Am I overreacting?

[Bill (Papa) Lee]

On April 17, 2017 at 10:52 AM, Guest said:

How would you feel if your Young Women president and Young Women first councilor (the bishop's wife) came to your house and asked if they could take your daughter (the Laurel president) to go and visit some less active girls in your ward? You wouldn't think much of it, right? You would let your daughter go with them because this is pretty normal, the Young Women president and your daughter go and visit girls all of the time, bringing them the list of mutual activities coming up in the month.

You are not over reacting, you and your daughter we lied to by by those who are entrusted to tell you the truth, as well as those whom you should feel safe to do so. Sorry I wrote something to address before. Please accept my apology. 

[Vort]

1 hour ago, Bill (Papa) Lee said:

You are not over reacting, you and your daughter we lied to by by those who are entrusted to tell you the truth, as well as those whom you should feel safe to do so. Sorry I wrote something to address before. Please accept my apology. 

Again, the OP lied. She was (apparently) the girl, not the girl's mother. Nothing she wrote can really be trusted.

[Mormonheart]

Have I understood it correctly? Because your daughter has been making jokes with her best friend in the bathroom, do you think your daughter could be lesbian? Girls in that age make nonsense with the best friend. Best girlfriends are very close EMOTIONAL to each other, but this does not mean that they are SEXUALLY very close to each other!

If it were my daughter, I would talk to her first. If, from the daughter's point of view, she is a close-knit girlfriend, I would not do anything to make her realize how important good friends are.
If, however, erotic feelings of the daughter would be to her best friend, I would make clear to her three things:
1. Even as a lesbian she would still be my daughter!
2. God and his Church condemn homosexuality, so she may be homosexual, but she must never practice it.
3. If she wants to practice it, you would inform the bishop and she will lose all her rights as a member of the Church.

I guess, this would work to her.

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Mormonheart said:

Have I understood it correctly? Because your daughter has been making jokes with her best friend in the bathroom, do you think your daughter could be lesbian? Girls in that age make nonsense with the best friend. Best girlfriends are very close EMOTIONAL to each other, but this does not mean that they are SEXUALLY very close to each other!

If it were my daughter, I would talk to her first. If, from the daughter's point of view, she is a close-knit girlfriend, I would not do anything to make her realize how important good friends are.
If, however, erotic feelings of the daughter would be to her best friend, I would make clear to her three things:
1. Even as a lesbian she would still be my daughter!
2. God and his Church condemn homosexuality, so she may be homosexual, but she must never practice it.
3. If she wants to practice it, you would inform the bishop and she will lose all her rights as a member of the Church.

I guess, this would work to her.

It was a sham.  The entire OP was a fraud.  It didn't happen.  Check the past couple of pages of posts.

[Bad Karma]

I absolutely think the Bishop needs to know, I also think the Police need to know too, for many reasons and on many levels. I wouldn't let this slide, I'd persist until both those women never hold positions where they have any kind of access to anyone else's children. 

 

[The Folk Prophet]

And...the evidence keeps piling. Evidence of what? That you should never trust a teenager!

 

[NeuroTypical]

[Mormonheart]

11 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

And...the evidence keeps piling. Evidence of what? That you should never trust a teenager!

 

When I was a teenager, I often lied to my parents. I was gone with girlfriends. And came too late because "the bus had been delayed". We wanted to have longer fun. As a teenager, parents are seen as annoying, paternal and old-fashioned. Until we become parents. Parents of teenagers. Then we understand our own parents better.

[Bini]

OUT OF LINE, PERIOD.

I'm a parent, too. I would be furious that they lied to me but more furious that they secretly cornered my underaged child without my knowledge or consent! Trust has been broken here and I would not be comfortable with these adults being role models for my kids. Wish you the best. I left the church and not ever going back. So this is a church problem I will never have to deal with EVER.

[Vort]

5 minutes ago, Bini said:

OUT OF LINE, PERIOD.

I'm a parent, too. I would be furious that they lied to me but more furious that they secretly cornered my underaged child without my knowledge or consent! Trust has been broken here and I would not be comfortable with these adults being role models for my kids. Wish you the best. I left the church and not ever going back. So this is a church problem I will never have to deal with EVER.

It's also a lie, Bini. The whole thing was a sham and a misrepresentation. Before continuing in your breathless outrage against the horrible and oppressive Church from which you have finally freed yourself, you might want to read the thread. If that's asking too much, reading this post and this post is probably enough.

Edited April 24, 2017 by Vort

[mordorbund]

On 4/21/2017 at 9:19 AM, Carborendum said:

It was a sham.  The entire OP was a fraud.

 

1 hour ago, Vort said:

It's also a lie, Bini. The whole thing was a sham and a misrepresentation.

If a sham is a fraud, lie, or misrepresentation.... then what do you wash your hair with?

[Vort]

2 minutes ago, mordorbund said:

If a sham is a fraud, lie, or misrepresentation.... then what do you wash your hair with?

I would like to say that I have never used this particularly awful pun.

(I would like to say it, but I would be lying.)

[Just_A_Guy]

Well, the "sham" lay in the identity of the poster.  As to the truth of the underlying allegations, we really don't know one way or the other; but I suspect that the kernel of the story--that the OP was more or less "cornered" without her parents' knowledge or consent--may be, to some extent, true.

At any rate--she's a kid, she's taken her licks from us, and it's probably time for us to lay off.

[Strongerie]

You have every right to feel upset about this, I would too. I think you need to raise the issue. 

[Ffenix]

On 4/17/2017 at 0:32 PM, yjacket said:

However, the story told to the parent is probably very different than what actually happened. And a parent should be able to tell within a couple min. conversation with the actual leadership about which version happened. 

Can I just be the Teenager in the group here and point out that as teens we don't see things the same way as you adults do for the most part? So It's entirely possible that (sans the going behind the parent's back thing, which I've got no clue how that works) The daughter is correct, but the leaders didn't actually do anything that was directly meant to be derogatory. (ask Carb about some of me or my sibling's explosive reactions to things like "That's not a good idea.")

 

On 4/17/2017 at 1:38 PM, yjacket said:

(Big sigh). Everyone is taking the story of the daughter at face value and hardly anyone is giving the leadership the benefit of the doubt-so, so sad.

Everyone is believing the word of a 16 year old and no one has actually talked to the leadership who are probably at least 2x-4x the age of the girl have raised kids, lived life, etc. 

What a sad, sad world we live in where the 3rd hand story of a 16 year old is elevated and given such stature without even confirming that it is true.

Despicable.

Unless I'm missing something, Most of the responses (If I recall even Annatess said this in her first post) said that if the story given is indeed the correct one then do...(Fill in the blank).

However, Since then, no, most of the responses don't include that again. I personally don't have an issue with that since I dislike redundancies. However, You specifically Yjacket, seem to have walked off the main path here (correct me if I'm wrong) Where for the most part you're arguing against the discussion to allow the daughter to use FB in such a manner. IMO that's something that is more between the parents, the child, and the lord than any of the rest of us. For the most part everyone else is discussing the manner in which the YW Leaders dealt with this.

As to my own opinion, This may or may not have needed any sort of discussion, but if it did, it would be from the Bishop, as judge in Israel, talking to the parents and daughter in question, not the YW leaders talking to her without any parental presence whatsoever. The method is, according to the given story, unacceptable and should be addressed in some way. Whether it should have ever happened (in other circumstances or not) is not something I wish to attempt to untangle.

I think that in this case you are trying to push your views and level of spiritual progression on somebody who doesn't share your views and possibly hasn't reached your level of spiritual progression yet. while I can't really say that you shouldn't teach a better way, getting on their case like that without knowing the details is not, IMO, a good way to go about this. Yes, the actions and explanations (I have very specific rules for the difference between an excuse and an explanation) given here indicate a sort of naivete to the world of cyberspace, but that does not mean an offensive tone was necessary.

 

 

EDIT: Finished (sorta) reading the rest of the posts. I'm really starting to hate the few times I decide the discussion is TL;DR, With only a few exceptions I miss something really important that throws my entire opinion for a loop.

I stand by what I said earlier though. If the given story was true, there's my opinion. Now all of you go ignore the [teen] behind the curtain...

EDIT 2: Woo-hoo. My ability to insult people without meaning to astounds me. Apologies to YJacket for the more hostile parts, tone, etc.

Edited April 30, 2017 by Ffenix

[Ffenix]

On 4/21/2017 at 2:59 PM, The Folk Prophet said:

And...the evidence keeps piling. Evidence of what? That you should never trust a teenager!

 

I'm offended by that statement.

 

Then I go and look at most of my coworkers and realize I'm the weird one. *Sigh*

[yjacket]

1 minute ago, Ffenix said:

Can I just be the Teenager in the group here and point out that as teens we don't see things the same way as you adults do for the most part?

??? Yes, I agree I have stated so.  You obviously have not read the topic-I expressed many times that I understood that according to the girl xyz happened, however that was her perception and that her perception was most likely wrong-specifically because of this.

3 minutes ago, Ffenix said:

Unless I'm missing something, Most of the responses (If I recall even Annatess said this in her first post) said that if the story given is indeed the correct one then do...(Fill in the blank).

Again, the point being that I highly doubted that the story was correct and in fact we know that the story was incorrect as the actual person posting the story was the daughter who lied and presented herself as her mother.  I had a high suspicion that something was off in the story and I was correct.

6 minutes ago, Ffenix said:

Where for the most part you're arguing against the discussion to allow the daughter to use FB in such a manner. IMO that's something that is more between the parents, the child, and the lord than any of the rest of us.

 ?? Completely illogical.  Are you arguing that I have to be her parent to tell her that drug use is bad?  That I have to be her parent to say that nothing good happens after midnight? Do I have to be her parent to say you should stay in school, get your homework done or any other host of things? 

Quite frankly, you know nothing and to lecture me about what is or isn't between parents/child/lord is a whole lot of hubris on your part. Just because it is a parents decision to let their kid smoke weed, doesn't make it a good decision.  There is this really insane dumb philosophy that has taken root in modern America where no one can speak out against xyz thing b/c well that decision is "between the person and their spouse or the person and the Lord". I don't need a PhD in sociology nor physiology or be a spiritual leader to recognize and give warning against the use of things that have the potential to be really bad.  

There is not one good reason for a child to be on Facebook-not one!  Oh, that's how my friends communicate . . .so what, if your friends all did drugs would you? Considering children are highly impressionable and can very easily bend to social pressure.

http://miami.cbslocal.com/2017/03/13/dcf-mom-of-teen-who-committed-suicide-in-facebook-live-watched-episode-unfold/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_of_Megan_Meier

https://globalgrind.cassiuslife.com/4224039/teenage-couple-commits-suicide-days-apart-and-leaves-facebook-video/

And there was another one where some kid killed herself with a shotgun in front of her dad b/c of facebook bullying.  Facebook is in general a place that feeds people's narcissistic tendings and encourages people to be self-styled drama queens/kings.  I was bullied enough in school myself so why on God's green Earth would a parent give a child access to Facebook where they can be bullied after school at any point in time. Facebook and internet access for a child is not a need, it's a want and giving a child Facebook access is giving them a loaded gun and saying have fun!!!

And yes, I know you don't understand b/c as you said teenagers think differently than adults-that is fine.  I don't expect you to understand what I wrote

21 minutes ago, Ffenix said:

I think that in this case you are trying to push your views and level of spiritual progression on somebody who doesn't share your views and possibly hasn't reached your level of spiritual progression yet. while I can't really say that you shouldn't teach a better way, getting on their case like that without knowing the details is not, IMO, a good way to go about this. Yes, the actions and explanations (I have very specific rules for the difference between an excuse and an explanation) given here indicate a sort of naivete to the world of cyberspace, but that does not give you any right to beat the OP down.

I give the same advice to you, YJ as I do to the OP. Learn more about the situation, pray about what you have learned, listen to the lord's council, then take action accordingly. (How I wish I could say I always do the same)

And I'll give you some advice Ffenix . . .go back to school and learn to respect your elders-you might just learn something from them.

You have no clue what you are talking about, I've been through more hell in my life than you can possibly imagine, I've had a stronger closer connection to God than you can possibly imagine.  I've been on this rock a lot longer than you have and with that I've learned quite a bit so when you are a parent and/or have grown up a little and become an adult in the world then you can join the adult conversation.

The OP lied, period end of story. 

[Blueskye2]

On 4/30/2017 at 4:30 PM, Ffenix said:

I'm offended by that statement.

 

Then I go and look at most of my coworkers and realize I'm the weird one. *Sigh*

The fact is old folks were once upon a time....teenagers. We remember how we were, and how our friends were, and so wouldn't trust our own teenage selves. At least not all of the time. Teenagers can be sneaky lil twerps one minute and the most awesome people in the world the next moment. Keeps the old folks on their toes, and one day, they'll be the old folks with memories of their teenage selves, turning an eye askew on the newest crop of teens. 

[Blueskye2]

17 hours ago, Armin said:

 

I would agree, FB is potentially not without any risk for children. On the other hand I wouldn't compare it with a loaded gun, and I'm sure you wouldn't like to keep your children naive, unworldly,  and inexperienced - those internet bans and other restrictions might lead to the result that you'll once have brought up some kind of Amish youngsters in the end, maybe once driving with horse and carriage across Pennsylvania. And don't forget your children might get bullied all the more just because they are not allowed to use FB or the internet ("Nutheads, stone age fools!" or something more crueful). The question is, from which age it's appropriate to permit it, and how far developed the character or the personality of the child is.  Today without internet nothing runs at all (see POTUS 45), and I think children should be prepared for that. The earlier the better.

 

 

 

 

 

Facebook is not a must have invention. The internet has uses for minors, such as school work.  

One of my teenage nieces refuses to be on Facebook. She says it is for old people.

When my daughter was 13 yrs old, MySpace was The Thing.  I work in IT, and had her internet activity whitelisted. I allowed MySpace as long as I was her friend and approved all of MySpace contacts.  She had a fit, telling me I didn't trust her.  I explained more than once that I do trust her, but I do not trust all of the other people on the internet. Now that she is an adult, she has told me she gets it, and understands now what I was doing  

I taught her IT stuff when she was young.  HTML at nine, that kind of thing.  At 13 she was making a fan site for the anime she enjoyed,  I allowed all of that, no problem. Just because a parent restricts internet activity, does not mean they are Luddites.

By the time she was about 15 I had taught her how to build a PC.  One day I find her surfing freely all over the internet, and so I knew, she had figured out how to turn the whitelist off.  My IT heart was proud.  Good job! Is what I was thinking. But what I said was, I can still monitor your internet activity, so watch it girl.

 

[Blueskye2]

6 hours ago, Armin said:

One of my teenage nieces refuses to be on Facebook. She says it is for old people. ... I wouldn't say she is absolutely wrong.

When my daughter was 13 yrs old, ... By the time she was about 15 I had taught her how to build a PC. One day I find her surfing freely all over the internet, and so I knew, she had figured out how to turn the whitelist off. ... One day she will find a way to prevent your monitoring or supervision, and I bet she will outwit you somehow. So watch it.

??