View Full Version : Boy fathers child at twelve and girl at fourteen
Omanes Alexandrapolites
02-15-2009, 08:35
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2238252.ece
It's only really the tabloids that are covering this one. Thought I might as well post it up (I'm making a habit of backroom posting).
Thing is this sort of story is all too common across the UK. This one only happened to get to press after a family member shopped them to the Sun (who had a four page article on them yesterday). The families, both of them, although particularly the mother's, appear to be members of the ignorant "Jeremy Kyle Show" underclass that exists across Britain - in other words, council housed, unemployed and living off benefits. That translates as a useless burden on the state in my book.
The question is what should be done about it? Sex education isn't making a difference, it's existed since the sixties and teen pregnancies have been on the rise since. I don't really understand how it works, but perhaps its message opposing young sex isn't clear enough or indeed real enough. It's probably just a couple of cartoon drawings where the real side of having a kid isn't shown - maybe adding interviews with teen mums and their families on how hard it is and how damaging to their lives it has been could have a positive effect.
Of course, there is another option, start convicting parents maybe, but I don't think that would really make any difference either - modern children don't listen to their parents (not really always a bad thing though with the kind of parents we have nowadays). Punishing the children themselves would be morally wrong IMO, so that in my eyes isn't really an option.
Anyhow, thoughts? ~:)
rasoforos
02-15-2009, 08:36
No big deal...
...I lived in Hull for three years. If he was living there his mates at elementary school would probably scold him for taking so long...
Strike For The South
02-15-2009, 08:42
The boy looks like he's 8 and the girl looks like an abomination of God. The kid doesn't even look like he has boys that swim.
My dad sometimes gives me 10 (insert crazy montarey sign)
He should be set then right?
This kind of thing is all to common here to. These people are generally good but all to often these things lead to abuse and broken homes because there just not ready. Then there child grows up and repeats the cycle.
CountArach
02-15-2009, 09:36
They're going to have sex. Give 'em condoms.
Strike For The South
02-15-2009, 09:41
They're going to have sex. Give 'em condoms.
Well sweetheart that doesn't seem to work.
I mean condoms work but this kind of thing will go on wether or not you hand them out.
They hand out free condoms here from time to time, I ask for the flavored ones they never bring those
CountArach
02-15-2009, 09:42
Well sweetheart that doesn't seem to work.
Then give them more. Condoms shall solve this problem...
Strike For The South
02-15-2009, 09:44
Then give them more. Condoms shall solve this problem...
Well you only need one. Unless you think burying them in latex works. Personally I would make a jacket out of my extras.
I mean there wouldn't be any extras!....Who am I kidding there would be extras.
Looks like the lad is serious about it at least, I dunno it's kinda cute. Most obvious question, where are the parents parents?
Crazed Rabbit
02-15-2009, 11:14
The boy looks like he's 8 and the girl looks like an abomination of God. The kid doesn't even look like he has boys that swim.
What more is there to say?
CR
Me and my co-workers talked about this yesterday.
And we all agreed this was BS and a made-up story.
Evidence:
1. This story was only posted in swedish tabloids(Expressen, aftonbladet), they are known for making up stories.
2. However their source is a british tabloid The Sun, in others word a very bad source.
3. That boy is 8.
So I will consider this story to be false until posted by a respectable newspaper.
Me and my co-workers talked about this yesterday.
And we all agreed this was BS and a made-up story.
Evidence:
1. This story was only posted in swedish tabloids(Expressen, aftonbladet), they are known for making up stories.
2. However their source is a british tabloid The Sun, in others word a very bad source.
3. That boy is 8.
So I will consider this story to be false until posted by a respectable newspaper.
You think respectable newspapers would write about a couple teenagers knocking eachother up in the slums of east jesus chavistan?
tibilicus
02-15-2009, 13:28
Most obvious question, where are the parents parents?
Scrounging of benefits the article suggests. I'm amazed they would actually let their kids go through with it.
FactionHeir
02-15-2009, 13:36
You think respectable newspapers would write about a couple teenagers knocking eachother up in the slums of east jesus chavistan?
Afaik I saw it on cnn yesterday.
I don't think sex ed is going to do much. If anything it would create more curiosity. What would be more effective is starting to crack down on erotic media/ads that've been on the rise since the last century.
They created a new life, isn't that wonderful? :inquisitive:
Omanes Alexandrapolites
02-15-2009, 14:19
They're going to have sex. Give 'em condoms.UK schools have been handing out free (basic, as in just plastic sheets) condoms since the late 90s. Not sure how well publicised this is to students though. On the high street condoms are rather expensive for a kid to buy (£3.95 for ten rings a bell - no innuendo intended).
And a respectable newspaper (http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/families/article5734056.ece) does cover it (although to be fair, it is just the Sun's story reworded and re-printed). Regardless of the "realness" of this case, however, kids still are having kids which is worrying.
~:)
FactionHeir
02-15-2009, 14:22
Btw, news (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20090215/tuk-boy-may-not-be-baby-s-father-dba1618.html) has it that two others have now claimed to be the father...
Omanes Alexandrapolites
02-15-2009, 14:45
Richard, who told the paper he slept with Chantelle with the consent of her parents and without using any contraception, said he plans to demand a DNA test is carried out to find out the truth.That section is particularly disturbing should it be true. What sort of parent allows their under-age daughter to sleep with somebody? This just highlights that many parents nowadays are at best awful role models - we can see in the article the far from exemplary behaviour of the families, particularly the mother's, overall. At worst some parents are totally incapable of looking after their children. As a result of this poor parenting, these ideas get passed on to their children, then to their children and further on in a never ending cycle of negative ideas.
The problem is what can we do? Free parenting classes could be started I suppose, but you can hardly make parents attend - in reality the ones that actually genuinely care about their children (and so don't really need these classes) will be the only ones that actually go as opposed to the hopeless parents that actually need them. Another alternative would be assessment of parents prior to the birth of the child of their actual suitability, the baby of failing parents being taken away for adoption at this stage. Judgements won't always be accurate though and could result in perfectly good parents being discriminated against. Perhaps a reform of the education system could also break this cycle. Emphasis on hard-work, a good education, strong qualifications and, of course, sex education with a painfully strong emphasis on the need for contraception and the nitty gritty realities of not using it could turn things around. Or not.
:no:
Indeed... routine castration is now the only answer among the chav hordes. When you have a culture that is geared towards reproduction as a means by which to remain on state benefits for life, it is only logical and hardly surprising when such things occur.
Omanes Alexandrapolites
02-15-2009, 15:30
Indeed... routine castration is now the only answer among the chav hordes. When you have a culture that is geared towards reproduction as a means by which to remain on state benefits for life, it is only logical and hardly surprising when such things occur.I suppose that is the common sense solution, but the word inhuman comes to mind. It's unethical IMO.
What you bring up is other good point - the benefits system also needs reforming - in my eyes there should be no money, you get paid in coupons with which you can buy food, enough for your household to survive, and other essentials (toilet paper, soap e.c.t.) only. Clothing coupon should be given out separately each quarter. Other bills should be paid for, but only up to a certain value, this value considering the population of the home, to prevent people getting extravagant with their electrics, heating, phone and water. If they do exceed the value, they get what happens to anybody who doesn't bother to pay their bills and get cut off. They are of course welcome to use their own savings to pay any excess and buy whatever they like otherwise. Those who have actually been in employment before or in between claiming benefit should get provided with coupons/bill paying amounts which have an additional value of 0.25% per year they've been working (e.g. Bob's been working twenty years and is now on benefits - he gets 5% more than Sharon who has never worked in her whole life).
Child benefits should be similar, although they maybe should provide coupons spendable not only on the usual food and clothes, but also on toys, games and other things that a child will want to help bring them up.
Applying this to the "kid for benefit" ideology, parents' unconditional (as in no need to search for a job) benefit should end eventually forcing parents to find work/get an education (with government support) the moment free schooling becomes available for their first child (aged 4). Have another child, tough on you - the government shouldn't use having a second child as an excuse to avoid work - you had the child, you deal with the consequences. Child benefit should be provided to this infant though, even though unconditional benefit is removed.
All people on conditional benefit should have the choice between getting qualifications to improve their employability if they lack them or job hunting, them being forced into the former after two/three years of job hunting. If they come off benefit and then go back on, they should have half the time they've been off benefit to find themselves a job plus any time they had left before going into education before before being forced into education. Choosing/being forced into the education route allows benefits to continue as long as attendance at the establishment is retained, it being stopped the moment an illegitimate reason for lack of attendance is found.
As well as perhaps stopping this benefit culture, it may also stop individuals who are spending their benefits money on things such as cigarettes and alcohol which are commodities not to be enjoyed by those who are so desperate that they have to turn to the state for help.
That's probably a little too detailed, but you get the point anyhow.
~:)
Seamus Fermanagh
02-15-2009, 16:00
Such things have happened throughout history.
However, these sorts of things were or at least seemed to be VERY much less frequent when such behavior led to public ostracism, sneering, and belittlement.
With those involved NOT becoming social pariahs, it appears to be that such things are more frequent.
Is there a lesson there?
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
02-15-2009, 19:10
Such things have happened throughout history.
However, these sorts of things were or at least seemed to be VERY much less frequent when such behavior led to public ostracism, sneering, and belittlement.
With those involved NOT becoming social pariahs, it appears to be that such things are more frequent.
Is there a lesson there?
Perhaps, but not a useful one. The Chav underclass is quite happy with itself, the rest of us sneer. I saw something on television a while back to the effect that intellectuals and the media have been telling us that we are all liberated and laid back about social mores, bad language etc., but that the truth is that we are not.
I suggest the child be taken into care now, before any damage can be done to it.
They're going to have sex. Give 'em condoms.
They are too young to hear about sex. And sexual education too.
KukriKhan
02-16-2009, 05:34
Kukri thinks: if you get government money: you are a government employee.
As employer, the government can and should impose whatever conditions seem right. As employee, the individual should negotiate their best employment deal, then comply with the terms of that contract.
If the government has hired you to raise your children, you must raise them as the government/employer sees fit, or risk termination of employment. If you don't want the government to tell you how to raise your children, quit the job, or renegotiate a better deal.
Make abstinance or condom use a condition of employment. "Surprise" baby? Termination of employment. Underage pregnancy? Termination of employment. School drop-out? Termination of employment.
Devastatin Dave
02-16-2009, 05:44
As they say down south... Old enough to bleed, old enough to breed!!! Yeeehaw!!! G-damn, I'm drunk!!!
Strike For The South
02-16-2009, 05:58
We don't say that.
pevergreen
02-16-2009, 07:07
Was reported here a few nights ago that 6 other boys have come forward claiming to be the father. One 16 year old even demands a DNA test to confirm it.
They are too young to hear about sex. And sexual education too.
At 12 or 13, far from it. It is exactly the right time (according to my parents and my countries educational system). Because that is when a few of them are going to start. This exact same thing happened in my junior high, 15 years ago. Even with decent sex ed at 12 or 13 teen pregnancy is going to happen. You can't stop it totally, you can just try and minimize it as much as possible.
That section is particularly disturbing should it be true. What sort of parent allows their under-age daughter to sleep with somebody? This just highlights that many parents nowadays are at best awful role models - we can see in the article the far from exemplary behaviour of the families, particularly the mother's, overall. At worst some parents are totally incapable of looking after their children. As a result of this poor parenting, these ideas get passed on to their children, then to their children and further on in a never ending cycle of negative ideas.
My mother for one.
Strike For The South
02-16-2009, 07:13
Was reported here a few nights ago that 6 other boys have come forward claiming to be the father. One 16 year old even demands a DNA test to confirm it.
That girl must have one hell of a personality.
Yeah this kind \V/ *nudge**nudge* :wink3: :wink3:
pevergreen
02-16-2009, 07:27
Parents cant stop it. I was forbidden from having sex but it didnt stop me. It was about 5-6 months of constant unprotected sex. Luckily nothing went wrong. If they try to stop it, the kids will find a way.
Strike For The South
02-16-2009, 07:34
Parents cant stop it. I was forbidden from having sex but it didnt stop me. It was about 5-6 months of constant unprotected sex. Luckily nothing went wrong. If they try to stop it, the kids will find a way.
Your pharmacy has rubbers. They are relatively inexpensive. USE THEM.
At least tell me you spent 5-6 months completely hammered.
Was reported here a few nights ago that 6 other boys have come forward claiming to be the father. One 16 year old even demands a DNA test to confirm it.
All getting loads of money for their stories no doubt.....
That section is particularly disturbing should it be true. What sort of parent allows their under-age daughter to sleep with somebody?
mine... as long as the parents tell children what to do/ not to do beforehand theres no problem, especially as kids are likely to have sex anyway,
--> Benefits system over kids is very ropey at the moment, mainly becuase its very hard to give aid 'just' to the children who need it, as for benefits to be used efficiently it has to be used by the parents (and in many cases is used responsibly), just some choose to spend it on themselves, the problem then is that those parents are the least likely to make use of childcare help, such as parenting classes, or even encourage the kids to make use of free schooling etc. I don't envy the people who have to work it all out.
Crazed Rabbit
02-16-2009, 07:51
Good Lord, that's just a pathetic case of terrible parenting. I'm too disgusted to be angry at any of the fools involved in this.
CR
pevergreen
02-16-2009, 08:00
Your pharmacy has rubbers. They are relatively inexpensive. USE THEM.
At least tell me you spent 5-6 months completely hammered.
Never had a drop of alcohol. I refuse to drink or do any drugs.
Why didnt we? Well after the first time it was just...I dunno, we didn't want to and she was on the pill. Which I didnt know.
:sweatdrop:
I don't buy the "kids will do it anyway" argument. With proper parenting, they should not, at least not until they're of a legal age anyway. Most parents at least try to stop their kids going out and getting pregnant/getting someone pregnant. These type of people do exactly the opposite. Instead they turn a blind eye and encourage this kind of behaviour. This is because they too follow the "kids will do it anyway" philosophy - a philosophy which they feel absolves them from all responsibility (responsibility which they feel belongs with the state). The woman that let her three year old smoke is a good example of this. What the hell was going through her mind? "he'll do it anyway, so he might as well start now"? This won't be stamped out, but it can be brought down to a minimum, instead of becoming the acceptable norm.
The condom argument is also flawed. If they're stupid enough to be having sex and their parents are immoral enough to be allowing it, then they're obviously too stupid to know that they should use condoms. Condom use goes hand in hand with the individuals concerned being both mature and wanting to protect themselves... this is clearly not the case here. Those involved wanted to produce offspring a) to guarantee state benefits for the next 16 years, b) to sell their crappy story to a tacky tabloid rag. The other youths coming forward have the same motive, their parents likely encouraging them in the hope of getting some easy alcohol/tobacco/drug money. This is what comes of having generations of people that have never known work.
So yes, when the little tyke is out on the streets causing a nuisance - according to some it will be the state's fault... and it will be, though for different reasons.
I'd sepertae the "they'l do it anyway' in terms of drugs/ drink/ smoking to sex, the answer to preventing those imo lies in better regulating them (like actually enforcing age restrictions) and legalizing + controlling drugs, they all rely on external products
The condom argument is also flawed. If they're stupid enough to be having sex and their parents are immoral enough to be allowing it, then they're obviously too stupid to know that they should use condoms. Condom use goes hand in hand with the individuals concerned being both mature and wanting to protect themselves...
I agree, but it is better to provide sex education at a young age + free condomns in the hope that the message will get through than not to provide anything at all -
Those involved wanted to produce offspring a) to guarantee state benefits for the next 16 years, b) to sell their crappy story to a tacky tabloid rag. The other youths coming forward have the same motive, their parents likely encouraging them in the hope of getting some easy alcohol/tobacco/drug money. This is what comes of having generations of people that have never known work.
sad but true
:2thumbsup:
pevergreen
02-16-2009, 10:58
How young is young enough? I got sex ed in year 6 and 7 (i was what...9 or 10. Around that) I understood none of it.
Parents here don't encourage their kids to go out and beat up ambulance crews, or drink a lot, or sleep around, but they do.
I agree that the parents should aim to prevent it, I'm just saying it won't always work.
It's convinced me to never try drugs, smoke or drink, but the rigid stance against it was of my own will. If I didn't feel the way I did about the girl in question, I wouldn't have done what I did. Saying that, I do regret it, it was too early and I wasn't ready for it. But, in the time, you don't think, you just act.
In conclusion, I disagree with your first sentance, then agree with the rest Asai.
How young is young enough? I got sex ed in year 6 and 7 (i was what...9 or 10. Around that) I understood none of it.
You're not alone. The problem with sex education is that it treats immature children as adults. It should be the role of the parents, not schools. Once again this is the chav culture get out: "blame the schools they taught my kid to have sex". Responsibility needs to rest with the parent, not the state.
Parents here don't encourage their kids to go out and beat up ambulance crews, or drink a lot, or sleep around, but they do.
Again, it's not about encouragement, but more so turning a blind eye. I'm not sure where you are in the world, but here there is an attitude of "I can't control my kid, the state should do it". It's not so much encouraging and more so not caring.
I agree that the parents should aim to prevent it, I'm just saying it won't always work.
Of course not. Parents can only do their best, at times they fail. It's when parents simply don't bother that such problems as teenage pregnancy get out of hand.
It's convinced me to never try drugs, smoke or drink, but the rigid stance against it was of my own will. If I didn't feel the way I did about the girl in question, I wouldn't have done what I did. Saying that, I do regret it, it was too early and I wasn't ready for it. But, in the time, you don't think, you just act.
In conclusion, I disagree with your first sentance, then agree with the rest Asai.
:bow:
FactionHeir
02-16-2009, 13:14
Parents here don't encourage their kids to go out and beat up ambulance crews, or drink a lot, or sleep around, but they do.
I agree that the parents should aim to prevent it, I'm just saying it won't always work.
It works for Asian parents, I found out first hand or should I say stick :grin:
Make abstinance or condom use a condition of employment. "Surprise" baby? Termination of employment. Underage pregnancy? Termination of employment. School drop-out? Termination of employment.
So you probably end up punishing the baby in many cases because it will grow up in poverty or the parents might even go as far as doing something to it to "make it go away". :no:
Beefy187
02-17-2009, 01:06
It works for Asian parents, I found out first hand or should I say stick :grin:
Leave Japan out of it.. We stopped using our rulers 20 years ago :beam:
Parents and school should both take the blame for this. Parents for being irresponsible about their child, and for blindly trusting the schools sex education without bothering to know what its like. And school for trying hard to blame shift instead of actually bothering to do something about it.
Leave Japan out of it.. We stopped using our rulers 20 years ago :beam:
Parents and school should both take the blame for this. Parents for being irresponsible about their child, and for blindly trusting the schools sex education without bothering to know what its like. And school for trying hard to blame shift instead of actually bothering to do something about it.
Why the school? --> Schools have had compulsory sex education for a while now, I don't see what else they can do.
Shaka_Khan
02-17-2009, 04:44
Kids grow faster than we did when we were their age. They reach puberty faster. Don't get me wrong. I know that they're still kids, but we need to realize that they're situation is very different from us, and thus we need to be more aware of them. At an age when we still thought the opposite sex was yucky, they're already experimenting. Even the toddlers are smarter than we were. I was shocked when I saw my relative's daughter talk fluently. She is four years old. I couldn't make sentences when I was four. (Maybe it was because I was exceptionally dumb but anyway...) At that age, I didn't know that the earth was round nor could I do any mathematics. She already knows about Christopher Columbus and knows addition.
After looking at some kids attending college, I'm beginning to think that maybe in the far future the voting age might start at an earlier one. There are other groups who weren't allowed to vote in the past because others thought they weren't privileged enough to vote. Now we think it unimaginable to take away that right from them. I think in the far future, the new group will be teenagers. I have foreseen it.
Kids grow faster than we did when we were their age. They reach puberty faster. Don't get me wrong.
I respectfully beg to differ. I'd say that children nowadays are forced to grow up sooner and exposed to sex at too early an age.
I know that they're still kids, but we need to realize that they're situation is very different from us, and thus we need to be more aware of them. At an age when we still thought the opposite sex was yucky, they're already experimenting.
I'd say this is more indicative of the world we live in, more than anything else. We thought the opposite sex was "yucky" due to social constructs and the culture of the time. "Modern Children" grow up constantly exposed to sex in the media. It's no wonder that they're becoming sexually aware sooner and thus experimenting. This is what has to change. Children need to be allowed to be children and allowed a proper childhood. This is an important part of development and growing up.
I couldn't make sentences when I was four. (Maybe it was because I was exceptionally dumb but anyway...) At that age, I didn't know that the earth was round nor could I do any mathematics. She already knows about Christopher Columbus and knows addition.
This is because children develop at different rates. I don't think I could converse much when I was four years old either, though I see children that can barely converse at 14 every day. I would say that this is somewhat the reverse of your point above, but does also point to the education/class divide growing.
After looking at some kids attending college, I'm beginning to think that maybe in the far future the voting age might start at an earlier one. There are other groups who weren't allowed to vote in the past because others thought they weren't privileged enough to vote. Now we think it unimaginable to take away that right from them. I think in the far future, the new group will be teenagers. I have foreseen it.
There is a big difference between acting all mature and clever and actually being mature. Personally I think the voting age should be raised.
:bow:
rory_20_uk
02-17-2009, 10:58
Cut state benefits for everything. Reduce government. When parents are made aware that they will have to deal with their children's mistakes they'll do something to stop them - especially when they are aware that the SS (social services) aren't going to lock them up. Give back power and responsibility to individuals. :soapbox:
~:smoking:
Children need to be allowed to be children and allowed a proper childhood. This is an important part of development and growing up.
*Waits for some norwegian to say that sex orgies are the only proper childhood* ~;)
Concerning children being forced to grow up, how else are companies going to get their fully educated triple doctor title holders at 23? Science progresses and the new kids have to learn everything the old kids researched which becomes more with every generation. Personally I'm a slowpoke, which is why I will most likely fail society and should look to live in a forest in Canada with no contact to the rest of humanity. :shrug:
Tristuskhan
02-17-2009, 20:13
Children need to be allowed to be children and allowed a proper childhood.
Out of curiousity, what the h... is a "proper childhood"?
Off the top of my head, a proper childhood would be one that does not involve sex, drugs, violence/abuse and getting pregnant before they can vote. Preferably with parents that either a) work or b) want to work and instil the need to work and not rely on state handouts in their children.
Of course that's just my opinion.
:bow:
Tristuskhan
02-17-2009, 21:42
Off the top of my head, a proper childhood would be one that does not involve sex, drugs, violence/abuse and getting pregnant before they can vote. Preferably with parents that either a) work or b) want to work and instil the need to work and not rely on state handouts in their children.
Of course that's just my opinion.
:bow:
I grew up in a pretty neat environment and still was exposed to everything you say, up to some point, so i believe the childhood you're thinking of exists only in the dreams of some.
Believe it or not, no matter the state handouts, religion, sexual education or anything else in the environment, some have the *** on fire at age 12. That has always been and will always be. Mankind.....
I grew up in a pretty neat environment and still was exposed to everything you say, up to some point, so i believe the childhood you're thinking of exists only in the dreams of some.
So you're an example for the rest of the world now? ~;)
Children are always exposed to all that to some point but that doesn't mean they have to experience all of that themselves or get bombarded with it daily so it starts to become a focus in their lives, I think that is what he means with a proper childhood.
Tristuskhan
02-18-2009, 00:18
So you're an example for the rest of the world now? ~;)
Children are always exposed to all that to some point but that doesn't mean they have to experience all of that themselves or get bombarded with it daily so it starts to become a focus in their lives, I think that is what he means with a proper childhood.
I'm just an example of a very reasonably "protected" childhood, an was replying Asa's "Off the top of my head, a proper childhood would be one that does not involve sex, drugs, violence/abuse and getting pregnant before they can vote. Preferably with parents that either a) work or b) want to work and instil the need to work and not rely on state handouts in their children.".
It looks like I precisely did not have a "proper childhood", according to these standards, and that's puzzling since my childhood occured by the end of the 70's, beginning of 80's, in a small french city, in a very average familly (divorced:dizzy2:), conditions a very very (very, very...) large majority of kids on Earth could only dream of, and seem to be "unpropper" anyway.
The more I think on the topic, the more I want to call my doctor for a good definitive vasectomy. Breeding snappers, what a bore...
Shaka_Khan
02-18-2009, 01:56
I respectfully beg to differ. I'd say that children nowadays are forced to grow up sooner and exposed to sex at too early an age.
I didn't say they weren't exposed. The fact is, they're life is very different from ours. :inquisitive:
I'd say this is more indicative of the world we live in, more than anything else. We thought the opposite sex was "yucky" due to social constructs and the culture of the time. "Modern Children" grow up constantly exposed to sex in the media. It's no wonder that they're becoming sexually aware sooner and thus experimenting. This is what has to change. Children need to be allowed to be children and allowed a proper childhood. This is an important part of development and growing up.
:laugh4: I agree. I meant that we have to be aware to be more careful with them. We weren't exposed to those things in their age. So our parents didn't have to worry about what parents worry now.
What you said isn't wrong. I was too lazy to mention it because it's something what all of us already know. :yes:
There is a big difference between acting all mature and clever and actually being mature. Personally I think the voting age should be raised.
:bow:
You seem to get jumpy about kids. Frankly, I think the older adults can't do any better when judging candidates. But I don't really care about the voting age. I just decided to add humour, which I failed at. :embarassed:
Crazed Rabbit
02-19-2009, 08:42
I'm speechless: (http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2250059.ece?OTC-RSS&ATTR=News)
SCHOOLBOY Alfie Patten wore a personalised hoodie yesterday defiantly declaring he is baby Maisie’s father.
The 13-year-old — devastated after other teens claimed they were the dad — displayed the message: “I’m the daddy, if not **** you all I’ll still be there.”
WARNING: Photo of a print of an offensive gesture and a partially asterisked swear word in image!
https://img25.imageshack.us/img25/9363/alfiemain735878apu8.jpg
CR
Alexander the Pretty Good
02-19-2009, 08:54
If I were "other teens" I don't think I'd be screaming about how responsible I was for all of this. :/
Divinus Arma
02-19-2009, 09:27
Who cares. Blow me.
meh, can't blame them for wanting the money i guess
When will he moderate his first TV show?
Strike For The South
02-19-2009, 14:40
I still can't believe any had sex with that thing. I mean sure you can brown bag it but you know, you know.
I still can't believe any had sex with that thing. I mean sure you can brown bag it but you know, you know.
We're talking about an english council estate here, what's not to believe?~D
If I were "other teens" I don't think I'd be screaming about how responsible I was for all of this. :/
meh, can't blame them for wanting the money i guess
That's just it. You're dealing with people that are effectively on a different planet to the rest of us. These kind of people. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/shannon-matthews-case-five-fathers-one-mother-and-a-muddled-family-saga-808374.html) This is all about getting into the tabloids - even when it's so obviously for all of the wrong reasons - and primarily making an easy few quid.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.