice-versa.

I've often considered whether or not I did the right thing. I've come to the conclusion that I cannot second-guess myself. As bad as things were, it's possible that it was the best of all possible outcomes. Might I have handled it better? Perhaps. And perhaps if I hadn't snooped, she might have become pregnant or worse. I don't know and neither can you. All we can do is the best we can do and hope and pray for the best.

Lastly, I'd like to thank those who chose not to judge me even if they disagreed with my methods. Only time will tell if they were right or not. But after this episode was over, she came my wife and I and told us we were right. That is some consolation anyway.

[astonwest]

I remember after that first kiss, I was just disgusted! I asked my mom if this was what kissing was supposed to be like, because if so, I didn't want to do any more kissing with anyone for the rest of my life.

And I would have sat there with a dead serious face and said, "Yes, dear, it is."
:D

[reph]

1) ...Putting the computer in the living room is not all that different from monitoring their keystrokes. One is direct, the other remote. At best, it is a difference in degree but not in kind. Both say, "I don't trust you."...

2) ...I would have you consider that there are two sides to every story. Are you so sure you were so innocent and they were so villianous?
1) This is the difference: Computer in living room = kid knows you can see what she downloads. Monitoring keystrokes = you pretend you're not watching.

2) Yes. My mother was schizophrenic, suicidal, and homicidal. She was diagnosed with a thought disorder. She was hospitalized several times. Throughout childhood and adolescence, I was always under suspicion for something or other. Wait, it didn't end with adolescence. At one point in my twenties (I was living 150 miles from her), she convinced herself that I had had an abortion. Why? Because she'd read someplace that young women who have abortions become emotionally cool toward their mothers. I guess it didn't occur to her that her personality didn't exactly move me to act warm. It didn't end after my twenties, either. I could give more examples, but you probably get the idea.

[Celeste]

Nah, just kids thinking they can get one over on their parents because old folks are too dumb to understand

Ah ha! I finally know what the heck my son is saying when I see him type this way! It drives me insane. I'll walk past the computer and see him typing all this mumbo jumbo and ask what the heck he's saying. He tells me it's 'just short ways of writing'. So, of course me being a writer, I try to correct him and ask why can't you just write it correctly. I don't see it as being any quicker writing in those coded forms. I see it as being lazy. Even when he sees me typing, he'll tell me "It's quicker to write it this way, mom..." I tell him I'm not worried about it being 'quicker', I want it to be correct. He just laughs at me and I at him. But now I know his lil' secret! Lol...;)

As for 'children's privacy'...
I'll speak from my experience of having a 15 year old son. I have always tried to be open with him and encourage him to be open with me. But..he takes advantage of that. He is a sneaky little sh**! Once they hit their teens they try to push their limits. I do believe that there is a fine line as far as crossing into being 'too nosey' as a parent. But I also believe that we as parents sometimes have to keep our eyes open to what our children -- especially teenagers -- are doing. My son is always trying to sneak things past me. And having been quite the sneaky, rebellious teen that I was in my years, he doesn't get much past me. I know what to look for, I know the signs. It's hard to say which is the right, or wrong way to go about it because we're all individual. What may work for some children may not work for others. I'll admit I do 'spy' on my son when I feel he's up to something. 99% of the time I think he's up to something he shouldn't be, he is. I did not teach him to sneak around. But he does.

I believe that as parents we need to do what we feel necessary to protect our children. There is no one way to raise kids. I believe it's all individual. I have two boys, who are complete opposites. So, I have to use different methods for both. If I felt that by reading a diary, or spying on my son on the computer could possibly prevent a problem that could harm him in any way, I would do so. That's love, not being nosey. If I felt my son was straying off on a troubled path and he weren't being honest with me, damn right I'd spy on him to find out what may be going on with him. I'd rather have a child who resents me for a few things, than a dead one. It's a dangerous world, especially the internet. We need to stay on top of what's going on in their lives to prevent them from making wrong choices. I've taught my son right from wrong, but he chooses to rebel. And I hear so many say that when a child rebels, or is secretive, there must be a problem with the parents. I don't buy that at all. Teenagers can and are influenced by other teens and will sometimes get sucked into the wrong crowd, no matter how they are raised.

For example: My son is into gaming. He joins these 'clans' and plays against people on the internet. There was a woman my age in one of his clans who began IMing him and telling him dirty jokes and talking about sex with him. He was 14 at the time. He thought it was funny. I didn't know about it until I walked up behind him one night -- without him knowing I was standing there -- and was reading what this woman was writing to him. I put a STOP to that real quick. But my point is is I wouldn't have known about it if I hadn't of snuck up behind him and was 'spying' on him for a few minutes.

I've always been open with my son and him me, but once he hit his teens a lot changed. And it wasn't a matter of how he is, or was raised. It's just once they start getting into those teen years they start to test new waters and see what they can get away with. Well, that's how it is with my son. But like I said, every child is different. Some will make the right choices. And then there are some that need a little 'extra' guidance and need to be 'watched'.

But after having said all that... Here's to all of us raising happy, healthy children! :Thumbs:

celeste

[maestrowork]

But what's to stop your son from talking dirty to women when you're not spying on him?

The point is, we all do that. God, I was quite a little brat when I was 14. So were my friends. I read my first Penthouse when I was 12 -- at camp. So did my friends. For everything our parents caught... there were many others they didn't. But I grew up okay. I didn't "ruin" my life. Neither did any of my friends (they're all well adjusted)...

To me, that's like saying "boys will be boys unless I catch you doing it then it's not okay...."

I do understand girls are even worse... but like if you can really control your girls... once they go to college, all bets are off anyway.

The point is, where is that line? How much do you control your children: what to see, read, hear... what people they associate with... etc. etc. Yes, it's a crazy world out there and we need to do our best to protect our children... but where is that line? When is it too far? When you do start to treat your kids like a criminal and not a responsible person? And would all that spying and lying really help and change the kid?

I think the best thing to raise a child is to teach them the tools and the value system so they can make the right judgment. And if they don't and make mistakes (EVERYONE makes mistakes), that they can talk to you about it and work out the problems. Sneaking around will end up with more sneaking around and eventually you won't be able to catch them at all. By then it may be too late because they totally lack those tools to help them...

Anyway, I don't pretend I know everything since I don't have children. But my experience growing up taught me a few things. And I know it wasn't my parents' spying and punishment or whatever that helped me become a well-adjusted person. It's some deeper, more fundamental than that.

[brokenfingers]

Hmmmm… I’m not saying anything either way, but I wonder – if the parents of those Columbine kids had done a little snooping if things wouldn’t have been different.

I guess there’s just no one easy answer….

[maestrowork]

The Columbine Kids' parents were simply negligent. Period. IIRC, the kids were making bombs in their own bedrooms, keeping guns in their houses... they didn't even hide them because their parents were never there to begin with. It wouldn't really take much snoopy to find out what those kids were up to, but they went under the radar screen. Would the parents' snoopy have stopped them? Maybe. Maybe not. I'd say NOT since those kids were determined to "rock the world."

Again, like I said, the problem/issue lies deep and fundamental than spying.

[Celeste]

But what's to stop your son from talking dirty to women when you're not spying on him?


Well, there's nothing I can do, but I sure as hell don't appreciate a woman old enough to be his mother talking to him the way she was. And if I'm there and see it happening, I will stop it. And I agree, boys will be boys. It's normal for a teenage boy to want to take a peek in a Playboy magazine, etc..but it's not normal for grown women to be talking sexually with a child. I allow him to be the curious teenage boy that he is. But when I see a situation where I need to step in, I will.

I can only speak from my experience having raised my boys. So, I can't tell you where that 'line' is. But I do know where to draw the line when it involves my own children. I don't smother him and try to keep him blind to what normal teenage boys are curious about.

There were things that I thought I would never interfere with regarding my children BEFORE I had kids. I'd say.."If I ever have kids, I'll never do that..!!"
But it all changes when you actually do have children. Your views change.

And there's no really 'controlling' your children. They are going to sneak behind their parents' back and try to get away with things. We can't always know what they're doing 24/7. But when we see signs of a possible problem, a good parent will take whatever measure they feel fit to get their child on the right path.

And everyone's experience growing up, or how they teach their children is always different. Like I said earlier, it's individual. What may work for some, may not for others. There's no set way in stone, or a 'parent's guide to raising children'.

So, I can't answer your questions of where to draw the line. I can only do what I see fit, and what I feel is fair for my own children, to teach them to be the best they can be. I don't expect my children to be perfect. I respect who they are. But I can teach them ways to better themself and make wiser choices.

celeste

[Celeste]

I think the best thing to raise a child is to teach them the tools and the value system so they can make the right judgment.

It all sounds so easy the way you put it. And I wish it were. But it's not.

Raising children isn't "I've taught you the tools, now use them" and that's it.
I've been a parent for 15 years and I'm still learning. Every year as they get
older there are new issues to deal with. A parent's job never ends.

[reph]

Reading others' reports here, I'm starting to feel abnormal. Apparently teenagers are supposed to do delinquent things and lie to their parents about them. Isn't there anybody else here who didn't?

[maestrowork]

But once you become parents, your children pay for your past sin... ;) Suddenly you forgot lying to your parents is SUPPOSED to be a normal growing up thing to do... ;)



Roger, I am not against you, but one of your comments really bugged me, since I don't know your situation:

I snooped at every opportunity.

Especially since you never did and never will tell your daughter (even now that she is a well-adjusted adult). Personally, I really do think deceptive behavior is a bad thing. You lied to your parents (and they had no clue), and now you lied to your child (and she has no clue)... Fighting lies with lies (and the whole "end justifies the means" thing just doesn't sound right here.

Of course, that's just my opinion.

[Celeste]

But once you become parents, your children pay for your past sin...

I wouldn't exactly call it that. I try to prevent him from making the same mistakes that I did. I want better for my son and wouldn't want to see him go through some of what I did as a teen.

Apparently teenagers are supposed to do delinquent things and lie to their parents about them. Isn't there anybody else here who didn't?

Well, I wouldn't say they're supposed to. But it's not all that uncommon.

Reading others' reports here, I'm starting to feel abnormal..

Don't feel abnormal. Feel lucky, thankful. ;)

[Galoot]

Apparently teenagers are supposed to do delinquent things and lie to their parents about them.Where the heck did you think politicians came from, reph? :D

I don't think kids are supposed to do delinquent things and lie about it, but a whole lot do. I did.

It wasn't disrespect in my eyes, it was learning for myself what was right and what wasn't rather than accepting the word from on high as law or gospel. I accepted everything I was told when I was a tot, but when I realized mom and dad didn't know everything I developed a sudden and strong need to find out for myself. Finding my own limits, not the limits imposed on me by someone else. I respected dear old Dad, but I never believed the old guy knew what it was like to grow up in "my decade." (I was too young to know that there wasn't really that much of a difference.)

Others do delinquent things, but don't lie about it. The ones I knew who fell into this category either turned out extremely well or were later diagnosed as psychopaths. I don't know if that's a trend you could bank on, though. Not enough data points.

In my school, the vast majority of the students were doing things their parents wouldn't have approved of. Maybe some of the parents knew, but their knowing didn't stop the kids from doing.
Reading others' reports here, I'm starting to feel abnormal.You say "abnormal," I say "at the enviable extreme of the bell curve."

[reph]

I accepted everything I was told when I was a tot, but when I realized mom and dad didn't know everything I developed a sudden and strong need to find out for myself. Finding my own limits, not the limits imposed on me by someone else.
Interesting. Was that your understanding, at the time, of what you were doing, or is it more like an analysis with the benefit of hindsight?

What you said enables me to explain some of my premature good behavior. I knew pretty early that something was wrong with my mother and she couldn't be trusted about right and wrong. My father was an ethical person, but he wasn't strongly involved with me in overt ways, for reasons I didn't know at the time. He seemed to stand back, watching, and give me a space in which to work things out for myself. So I did some of the mental tasks of adolescence before I got there chronologically.

It's also possible to learn from other kids' experiments. I remember seeing a few age mates seriously drunk. People who've drunk too much look so disgusting when you're sober. The sight of my classmates throwing up sure didn't inspire me to want to try it.

[Galoot]

Was that your understanding, at the time, of what you were doing, or is it more like an analysis with the benefit of hindsight?The latter. No doubt about it. At the time I was thinking "I want to do this thing and I'm smart enough to understand the consequences and live with them even though old dad doesn't think I am." Feeling my oats.

Sometimes it was a given that he wouldn't want me to do something because it had been discussed previously, sometimes I knew it wouldn't be acceptable because it was similar to something else unacceptable. But, whatever the reason, I felt I knew more than dad did about what was good or bad for me. Often enough I was right. Sometimes I was terribly wrong (but Canada's Young Offenders' Act means I can deny those times ever happened).

I knew pretty early that something was wrong with my mother and she couldn't be trusted about right and wrong. My father was an ethical person, but he wasn't strongly involved with me in overt ways, for reasons I didn't know at the time. He seemed to stand back, watching, and give me a space in which to work things out for myself. So I did some of the mental tasks of adolescence before I got there chronologically.Aha. You must be my long-lost sister. Except I didn't figure mom out until I was a young teen. Too late by then.

It's also possible to learn from other kids' experiments. I remember seeing a few age mates seriously drunk. People who've drunk too much look so disgusting when you're sober. The sight of my classmates throwing up sure didn't inspire me to want to try it.God, yes. Again, though, I was already in the stages of doing those things for myself before catching on that many of the older kids who did the same things were turning into drooling idiots. That's why I stopped. I take responsibility for my drooling idiocy. I didn't want drugs and alcohol to get all the credit.

[Fractured_Chaos]

but it's not normal for grown women to be talking sexually with a child.

Celeste, not against you or anything (Because I think I might have gone ballistic under the same circumstances), but did the woman -know- your son was only 14?

As a way of protecting our kids from on-line predators, alot of games, IM svcs, etc, allow the member to hide their profile. But that ends up being a double-edge sword, too.

With IRC chat, there -is- no profile, at all. And there have been a couple occasions where a room I was moderating in had members that I could have sworn were legal adults (We didn't allow the short-hand AOL-speak because it was a room for writers and artists, and for a large number of the members english was their 2nd language). And there have been occasions where I was certain a chatter was only around 14 (the bottom age limit for joining this particular room), only to find out they were in their 30s, or so.

[Roger J Carlson]

First of all, the "snooped at every opportunity" line in my original post was a little overstated. If I had known the debate that was to ensue, I would have been more careful in my wording. I did not start snooping until we accidentally stumbled across some things that didn't feel right. When we asked her about it, she lied to our faces (as we discovered later). And the snooping was not just idle curiousity or an effort to 'control' her. I had to have information and I wasn't going to get the truth from her.

Personally, I really do think deceptive behavior is a bad thing. Absolutely. So do I! However, I think that there are worse things. Things like turning a blind eye to behaviors in your child that you know will lead to catastrophe. Remember the parents of the child who committed suicide in my first post? It's not so much that they turned a blind eye as they weren't looking.

You lied to your parents (and they had no clue), and now you lied to your child (and she has no clue)... Wrong on both counts.

I never lied to my parents. (OK, let's get the "never lied" thing straight. Of course I lied sometimes...everybody does. I mean that lying was not my habitual means of deception with my parents. OK?) It was never necessary to lie. They were so trusting that it never occurred to them that I might be doing things we both knew were wrong. But because of this, I KNOW it is possible for a child to act like a perfectly obedient child on the outside while doing things he or she shouldn't.

I never lied to my daughter. In fact, through carelessness on my part she caught me monitoring her IM. When she asked if I was doing that, I admitted that I was and told her why. You might consider this splitting hairs -- deception is deception -- but I think there is an important difference. We never told her we would not monitor her. She knew we could. She knew I knew her AOL password. She knew that I could tell when she was on-line when we were not home. (AOL has a nice little billing statement.) She also knew that I could tell where she went on-line. I explained all this to her. That was when she turned to IM and later to Yahoo. In every case, she upped the ante.

My daughter has always known she could trust us to do what we say. We never (and this time I emphasize never) promised a reward nor threatened a punishment that we didn't follow through on. To have told her that I would not monitor her and then break that promise would have been a deception. As it is, she should have had every expectation that we were monitoring her. She just thought she was being cleverer that us. (In fact, I believe they were the ideas of her boyfriend.) But when it became clear that we couldn't trust her word, we had to find other means.

... whole "end justifies the means" thing just doesn't sound right here.I guess we'll have to disagree here. I do not apologize for using every means at my disposal to keep my daughter safe. It would have been irresponsible to close my eyes (or worse yet refuse to look) to behaviors that I knew were wrong and harmful. It WOULD have been wrong to let her continue without trying to do anything to stop her. In order to do that I needed information, and I did that unflinchingly because my love for my daughter supersedes my devotion to an ideal.

[reph]

I never lied to my parents. (OK, let's get the "never lied" thing straight. Of course I lied sometimes...everybody does. I mean that lying was not my habitual means of deception with my parents. OK?)

I'm sorry, Roger, but "Everybody does" isn't a way of getting the "never lied" thing straight. Quite the opposite: it puts more kinks and bends in. People bias their estimates of others' private behavior toward believing that others do as they themselves do; this is empirically established. That all teenagers lie to their parents is only an assumption. You're still trying to justify having intended to deceive your parents.

Once, when I was home from college on a break, my mother said I'd lied to her about something. I was sure I could have explained it, because I hadn't been telling any lies; but she refused to tell me what it was.

So what was your habitual means of deception? Hiring a body double?


I do not apologize for using every means at my disposal to keep my daughter safe.
Okay, okay, she was in danger, and you had to help her. I accept that. I still think it would have been more honorable to be as straight with her as possible.

Getting secrets off one's chest feels good. Are you going to tell her you read the diary?

[Roger J Carlson]

reph,

In all of these exchanges, I have never once said anything personal about you, yet you have continually commented about my personality, my past, my home life, and my character. About which you know nothing.

In the first message you implied that I was sneaky and a habitual liar and that my home was unhealthy. Later you assumed I never told her I was reading her emails (I had) and that I was un-honorable by "hacking" into her computer (it was my computer, I can install anything I want.) You have called me "sneaky" and a "sneak" numerous times. You associated me with "sociopaths" and disassociated me with "sensible people". In the last post you said I was trying to "justify having intended to deceive your parents" (in fact, as I stated earlier, I lied very little to my parents.)

I have apologized where I thought there was a possible misunderstanding (the "quibbling" thing) and I have ignored statements that I considered jabs at me on the assumption that I might be misconstruing them. But enough is enough.

I don't know why you have chosen to make this topic personal, but I'm no longer going to engage in it.

[maestrowork]

Sorry, Roger, but this is what you said:

It amazes me that otherwise intelligent adults believe their children would never lie to them, even when they know how they lied to their parents. My parents didn't have a clue, and I determined then and there that I would never be a clueless parent.


And this:
I never lied to my daughter.


... is itself a lie. I'm sorry, you're lying to your daughter. The second you read her diary and not tell her (or decide that you will NEVER tell her, even when she's 80 years old) is the day you lied to her.

I mean, what if SHE read your diary (or snoop on you or your wife) and not tell you. Would you say she was lying to you?

Lying is lying. It doesn't matter if the parents or the children are doing it.

[reph]

reph,

In all of these exchanges, I have never once said anything personal about you, yet you have continually commented about my personality, my past, my home life, and my character. About which you know nothing.

In the first message you implied that I was sneaky and a habitual liar and that my home was unhealthy. Later you assumed I never told her I was reading her emails (I had) and that I was un-honorable by "hacking" into her computer (it was my computer, I can install anything I want.) You have called me "sneaky" and a "sneak" numerous times. You associated me with "sociopaths" and disassociated me with "sensible people". In the last post you said I was trying to "justify having intended to deceive your parents" (in fact, as I stated earlier, I lied very little to my parents.)

I have apologized where I thought there was a possible misunderstanding (the "quibbling" thing) and I have ignored statements that I considered jabs at me on the assumption that I might be misconstruing them. But enough is enough.

I don't know why you have chosen to make this topic personal, but I'm no longer going to engage in it.
I didn't make the topic personal. It became personal when you reported your parenting strategies.

I believe you have misconstrued some statements. I didn't associate you with sociopaths or disassociate you from sensible people; I brought up sociopaths to make a point countering the cynical view you expressed, that people behave themselves only to avoid getting caught. I believe most people would behave themselves without the laws on the books and without a police force. (But perhaps I'm exhibiting that bias about thinking "most people" resemble me.) Sociopaths represent one end of a continuum in that they aren't interested in being good, only in not getting caught. I changed my mind about the "hacking" when you said it was your computer, and I said so. The post where I said so is still there, if you want to go back and read it.

In surreptitiously reading your daughter's diary, you were sneaking. I don't know what else to call it.

My intention isn't to take jabs at you. I'd hoped to bring a couple of facts to your attention: Not all kids lie, and the assumption that they do is false. "I never lied...well, of course I lied, everyone does" is precisely what people say who are trying to rationalize lying. People will also say "I don't tell lies. Oh, sure, I said [fill in the blank] last Monday, but that's not really a lie, because..." The point here is that lying is lying and there's no way around it. To defend it is to engage in further dishonesty. I'm not condemning lies absolutely. There are times when lying is the best course of action, but they're far rarer than the times when people think they lied for a good enough reason.

Really and truly, Mr. Carlson, not all kids are or were trying to get by with something. Of course, since you think everyone lies, I don't expect you to believe that. Why wouldn't I be a liar along with (in your view) the rest of the human race?

You are, of course, free to stop participating in this discussion for any reason. Just don't attribute motives to me that I don't have.