Darkostar Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 I don't necessarily want to get too off topic on this, but trust is earned and not given.The kid vacated his claim to any trust when he stopped being, well, trustworthy.Kids don't always have a great understanding of what trust is, or how to maintain it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 Kids don't always have a great understanding of what trust is, or how to maintain it.And? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelli Fury Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 Trust is really a two way street, if one party can't or doesn't trust the other, that bond is just broken. Kids react like this when they KNOW they've done something they shouldn't and get caught- to try and turn it around and make it not about you is a pretty easy way to duck the real issue. I don't think this kid actually feels like he can't trust his parents any more than any 12 year old. The trust thing is not really a big deal, the kid/parent relationship is not one that usually has or requires a lot of trust. The dynamic is more one of respect, and this kid clearly has no respect for the rules at all, which means the rules are going to have to be changed in such a way it is much harder to break them, like taking his internet access away, downgrading his phone to one without internet or camera, ect. Things will be shitty for awhile, the kid will be angry, but that's what happens when you don't have clear rules to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Nan Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 I don't think this kid actually feels like he can't trust his parents any more than any 12 year old.this kid clearly has no respect for the rules at allYou don't see a contradiction between these things?The kid's not going to trust them again. People don't forgive being spied on... well, unless they're like Cantabile's son, which Zoo Rape Kid isn't. And yes, it's his fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerraPrime Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 Breaking someone's trust isn't acceptable simply because that person broke your trust first.That boat has sailed when your son and his wife installed the key-logger and when they refused to tell the grandson the truth about how they were discovering these disturbing information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 The kid is the one that broke the parents trust.They gave him basically unlimited private internet access and he did ... well, this with it.They trusted him to be responsible, he wasn't, now he pays the consequences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaak Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 Trust is really a two way street, if one party can't or doesn't trust the other, that bond is just broken. Kids react like this when they KNOW they've done something they shouldn't and get caught- to try and turn it around and make it not about you is a pretty easy way to duck the real issue. I don't think this kid actually feels like he can't trust his parents any more than any 12 year old. The trust thing is not really a big deal, the kid/parent relationship is not one that usually has or requires a lot of trust. Except here Cantabile obviously needs a lot of trust from his grandson. The boy may be a 12 year old, in custody of parents - but like any prisoner even in a dungeon, he can refuse to share truth about his thoughts, and that is what Cantabile wants to get over. Incest? Child murderer? Shit for honour? They need to open up, what the child actually wants and can be trusted about - and that requires earning his trust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkostar Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 The kid is the one that broke the parents trust.They gave him basically unlimited private internet access and he did ... well, this with it.They trusted him to be responsible, he wasn't, now he pays the consequences.Not every 12 year old grasps the concept of consequences, especially when a parents is so immune to consequences (his mom pushes her husband around with no repercussions.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 Not every 12 year old grasps the concept of consequences, especially when a parents is so immune to consequences (his mom pushes her husband around with no repercussions.)And that's why they shouldn't have trusted him in the first place.But they did, he broke it, now he pays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkostar Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 And that's why they shouldn't have trusted him in the first place.But they did, he broke it, now he pays.A double-standard won't help this kid's recovery at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelli Fury Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 You don't see a contradiction between these things?The kid's not going to trust them again. People don't forgive being spied on... well, unless they're like Cantabile's son, which Zoo Rape Kid isn't. And yes, it's his fault.No, I don't. You may not trust your boss enough to tell him your innermost thoughts and desires, but you understand you need to follow the rules of your job. Sure, it would be nice to have trust in the relationship, but are his parents going to trust a panty thief who loacks them out of their own computer? No. Is he going to trust a couple of people who (in his opinion) go through his personal property and talk about him behind his back? No. He had no respect for the expectations his parents had on him to begin with, or he would not have been stealing his mother's panties and taking pictures of the girls at school, unless he is a sociopath, he KNOWS he should not be doing those things without being told. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Nan Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 Sure, it would be nice to have trust in the relationship, but are his parents going to trust a panty thief who loacks them out of their own computer? No. Is he going to trust a couple of people who (in his opinion) go through his personal property and talk about him behind his back? No.Right. I think that most 12-year-olds do, in fact, trust their parents more than that, though.unless he is a sociopath, he KNOWS he should not be doing those things without being told.There's an anti-panty-stealing-and-voyeurism moral instinct? What has Pinker been saying since I turned my back on him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelli Fury Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 not an instinct, but you know by 12 it is socially unacceptable. There is also, I believe, some pretty obvious evidence he knew he shouldn't be doing it because he was hiding it. To pretend you don't know better by 12 years old is just being contrary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Nan Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 There is also, I believe, some pretty obvious evidence he knew he shouldn't be doing it because he was hiding it.Which is a sign he did respect their feelings, no? Of course he respected his own more, but that's life. Hiding is the standard compromise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 A double-standard won't help this kid's recovery at all.What double standard? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkostar Posted December 11, 2010 Share Posted December 11, 2010 What double standard?The parents have violate the kid's trust by bringing others (including us, indirectly) into a private matter without his knowledge. On top of that, the mother clearly exercises too much control, without regard for the feeling of others, and doesn't have to suffer any consequences. The kid is emulating her, intentionally or otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted December 11, 2010 Share Posted December 11, 2010 The parents have violate the kid's trust by bringing others (including us, indirectly) into a private matter without his knowledge. On top of that, the mother clearly exercises too much control, without regard for the feeling of others, and doesn't have to suffer any consequences. The kid is emulating her, intentionally or otherwise.So, again, where's the double standard?They didn't violate his trust, he violated there's. And then they, like responsible parents, checked up on the kid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted December 11, 2010 Share Posted December 11, 2010 The parents have violate the kid's trust by bringing others (including us, indirectly) into a private matter without his knowledge. On top of that, the mother clearly exercises too much control, without regard for the feeling of others, and doesn't have to suffer any consequences. The kid is emulating her, intentionally or otherwise.Oh good grief.Look, we get it, you're into kink. And that's fine.But the number of hoops you're willing to jump through to minimize the behavior of this kid is ridiculous and transparently self serving.The kid doesn't deserve to be trusted. How he feels about being 'spied on' (AKA 'caught') is the least of the issues involved here.The parents have a RESPONSIBILITY in this case to probe into the activities of their child in his own best interest.To even suggest otherwise is mindboggling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkostar Posted December 11, 2010 Share Posted December 11, 2010 To even suggest otherwise is mindboggling.All I'm suggesting is that they're not immune either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MercenaryChef Posted December 11, 2010 Share Posted December 11, 2010 my curiosity is what supposed behaviors by this supposed child would darkostar not rationalize and trivialize? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.