[hamster-bamster]

It seems that there is lack of guidance with regard to the content of posts on the Sexuality forum, due to the fact that people under 13 may view the forum.

I would suggest trying the following approaches:

1) Making viewers confirm that they are over 13 before viewing the forum.
2) In the sticky, post guidance on how to select topics for posting and what links may be put in posts.

Thanks!

[DocJohn]

I'm not sure how we'd post "guidance" on what topics are appropriate to discuss in the realm of human sexuality, given its diverse and broad nature. I don't want to get into a situation where someone has to vet every link or thought or topic on a specific forum for its "appropriateness" (ala "I know it when I see it") ( I know it when I see it - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ).

We will certainly take your other suggestion into consideration, though, thank you.

DocJohn

[Sabrina]

Only thing is, what's to stop the 13 year old lying about their age?

[DocJohn]

Absolutely nothing. Kids do it all the time online.

Originally Posted by Sabrina

Only thing is, what's to stop the 13 year old lying about their age?

The suggestions may be good to put in to place, however. We live in a sue-happy society and if a disgruntled parent sees that their child is reading, it could potentially protect you from a nasty lawsuit. It's hateful we have to think that way, but....

[hamster-bamster]

Originally Posted by Sabrina

Only thing is, what's to stop the 13 year old lying about their age?

The point is not to elicit truthful responses from the kids, but to put them on notice. If you put people on notice, their subsequent steps are their responsibility.

[hamster-bamster]

Originally Posted by DocJohn

I'm not sure how we'd post "guidance" on what topics are appropriate to discuss in the realm of human sexuality, given its diverse and broad nature. I don't want to get into a situation where someone has to vet every link or thought or topic on a specific forum for its "appropriateness" (ala "I know it when I see it") ( I know it when I see it - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ).

We will certainly take your other suggestion into consideration, though, thank you.

DocJohn

I totally agree with you. The choice of minimally necessary censorship that the site has adopted so far - no suicidal posts on the depression forum, no numbers listed on the eating disorders forum, and a few more minor rules - does seem very reasonable and well thought out. In the sexuality forum, nobody should vet the posts, in my opinion - neither you nor other posters.

However, the experience shows that other posters DO attempt to vet links in posts, and since they DO, they should have some guidance. It would be better if they didn't attempt to vet the links, but they do.

My suggestion arose out of a situation when fellow posters criticized a post (you know which one). One person suggested the post was misplaced and offered an alternative forum for the post. That was OK - that seemed like a benign suggestion, accompanied by a practical alternative. That poster did not try to SILENCE the OP, but instead offered an alternative venue for expression.

The next poster actually tried to SILENCE the OP, saying that the content was inappropriate for minors, and since minors visit the site as a whole, the post just should not have appeared, at all. It is in response to that second criticism - the one that attempted to SILENCE the OP - that I suggested that you post some guidance, because there is none. And no, in the situation described, no supreme court justice would have exclaimed "I know it!", because the visuals that were criticized were very sanitary-looking and even medical-looking computer animations of average-sized human bodies, moving in the typical robotic computer-animation fashion. As clearcut NOT "hard-core pornography" (citing the supreme court justice from the wikipedia link) as possible. Nor was the goal of the visuals to excite and arouse - the goal of the visuals, which were accompanied by a lot of descriptive text, was to serve as a tutorial along the lines of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_pictu...thousand_words

Again, in the best case scenario, it would be nice if nobody tried to vet anybody's posts and links in the realm of human sexuality.

[DocJohn]

Putting a kid "on notice" about the frank topics in a forum -- where it already says it's for frank discussion of sexual issues -- doesn't really add much to the experience. Nor does it do anything to protect us from liability (since they are a child, the same rules don't really apply).

Since you gave me an example we're both already familiar with, you also know that since I okayed that link in that thread, I didn't agree with some people's opinions in that thread -- showing more clearly than I could otherwise explain how I can't put such things into any simple one-sentence description that could be easily followed.

Honestly, we're not here to judge nor do I want to be in a position to have to judge other people's links, thoughts, or what-have-you. This is a gray area I feel is best left to members' discretion.

DocJohn

[lynn P.]

Since I'm the one referred to as the "other poster" who objected to the animation link, its only fair I get to voice my opinion. All I did was say my opinion and it went on from there. I have nothing against the OPer of that thread (sexuality forum) at all. The thread was there to inquire about posters favorite position. Anyone can search the multitude of positions, so its not necessary to give the link IMO. One poster said he couldn't even access the link because his university has websites like that blocked - good call.

Swear words are censored here, so it made sense to me this animated link would also qualify. Fact is ...there's no way to block kids from here. Inquiring other peoples positions seemed invasive and it made me feel uncomfortable. In addition many of the positions go beyond the average persons physical abilities lol which may make some feel inferior. I have a sincere question and this isn't directed to the OPer of that thread........how does a website decipher between a legitimate sexual issue and a poster who tends to be perverted......then posts topics for his/her own pleasure? As I stated on the thread, I have no problem speaking openly if a person has a problem

[DocJohn]

Swear words are censored automatically by the software. Without significant costs, there's no similar service for websites like ours to censor/filter inappropriate links as they're posted.

[Gus1234U]

i have not noticed any lack of ability by this site to monitor, edit, restrict and remove posts that are complained about. many which are MUCH less potentially offensive and gratuitously graphic than the one being discussed.

[amandalouise]

Originally Posted by lynn P.

Since I'm the one referred to as the "other poster" who objected to the animation link, its only fair I get to voice my opinion. All I did was say my opinion and it went on from there. I have nothing against the OPer of that thread (sexuality forum) at all. The thread was there to inquire about posters favorite position. Anyone can search the multitude of positions, so its not necessary to give the link IMO. One poster said he couldn't even access the link because his university has websites like that blocked - good call.

Swear words are censored here, so it made sense to me this animated link would also qualify. Fact is ...there's no way to block kids from here. Inquiring other peoples positions seemed invasive and it made me feel uncomfortable. In addition many of the positions go beyond the average persons physical abilities lol which may make some feel inferior. I have a sincere question and this isn't directed to the OPer of that thread........how does a website decipher between a legitimate sexual issue and a poster who tends to be perverted......then posts topics for his/her own pleasure? As I stated on the thread, I have no problem speaking openly if a person has a problem

the censoring sexual information can be don through a parenting control program with in the computers of each person that owns a computer. I forget what the program is called but it runs about $50-100 bucks in walmart. Parents upload the program and then sets what materials they dont want their teen and children to have access to. computers also have setting options for parents to use where they can block specific sites/internet materials. personal computers also have settings for things like fishing/spyware/virus/ pop ups and other settings that address porn links.

which is probably why websites in general leave a persons viewing pleasures up to each of its members to take care of...

on a personal note on this idea of psych central coming up with something to limit a persons viewing/posting pleasures....

yea its aimed at teens but like already discussed theres no way to varify whether a person adult or teen is ....really...a teen or adult behind the computer screen, there are adults out there pretending to be kids/teens and kids/teens pretending to be adults...example facebook the rule is no one under a certain age but I know quite a few 5-13 yr olds on the site playing games, posting and what have you...in their profiles it states they are in their 20's because when they register and place their true age the registration wont go through...facebook is now changing to an open to all policy because they have recognized they can not prevent children and teens from being on the site with or with out parents permission.

that said....lets just pretend for a moment that psych central has some how come up with a way to limit child and teen activities here....

now to see how this will also impact the adult members look at one of the mental disorders here...Dissociative disorders board....on that board we have many adult members with insider parts that are as young as 4 or 5 posting...with limiting a members under a certain age that means that most of those on the dissociative disorders board will no longer be able to post and view anything above G rated material...now go to each of the boards and you will find that sexuality and sexual problems are part of just about every mental and physical problem there is....

so now not only do the adults from the DD boards get affected but everyone who may have sexual problems because of depression, bipolar, schizophrenia, and every other board..

just something to think about because when you are asking that teens be limited you are also affecting your own abilities to have freedom of viewing and posting..right down to if you suddenly get prescribed a medication that may be causing you sexual problems....

[hamster-bamster]

Originally Posted by amandalouise

the censoring sexual information can be don through a parenting control program with in the computers of each person that owns a computer. I forget what the program is called but it runs about $50-100 bucks in walmart. Parents upload the program and then sets what materials they dont want their teen and children to have access to. computers also have setting options for parents to use where they can block specific sites/internet materials. personal computers also have settings for things like fishing/spyware/virus/ pop ups and other settings that address porn links.

I have just been tinkering with my AT&T U-Verse account online. One of the options was parental control through them. I have not explored it, but it is available. So besides parental controls through third party software, there are parental controls through ISP's. And, they are probably free. And, a parent can combine parents controls offered by the ISP with software from third parties.

Originally Posted by amandalouise

that said....lets just pretend for a moment that psych central has some how come up with a way to limit child and teen activities here....

now to see how this will also impact the adult members look at one of the mental disorders here...Dissociative disorders board....on that board we have many adult members with insider parts that are as young as 4 or 5 posting...with limiting a members under a certain age that means that most of those on the dissociative disorders board will no longer be able to post and view anything above G rated material...now go to each of the boards and you will find that sexuality and sexual problems are part of just about every mental and physical problem there is....

so now not only do the adults from the DD boards get affected but everyone who may have sexual problems because of depression, bipolar, schizophrenia, and every other board..

just something to think about because when you are asking that teens be limited you are also affecting your own abilities to have freedom of viewing and posting..right down to if you suddenly get prescribed a medication that may be causing you sexual problems....

thanks, I did not realize the true extent of ramifications of restricting viewing and posting.

[hamster-bamster]

Originally Posted by DocJohn

Putting a kid "on notice" about the frank topics in a forum -- where it already says it's for frank discussion of sexual issues -- doesn't really add much to the experience.

That is a little outside of the industry standard, because it leaves it up to the child to make the connection between "frank" and "not appropriate for minors under the age of 13". The industry standard is more blunt and binary - over the age VS under the age.

But, I guess, why not? "frank" is a pretty clear word.

And, "sexual" is a pretty clear word, too.

So, I see your point.

[hamster-bamster]

Originally Posted by DocJohn

Swear words are censored automatically by the software. Without significant costs, there's no similar service for websites like ours to censor/filter inappropriate links as they're posted.

The problems (if they can be called "problems") are not comparable in magnitude.

Swear words - a short finite list of words. A straightforward problem. To digress, I have always wondered though why A*al is considered a swear word. While I have never engaged in a*al activities of sexual nature, I thought the word at least belonged to old fashioned Freudism. So... why ban it? But I am sure DocJohn does not make the call but just uses built-in solutions.

Links - an infinite set of possibilities. A problem that is very hard to solve. Very costly and all the solutions are error-prone.

[Yoda]

I am on another community (also bulletin board format) and we have a 'mature' forum where members must be 18 years old and have a minimum of 50 posts before they can ask a mod for the password to enter the forum.

[hamster-bamster]

Originally Posted by lynn P.

Since I'm the one referred to as the "other poster" who objected to the animation link, its only fair I get to voice my opinion. All I did was say my opinion and it went on from there. I have nothing against the OPer of that thread (sexuality forum) at all. The thread was there to inquire about posters favorite position. Anyone can search the multitude of positions, so its not necessary to give the link IMO.

The link to the tutorial contained very specific, unusual names for the positions. Therefore, it provided a common frame of references for thread participants to select their favorites. I have not searched for sexual positions online, ever, and do not know if the names listed in that tutorial are industry standard. At least they were not known to me when I reviewed the tutorial and scanned the answers with posters' preferences - Amazon, etc., I had never heard of them, so these names are at least not known to some people, which makes me suspect that perhaps they are not industry standard.

To the extent that the link provided a naming convention, accompanied by very clearcut explanations, it enabled the participants on the thread to avoid lengthy verbal explanations of what they like to do in bed. They could just mention the name of their favorite position. So, it was very useful and helpful in organizing the exchange of information/preferences/tastes - although I could not participate due to the severe lack of variety in my repertoire, I could, as a by-stander, appreciate the taxonomic value of the link.

Originally Posted by lynn P.

Inquiring other peoples positions seemed invasive

And inquiring about people's medication dosages is less of an "invasion" of their privacy? And many people not only welcome such inquiries, but post their dosages in their signatures - I just stopped doing that a week ago.

Originally Posted by lynn P.

Inquiring other peoples positions ... made me feel uncomfortable.

For that, DocJohn provided very clear guidance back in 2007:

Originally Posted by DocJohn

If that may be triggering or disturbing to you, please, do not read this forum.

Enjoy!
DocJohn

While DocJohn said it about the forum as a whole, you can, for your personal purposes, choose not to read the threads that cause discomfort. I take it, "disturbing" in DocJohn's welcome letter and "uncomfortable" in your post are close to synonymous. Maybe I am wrong... but they are close enough to say that the welcome letter applies to your feeling uncomfortable. I personally feel uncomfortable every time I see descriptions of cutting. Extremely uncomfortable. But I realize that I am not to silence the people who talk about cutting just because I happen to be uncomfortable. My level of comfort should not be a standard for other people's self-expression.

Originally Posted by lynn P.

In addition many of the positions go beyond the average persons physical abilities lol which may make some feel inferior.

That is very true. It does make me feel inferior. But the long thread about exercise on which people post how many miles they have walked today makes me feel equally inferior. Plus, my feeling inferior, just as my feeling uncomfortable, should not silence other people, whether they post about intricate sexual positions or high daily running mileage.

[hamster-bamster]

DocJohn, I see what you mean - you added this to the thread in question:

Originally Posted by DocJohn

{ Hi folks, I had to remove a number of posts to this thread that were off-topic from the OP. If you have a problem with a thread, please report it. If you don't agree with a thread, please don't participate in the thread then -- not every topic is going to be agreeable to every member. If you want to discuss this issue further, please start a new thread in the Feedback and Community Support forum. Thank you for your cooperation. }

That is great, but I think it should be added to the Welcome letter. The welcome letter says:

Originally Posted by DocJohn

Welcome to our forum for the frank and open discussion of sexual issues, sexual identity (gay/lesbian/transgendered/bisexual), sexual problems and sexuality in general.

As we say in the description, this is for the frank and open discussion of these issues. If that may be triggering or disturbing to you, please, do not read this forum.

Enjoy!
DocJohn

Your recent post clarified that somebody may want to review the forum but not read individual threads on that forum - that part is missing from the Welcome letter. It is just one sentence to add.

[hamster-bamster]

Originally Posted by Yoda

I am on another community (also bulletin board format) and we have a 'mature' forum where members must be 18 years old and have a minimum of 50 posts before they can ask a mod for the password to enter the forum.

The minimum post count would protect against spammers, which is a good thing, help validate the identity, which is another good thing, but disallow a new person in crisis to post, which is a bad thing.

[DocJohn]

Hi Yoda, it doesn't stop a kid from lying about their age, which kids do all the time in order to access "adult" material online. Adults are deluding themselves if they think asking for someone's age stops a kid.

So we don't engage in barriers that are only put there to make ourselves feel good.

DocJohn

[lynn P.]

Originally Posted by hamster-bamster

The link to the tutorial contained very specific, unusual names for the positions. Therefore, it provided a common frame of references for thread participants to select their favorites. I have not searched for sexual positions online, ever, and do not know if the names listed in that tutorial are industry standard. At least they were not known to me when I reviewed the tutorial and scanned the answers with posters' preferences - Amazon, etc., I had never heard of them, so these names are at least not known to some people, which makes me suspect that perhaps they are not industry standard.

To the extent that the link provided a naming convention, accompanied by very clearcut explanations, it enabled the participants on the thread to avoid lengthy verbal explanations of what they like to do in bed. They could just mention the name of their favorite position. So, it was very useful and helpful in organizing the exchange of information/preferences/tastes - although I could not participate due to the severe lack of variety in my repertoire, I could, as a by-stander, appreciate the taxonomic value of the link.



And inquiring about people's medication dosages is less of an "invasion" of their privacy? And many people not only welcome such inquiries, but post their dosages in their signatures - I just stopped doing that a week ago.



For that, DocJohn provided very clear guidance back in 2007:


While DocJohn said it about the forum as a whole, you can, for your personal purposes, choose not to read the threads that cause discomfort. I take it, "disturbing" in DocJohn's welcome letter and "uncomfortable" in your post are close to synonymous. Maybe I am wrong... but they are close enough to say that the welcome letter applies to your feeling uncomfortable. I personally feel uncomfortable every time I see descriptions of cutting. Extremely uncomfortable. But I realize that I am not to silence the people who talk about cutting just because I happen to be uncomfortable. My level of comfort should not be a standard for other people's self-expression.


That is very true. It does make me feel inferior. But the long thread about exercise on which people post how many miles they have walked today makes me feel equally inferior. Plus, my feeling inferior, just as my feeling uncomfortable, should not silence other people, whether they post about intricate sexual positions or high daily running mileage.

I'm aware of the guidelines which is why there's another thread on positions preference in that forum. Personally I refuse to answer casual sexual questions because its my private business and I don't feel the need to discuss it. A real problem is much different. Asking what sexual position has a creepy factor similar to a person calling and asking "what are you wearing?" Some people get pleasure from reading this.

I know about parental filters since I have kids. What I objected to was the detailed animation link - I'm an adult and don't need that visual. I felt if a nude animation pic was posted anywhere else it would've been deleted. If this is fine with Doc, then I have nothing further to add and my opinion won't matter anyways. I'll keep to my belief, in refusing to indulge this kind of inquiry to avoid giving anyone that satisfaction (jollies).

[Perna]

Originally Posted by lynn P.

If this is fine with Doc, then I have nothing further to add and my opinion won't matter anyways.

I think our opinion matters to Doc, Lynn; we do make up these forums and these forums are here to help and entertain us, not just because DocJohn enjoys helping and entertaining others and becoming rich (ha, ha) and famous from the Net. I think it is more of a "majority rules" sort of thing, unless Doc sees it as being harmful to the majority of users.

I have more problems with 13 year olds having access to computers and being on a predominantly adult set of forums discussing sexual matters without their parents or guardians having knowledge or taking an interest in what they are doing. I don't see it as any different from other parts of life. I do not think 13 year olds are harmed by reading about sex anymore than I think explaining about sex to pre-teens and getting them ready for puberty is a bad idea.

I suspect that any children, or even most teens on here are not going to necessarily understand the full sexual experience, whether they have had "sex" before or not. It's a growth thing like the rest of human experience and babies may hear and understand older people talking, may watch older people walking but they don't "understand" talking and walking yet, they have not experienced the whole of it. But whether we have experienced something or not, we are going to think, reason, feel about it from where we are; we know children get the "wrong" idea about things because they don't have the knowledge and experience yet with that situation and I know that I have carried wrong ideas into adulthood because my early ideas from earlier exposure to something have been wrong and I have not necessarily had a correcting/balancing experience to put it in a better perspective for me. There is no way that my parents, as good as they were as parents, could foresee and "protect" me from myself and my own thoughts and ideas that I was too young to articulate so they would even know I had a problem. The bad person tells us not to tell or more bad things will happen and we believe them and don't tell and get to where more bad things cannot happen but, it's late and more bad things did happen, just because we did not tell and carried that all the way forward with us into our adult lives. . . "All sun makes a desert" says an Arabian proverb and trying to protect other people, especially from themselves, just can't work; not for parents, not for one's self.

[pegasus]

You'll never be able to stop youngsters reading the forums, they are at an age where curiosity is natural and needed. Personally, I would like to see that forum only used for issues or problems to do with sex or gender, not titilation. We are a support forum not a porn site.

[Pikku Myy]

Pikku believes it is the responsibility of the parents/guardians to prevent & shield young adults/teenagers from exposing them to the reality of the world.... too soon... they will find their way & explore one way or another..... but being truthful and honest will pay off in the long run..... hugs

[hamster-bamster]

Originally Posted by lynn P.

Personally I refuse to answer casual sexual questions because its my private business and I don't feel the need to discuss it.

I think that your personal rule is great, but, the thread's title asked for opinions on the favorite sexual positions, and, in doing so - straightforwardly and without any nuances of meaning - it put you on notice about the content of the post. So if you refuse to answer casual sexual questions, and, moreover, find the question itself an invasion of privacy, it seems that you should not have clicked through. You did click through - in order to

1) form an opinion about the visual, as expressed on the original thread and the current thread,
2) side with the policy on censoring web content employed by the administration of the college attended by one of the original thread's participants,
3) post on both threads

- you must have clicked through.

So if you were put on notice, and you had your own policy on what kind of questions you would answer, and you felt that the question was an invasion of your privacy, why did you click through?

Clearly, the site administration does various things in an effort to put us on notice - the forum is described as being "frank" and you are advised not to read it if the content disturbs you; there is an option to block the forum from view - say, mentions of SI generally disturb me so once I found out about the forum blocking capability on the site, I immediately blocked the SI forum, so I no longer see the latest SI post when I scroll down the list of forums. So the site administration tries to be helpful.

That said, there is a limit to what it can do while trying to be helpful: if you click through against your own policy and despite being put on notice, I do not know what the administration can really do to protect you, because your clicking actions are completely outside of the administration's control.

Originally Posted by lynn P.

Asking what sexual position has a creepy factor similar to a person calling and asking "what are you wearing?" Some people get pleasure from reading this.

I did not see anything creepy in the post. Moreover, the thread was started by an old timer, who has made numerous posts that endeared me to him and revealed his many vulnerabilities and, in his posting, he has come across as very genuine. I cannot assess the analogy between his question and being called and asked what I am wearing, though, because nobody has ever called me to ask what I am wearing.

I also do not have a problem with people getting pleasure from reading this or anything else. There are all kinds of people with all kinds of unusual sides to them and there might be people who enjoy reading about suffering. There might be people who take pleasure in reading the depression forum while not being depressed themselves. All sorts of things might be happening. The administration clearly cannot gain visibility into the brains of the users, even if it had an unlimited budget.

Originally Posted by lynn P.

I felt if a nude animation pic was posted anywhere else it would've been deleted.

It was a computer animation. I do not think that you can call it "nude". I feel that the adjective "nude" can only be used to describe real human bodies, depicted in art or captured via the use of various tools of technology. Unless this can be called "nude":

http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/phys...rso-side.page?