Dear moms,
I have some information that might interest you. Last night, as I sometimes do, I sat on my couch and looked at social media on my phone.
I’ve been on vacation, so naturally there are quite a few blog posts and news articles to wade through. Wow – the Internet sure has been busy with the slut-shaming this summer! Some of my friends brought this to my attention, because as Christians and/or feminists, we notice shit like that.
I noticed other things, too. For one, it appears that I’ve been on the wrong path when it comes to raising my own son.
I get it – you’ve seen all those shameless hussies putting their pictures up on Facebook how our culture exploits women’s bodies, right? I can’t help thinking that maybe I’ve failed by trying to raise a son who respects women regardless of how they’re dressed. Clearly, I should have been protecting his eyes. I should remedy that.
So, here’s the bit that I think is important for you to realize. If you are the parent of a teenage son, you should definitely make sure he never, ever sees a half-dressed girl. Half-dressed boys are okay, though, because naturally, none of your sons are gay or bisexual. Posting half-naked pictures of your own sons flexing on the beach is also totally fine, since no one ever equates strength and virility. We all know that unless we see a penis, it’s not sexual anyway. Besides, it’s not at all exploitative to parade their bodies on the Internet for your own gain; everyone knows that’s much better than making one’s own choices about what to post.
Please understand this also: you are not responsible for making sure your sons know that regardless of what a girl is wearing, she deserves respect. All you need to do is assure they don’t see those pictures. After all, if they don’t see them, then you can relax in the knowledge that your sons do not know what girls’ bodies look like or that they won’t satisfy their curiosity by looking at the Internet at a friend’s house.
Not to mention that those “sexy” selfies your sons’ friends are posting don’t reflect who they are clearly demonstrate that they are temptresses who want to cause your sons to fall into sin. You need to be sure to remind them often so that you can keep your sons from acting like animals protect your sons.
And now – thank God – you have a good excuse to select who your sons are friends with. You can also have awkward family dinners during which you remind them that masturbation is a sin teenage girls are sluts they should probably not see a female-bodied person in her nightgown until they are married.
I know you’re concerned that these girls’ parents would be disappointed if they knew their daughters were causing your poor, defenseless sons to get hard think impure things when looking at them on the Internet. Obviously, you know that once a boy sees a girl in a state of undress, he turns from a respectable, nice kid into a raging, hormonal beast. You don’t want your sons to only think of girls in this “sexual” way, do you?
Of course not.
You’re also probably aware that girls don’t fantasize about boys’ bodies, so you’re free to put as many objectifying pictures of them up on your blog as you like. No worries–you won’t be causing any teenage girls to lust. That’s because girls don’t really have any sexual feelings unless they are a)married or b)they weren’t properly guarding their hearts. Naturally, they never masturbate or look at naked men on the Internet. And they’re not ever lesbians, either.
Good thing you’ve resolved not to give any of these teen temptresses a second chance to corrupt your innocent little men. I’m sure you’ve also installed nanny software and have a firewall so good no one could ever hack it. You’ve probably made sure that your sons’ friends have these things too. Don’t forget that awkward conversation you had with all their dads to find out if any of them had a stray magazine or several that you needed to confiscate before you allowed your sons into their homes.
I know that sounds harsh and old-school, but that’s just the way needs to be if you want to raise your sons right. Blocking, banning, and shaming is so much more effective than merely having open conversations about how your sons treat women. Remind yourself that you are raising men, while their female counterparts are mere girls. That way, you can convince yourself that your sons are mature enough to make adult decisions while these girls are not–and apparently don’t have any parents to help them learn and grow the way you’re helping your sons. Their parents will probably be grateful that you implied their daughters are tramps anyway.
Meanwhile, you should have in mind the kind of women you want your sons to marry. Your gag reflex probably prevents you from realizing that they may be gay, which is why you need to imagine them with women. It’s not creepy and weird at all that you are making these plans for them when they’re only halfway through high school. It’s never too early to control your children’s future adulthood. Besides, there’s no chance whatsoever that your sons will go behind your backs and date or have sex or whatever. And did I mention that these “men of integrity” are totally not ever, ever masturbating? Oh, I did? Well, I said it again.
Moms, it’s not too late! If you think you’ve made a mistake in raising your sons (we all do – don’t fret – I’ve made some doozies), RUN to your boys’ social media pages and block every single one of their girl friends. There are pictures of them that make it easy for your sons to imagine them naked, including that lovely senior portrait. After all, girls don’t even need to be in a state of partial undress to tempt boys to lust after them–all it takes is their mere existence.
Will you trust me? Your boys are crying out for you to teach them that girls are the cause of all their adolescent hormone surges as well as any other behaviors they may exhibit. Deep down, they are uncontrollable cavemen who cannot possibly learn how to respect and love women unless you protect them from the grasps of those alluring young things. (And also, they are NOT gay, so you probably don’t need to worry about protecting them from other boys.)
You are raising MEN.
Teach them guilt, sexism, and blame.
I’m glad could have this talk. Maybe we’ll talk again sometime about how we can raise our girls into women who feel ashamed of their bodies.
Mrs. Mitchell
unchained faith 
Yes! I just read your article after coming across the one yours addresses. You said everything that I wanted to say. I am sick and tired of passive aggressive slut shaming.
Agreed–this is a terrific piece! I wrote something along these lines (but in a more straightforward tone) at my blog; please check it out if you’re so inclined:
http://rebeccahains.wordpress.com/2013/09/04/a-response-to-mrs-hall-teaching-our-boys-respect-and-self-control/
What a phenomenal piece, Rebecca. Thank you for sharing it here. I’m passing it along.
Thank you so much. I appreciate that!
Pingback: FYI (if you’re a mom of teenage boys) | Otherside
Thank you for saying what I was thinking!
The absence of holding her boys accountable made me wonder. Here are my thoughts. http://www.juicsee.com/fyi-if-youre-a-parent-of-teenage-boys/
Amen. Thank you, sir.
Men and women have the tendency to mainline anti-depressant and bonding hormones through sexual images and encounters instead of working toward real-deal communion and intimacy. Our daughters’ hearts cry for a deep love, but settle for cheap attention. Our sons cry for a deep satisfaction that will only be borne of sacrificially giving themselves, but settle for cheap sex.
If we’re going to teach our sons AND daughters anything, it is what their hearts truly were made for and how to get there. And, yeah, the boys need us to block the images and our girls need us to draw the line with what they wear- when I was teaching my kids about how to keep safe crossing the road, I still acted like an adult and kept control until they were full well able to do it safely on their own.
Thank you! That was awesome…pretty much everything I was thinking.
%$#@$& brilliant. That mom had the cart before the horse. Thank you for restoring order. I keep wondering what mom would think of all those girls having pictures of themselves in their beachwear (which usually doesn’t include bras, IIRC) instead of their rather modest PJ’s…
This is all very pertinent, but you neglected one very key point.
Even if mothers (or fathers) successfully shield their sons from ever seeing anything like a sexually attractive human on the Internet or elsewhere, there’s still a chance their sons could decide sheep, or dogs … even fish, might be sexual candidates.
So, parents should shield their sons from all human and non-human living systems. Well, maybe non-living systems (objects) too, like telephone poles and economic systems.
Indeed, better to place them in sensory deprivation and never let them out. Only then an they be men of integrity and in just as much of dreamland as their mommy.
You’re right! I am going to go RIGHT NOW and make sure there are no pictures on my son’s account that might entice him. He’s only 10, but hey, it’s never too early to start, right?
LOL
I love you. ^_^ Thank you for posting this.
Thank you! I really needed this after seeing the blog post you’re responding to.
Thank you for writing this. It sickens me when people do not see the hypocrisy in what standards they are setting for boys and for girls.
Is it said that a piece like this only gets a couple of comments but the other one gets a whole lot more (in agreement)? Yeah, it’s absolutely disgusting.
The posts on the original get moderated; there’s a disclaimer at the top of the page. My guess is the writer is editing out all of the comments in disagreement.
Your point is very eloquently stated and I’m not looking to flame, just offer another viewpoint. I feel like the message of the first blog is being lost on this double standard conversation. My take away from the first one was to tell girls that there are repercussions for what you post online, including a parent who may see and not want their child to be friends with you. Maybe I need to go re-read it, but I didn’t really think about her parenting style or shaming girls into being embarrassed about their bodies and any of the deeper context you got from it. I actually re-posted that first blog in the hopes my 18 y,o. niece would see it and read it and think twice about her next pouty bathroom selfie where she’s posing sideways trying to look as thin as possible and show off the perfect gap between her thighs. I have two young girls (under 10) and don’t really fear the future gender double standards as much as I fear the Kardashian sisters. Again, no flames here, just a friendly difference of opin. on the message of that originating blog.
I definitely appreciate the respect I sense from your comment. Thanks! 🙂
I think the biggest problems for me weren’t really the double standard (though that was a big factor in figuring out what’s considered “appropriate” to post online). It was the way she never once suggested her sons have a responsibility to just click on by or that even though the girls posted something *she* doesn’t approve of, it doesn’t mean that the girls want anything from the boys or that they are entitled to take anything from the girls. She didn’t mention the boys’ self-control or their responsibility. She mentioned how she wants them to be “men of integrity” who don’t drool over teenage girls (yuck, because adult men shouldn’t be looking at teenagers and teenage boys aren’t yet men). Yet the way she suggests her boys will become men of integrity is to unfriend girls doing inappropriate things–or for the girls to stop doing them–rather than teaching them to show respect. She also has some odd notions of what’s appropriate–all she mentioned were nightgowns and towels, but not bikinis on the beach, which cover far less. She was put off by whatever faces the girls were making that she deemed sexy, but that’s *her* opinion and may not be shared by everyone. It’s just another version of blaming girls for dressing in some kind of “enticing” way and trapping men into lust. Meanwhile, we can’t even agree on where the line of appropriate clothes even is, nor on the definition of lust.
The blog post is misogynist and chauvinistic and grounded in a book that dictates that woman that is raped should be stoned to death or married to her rapist. The bottom line is that her article was attention seeking at it’s worst … and perpetuates the false idea that men are not able to control themselves once exposed to a sexually attractive woman. The article contains absolutely no intelligent informed information and is written by a bible brainwashed fool! I have always maintained that women are a big part of the issue with SlutShaming … Shame on her and her blog post … and further shame to her obvious chauvinistic bias demonstrated clearly in the choice of her pictures … this more than anything identified her as laughable and dismissible .. Yes yes let us protect her pure god fearing little boys from all the big bad slut female bodies … YUK YUK YUK . Warmest regards Ms. Pahl … Mother of 8 girls, retired social worker and woman that endured rape and slut-shaming.
But the Kardashian sisters are a perfect product of our culture’s warped “gender double standards”! Our culture teaches our little girls that their value lies only in the shape of their bodies, how virtuous much or how attractively little clothing covers it, and that her worth either way can only be assigned to her by an external audience, measured in fame, “likes” and attention. In such a world, how can we blame a young woman for seeking affirmation.
Both body image issues and the idea that seeing a woman’s skin can somehow ruin her reputation are manifestations of some severely fractured gender politics. We can’t build the house then damn people for trying to live in it.
very well said
OMG. Thank you. This is so amazing and everything Ive ever wanted to say.
Absolutely BRILLIANTLY written. I also thought that it was weird that her HUSBAND (another male) was “monitoring” these “slutty” photos on their sons social media pages. Let’s not even MENTION that since their faces are on her blog page, the amount of bullying, teasing, and public shaming THEY’LL go through because mom’s a nut job. This will also ensure awkward conversations with their friends, who won’t want to come to their house, and thus they will become social pariahs. This will ensure rebellion, possibly getting a girl pregnant, or even worse.
Way to go mom! (roll eyes)
Thank you for a well worded response to Stupid Write … You were gentle and kind … I was not so gentle in my response to the asinine and offensive blog post… Thank you for speaking out …. as a woman of 50 years old .. raped from age 5 … Slut shamed in a very small community … apprehended by the government under pretence of protection, raped in multiple group homes, Slut shamed as the “girl in Children’s Aid, the girl that was raped by her father, retired social worker … 8 foster girls all grown now …all raped as children … Advocate and voice of conviction to the accountability in us all for the Rape Culture we perpetuate … I adore you and anyone who will find a voice to start turning the tide of this Rape Culture we live in,( more like a tsunami ) as at 50 years old … I still remember the dirty looks, stinging glances and the disdain I felt from the many mothers not unlike the writer of the hateful self serving article … Thank you kindly from this Queen Exhalted Slut. Warmest regards Ms. Pahl
Wow! Sounds like you’ve had a long, long journey. Thank you for your kind words. I hope more women speak out about their personal experiences in this shaming environment. The more voices, the better.
Pingback: The Questions We Should Be Asking After Reading What Mrs. Hall Had To Say
Sounds like it is a stab at both sexes… seems the double standards have needed to come under fire for a verrrrrrrrrry lonnnnnnng time… sick of the double standards of society. Men need to stop treating women like a piece of meat, sure, but they also need to give women the same respect of not acting like a piece of meat on the hunt either. I do not care as to whether the individual chooses a different sexual preference than I have, they still need to treat their own body with the same respect. The rule of blasting and calling out others goes a little something like this: if you are pointing the finger at one person, three are pointing back at you. The biggest problem here is the fact that a person considers the greatest insult to throw at another individual to be the thing they most fear others will know they secretly hate about their own self. So if person A is calling person B a “slut” then person A’s biggest fear is that they already believe they are or will become a “slut” if they leave themselves unchecked.
All the high fives. Thank you for this!
Brilliant!! Loved it! Laughed out loud several times!
You crushed this and I go on record with everyone else who says thanks for saying what I was thinking.
Thank you! Now I don’t need to write a post. 🙂
FYI Mrs. Hall posted this amendment to her blog in response to all the challenges she got regarding the pictures of her shirtless boys. Some credit for admitting she was wrong to do so, although I wonder why she didn’t delete the original.
“Readers, two days ago I wrote this post for my normal audience, which is usually very small. That said, I included recent pictures of my kids at the beach, and many new readers found that to be a grave lack of discernment, especially considering the topic. I agree, and so you can find the same post here with different photos.”
I was wondering that too. Why leave the original up, especially since she’s apparently having to comb through and delete all the comments that disagree with her?
Pingback: » Body Shame and Teenage Girls: link round-up! - The Fat Midwife
I am usually so disappointed in the internet. (BAD INTERNET!) Today, when I saw the post about the “Hall boys” and no new Caturday memes, I thought it was going to be business as usual. But no. I found a link here and this – this is like the diet coke at the end of my day. So so good. So right. I want to shove a laptop up Mrs. Hall’s butt still, but…you made it somewhat better. Ahhh. Thanks for taking the time.
“I want to shove a laptop up Mrs. Hall’s butt” made me laugh out loud.
Brilliant!
Pingback: back to school + controversy confusion | KKF Learning to Teach
So happy I stumbled upon your blog! Your honesty is refreshing.
Pingback: Double Standards and Responsibility: An FYI Roundup
I love this! I love this! I love this!!!!!!!
Please let it be known that “Mrs. Hall” has gutted her Facebook of all comments other than those that adore her AND she has removed, or at least thinks she has removed, the questionable photos.
She has caught the attention of several news sources so undoubtedly she wanted to clean things up a bit for those who might go check her out.
Weakness binds the woman’s soul.
I am so not a pot-stirrer and I can’t believe I’m about to post this comment after a gazillion writes and rewrites and deletions and actual navigating away from both the pages because maybe I would forget. 🙂 So sorry. For realz.
I just have to say that – (And I so get your post – mostly anywho – so I’m speaking more to the commenters on both posts – that seem to have morphed into a gazillion posts overnight) – there are so many mothers and women who are out there trying to navigate through this shitstorm called life and none of us have it all right, all perfect, all good. And I know you know that. Zoloft, Klonopin (Not that I take those. Daily.), an occasional glass of wine or vodka and pouring my guts out on my blog is what keeps me out of the freaking looney bin. Sometime it’s a good pour, and sometimes it sour milk. I guess since I decide to post publically my mental upchuck, I have opened myself up to criticism for what I bleed that day. And I guess I’ve been lucky I haven’t pissed anyone off. Yet.
I ramble all that to say that I don’t think we as writers can be anti-slut-shaming, but pro-woman and/or blogger-shaming at the same time, you know? You don’t agree. I don’t know that I agree – but if someone started commenting some of the stuff I’ve read on her post – you can bet your ass I would “scrub it”. My dad and my aunt randomly visit my blog. My grandmother randomly visits my blog. I don’t want them reading about me needing a laptop shoved up my butt – you know?
Maybe I’m putting too much thought into this as it’s 11:11 CST and I’m slightly delirious, but I just unfriended someone on facebook today that in less than 24 hours posted about “All human life being sacred and abortion is murder” and then posted “Why don’t we just nuke Syria and kill them all.” It’s hypocrisy that is so effing blatant that I abhor.
Again – I’m totally not saying that that’s you. I get the tongue in cheek snark – I live for it actually much to all of my superiors work’s chagrin – but the commenters are fueling a fire that really could have been put with a dish towel, but now needs those helicopters that drop water from the sky. Or whatever.
I am SO sorry this is so long and I promise if I ever comment again it won’t be more than three sentences tops. SWEAR.
“I don’t think we as writers can be anti-slut-shaming, but pro-woman and/or blogger-shaming at the same time, you know?” My thoughts exactly. Well said!
Mrs. Hall is one mom trying her best at negotiating a soon to be man in a very fast-paced & electronic savvy world.
Rather than ‘mom-shaming’ (or ‘blogger-shaming’) why can’t we say: “here’s how she’s doing it, and here’s what I would do differently” in a positive way?
We are figuring out life and raising the future generation and will choose different avenues. Where’s the empathetic (vs sarcastic) tone of this piece on that fact alone?
Well said Tee
I was the one who wanted to shove the laptop, not the blogger, and I posted it in jest (and frustration!) on someone else’s blog (here) who seemed to understand comedy and satire. Mrs. Hall’s grandmother would have to link around the Internet for a while and read a ton of comments to find that, and if she has the computer savvy to do so – all the best! To Mrs. Hall herself, I posted a long and reasoned response that, nonetheless, never got posted in the comments (I guess because it was critical of her views).
Saying we can’t shame someone who is shaming is like saying we can’t be intolerant of intolerance. The difference between “blogger shaming” (which I don’t think I’d call this) and “slut shaming” is that sexuality is normal and girls are judged sexually whether they intend to be or not. Hall is not being judged simply for having a computer and blogging. She is being judged for her sexist views. She is not simply shamed for inherently being a writer or wanting to express that writing digitally. She is being called out for a hypocritical double standard – and rightly so. Being a woman or blogger has nothing to do with our criticism. Being sexist and does.
Exactly! Hall wants to have it both ways and wants everyone to love her for it.
Anyone who disagrees or calls her out is kicked off the island. LOL
Yet, another double standard.
Being the only left thinking person in an office full of Texan conservatives who love to shoot things, I’ve tried to perfect the art of civil debate, so please feel free to call me on the carpet at anytime. 🙂
Do you think it’s possible that it’s more of an “I don’t have daughter” thing or a pattern of sexism? I guess I phrased my shaming wrong – the attacks felt more like another mommy war and not a battle for women’s rights as it were.
I would tend to agree as her “my sons are perfect” tone gives that impression, but she has a daughter. She is sitting on her brother’s shoulders in the beach pic and shows up in a lovely “Little House on the Prairie” image on the new set of pics. I feel sorry for all of them.
Thanks for pointing that out. I didn’t see that earlier.
I don’t find it a mommy war (something I write about in my own blog) because her post was not saying “this is how I parent, you can make your own choices.” I’m not upset because they want to parent differently; I’m upset because of the way Mrs. Hall casts girls and women vs. men and the implications that has on my own children.
It told girls that they were wrong for being sexual beings and that it was their fault that her sons were looking at them in this way. It told other parents that they were wrong for allowing their daughters to be sexual beings. It flat-out said that men can’t help it, they are incapable of viewing women on any other level than sexual, and once again put the responsibility of how her boys viewed things onto the women they were viewing. This is insulting to men and women, whether Christian, “virtuous,” or not.
If Mrs. Hall spends that much time thinking about teenage girls sexually, Mrs. Hall needs to consider what is going on with her. What adult person looks at a teen’s pic on Facebook and tries to determine whether or not she has a bra on? It’s not a mom issue to denigrate half the population because she can’t come to terms with how to address the issue of sex with her boys. Mrs. Hall is shaming people for being human, for having sexuality (we all do), and for figuring out who they are as they grow (which involves sexuality). She is shaming other parents for not feeling as she does. She does not talk about shaming her sons into not feeling sexually toward these girls though (after all, THEY can’t help it). Here is the double standard, the crux of the sexism, and the frustrating point.
She is calling my daughters Delilahs and Eves and her sons are perfect Adams, tricked into sin by the temptress women. I firmly believe we all have the right to screw up our children in our own unique ways. Even Mrs. Hall! What I object to is the way Mrs. Hall is perpetuating the screwed up double standards of society that affect my children.
I agree with you completely. I need to go back and reread her post. And if she is deleting constructive opposition, then she has more issues than sexism. As part of of my bleeding heart badge that I accept as a compliment, my initial reaction is to defend. I may have very well picked the wrong person to do that with (meaning her and not you). Thanks for taking the time to talk.
Of course! I am definitely the first one to say live and let live!
Pingback: FYI (If You’re Raising Boys) | Stitches And Stretchmarks
Brilliant and poignant satire. Loved it. Thank you. . . . Whenever the topic of “modesty” comes up, I inwardly groan. Then frustration and exasperation sweep in, followed by a big dose of “I don’t give a damn.” Thank you for giving a damn, and taking the time to counter the overbearing “cover up!!!” messages that bombard our social media and the lives of us women and our daughters . . . and our sons. Our children – sons and daughters – need to be empowered. Not condemned, let off the hook, or micro-managed.
Such a great response. Lets teach respect and pride rather than shaming.
Pingback: JGR: FYI (if you’re a slut-shaming facebook stalking mother) | SecularView
I think you all are missing the point that no one should be posting pics of themselves with next to no clothes on on the internet. It’s called pornagraphy,weather intended or not. Boys or girls. Wake up parents & get a backbone & some morals.
Phyllis, YES! Amen sista.
I think you might be confused about the definition of “porn.” Wearing a nightgown and no bra is not “porn.” Neither is a towel. Neither are bathing suits. Making “duck lips” or arching one’s back is not “porn.” What a silly thing to say, and it *also* misses the point. By your definition, the bathing-suit-clad Hall boys on the beach flexing would be “porn.”
Amy you are still missing the point. Do you have children? Would you want them in seductive positions displaying themselves across the internet for all to see. And have some depraved person redo the pic with some photo edit software. Wake up the internet is not a safe place.
By your logic, if someone is stalking them they would still take whatever picture the had and edited it, even if they appeared fully clothed and walking or standing or just sitting in it. And while I know those things exist, I think you are leaning to the side of full blown paranoia.
And still…. that was not even the point of Ms Hall´s article.
Ms. Hall´s article was not named “FYI, internet security, depraved people alert”. It was an article about slut shaming, making the girls that posted selfies at facebook responsible for how the boys´s integrity would flourish or perish. And what´s wrong with that is that the boys integrity and morals and values do not depend on wether they see selfies of girls at facebook. It depends on the education they are receiving back at home, something that on Ms. Hall´s article does not gets mentioned even once.
And FYI, I am not a parent, and even I can see what´s wrong with Ms. Hall´s logic. And yes, I would be worried and be mindful about the internet habits of my children (when I adopt them) and will have talks with them to see if there is anything wrong if I noticed odd behaviour which might point to a deeper problem.
But I would never in a million years take the “advice” of another mother when she is insisting that the only reason her boys are screwing up so badly is because of a pic one of my girls posted in facebook, all the while suggesting that she is morally reprehensible and the only one to blame.
No, just no.
From some of the comments on this site you all are reading a LOT more into what Mrs. Hall has said than what is written. She is just a Mom raising her kids the best way she can. I would do the same. I have two kids,a boy & a girl. If they put pics on facebook of themselves in towels & next to no clothes with seductive looks. It would say to me they are not mature enough to have a account on facebook or maybe even the internet. I am protective of my kids that is my job as their mother(not to be their friend). If anyone does not understand that it is not appropriate to put shots of him/her in barely any clothes or braless,bottomless or in a towel could cause a problem, then maybe she/he isn’t mature enough to handle facebook (This include parents as well)
The comments may be putting more thought into what is written than Mrs. Hall put into it, but they are not reading more into it, which implies that the criticisms are unjust. Whether Mrs. Hall realizes it or not, she has preached a double standard by telling girls not to dress sexily because it tempts her boys next to pictures of her boys sans shirts, flexing muscles.
And Hall is not even telling her boys that this is not acceptable behavior. She is not talking to her children about their behavior at all – just about the behavior of these *bad* girls. You are talking about teaching your children responsibility for themselves. Hall is blaming others.
In good faith you are more than welcomed to do with your kids as you see fit. But even then, I´m pretty sure you would also teach them about respecting others and you would not blame other boys or girls for your own kids shortcomings.
That and no more is what is been talked about here. And really, no one is reading too much into Ms. Halls words. Perhaps you should read Ms. Halls entry again and seriously pay attention this time: she is not talking about wether the girls are mature enough to have a facebook account, she is insisting that her boys will not grow up to be upstanding citizens with moral values just because of some selfies at Facebook (and even we don´t know for sure the real content of those pics, so really take Ms. Halls words with a healthy dose of skepticism). Hall´s making the girls responsible for how her own kids develop, which is a lie with a BMI so high is a wonder it did not affect the rotational movement of the planet. Oh, wait, there is no wondering, because is a lie!
Also, the original entry had pictures of her sons flexing muscles, just with a swimming short with no shirt on… all pics that you are saying you would not approve of… So what the heck? What´s wrong with you? Double standard much? Surely I don´t need to explain this?
Just wanted to point out that you are blaming boys and girls and their parents for the way some depreaved persons used those photos. Again, you are puting blame where none is deserved.
Why not talk about how and why those poeple are doing what they are doing?
And you know what? Probably, those people NEVER learned to respect fellow human beings and realize they are not objects to be used. Sort of like the way Ms Hall´s presenting her ideas to the world but most importantly, to her sons: Why learned about respect if we are learning to blame others for our own shortcomings?