Never Post a Baby Photo on Facebook?

Hi Readers — It’s nice to hear of sanity taking root!

Dear Free-Range Kids:  I just had my first child 6 months ago and I never thought I’d even have to worry about Free-Range Kid topics until he was at LEAST 3 years old, but I was wrong.

I posted an adorable picture of my son on my facebook page 2 days ago of him having tummy time on a towel; diaper free.  Lo and behold, this morning in my message box on Facebook I have a concerned ex-co-worker warning me about the dangers of putting naked pictures of my child on the internet and that pedophiles could get ahold of the photo.  I don’t know how I would have responded a few years ago.  Perhaps I would have sheepishly said I was not worried and in the back of my mind wondered if I was right.  Thanks to you and this wonderful community of fearless parents this was my response:

Oh, you can’t see his front bits. I’m not worried. Perverts can make
something sexual out of ANYTHING. Even feet, or eating cake. We lock
our doors at night, try not to drop our baby on his head, and don’t look
for babysitters on Craigslist. Most sexual abuse happens with family
members, friends, and teachers/ religious leaders, etc. So the best
thing we can do for Ari is make sure that growing up he feels comfortable
talking to us and is raised to fearlessly express his boundaries. In
addition, crimes of that nature in this country have actually
gone DOWN in the past 20 years. I respectfully appreciate your concern
but life’s to short to deprive my family members of that cute little
tush. — A Less-Worried Mom

Hey baby! It's nice to see you (here, on the internet).


155 Responses to Never Post a Baby Photo on Facebook?

  1. Melanie May 31, 2011 at 11:14 am #

    Yay you! That’s brilliant.

  2. Anthony from CharismaticKid May 31, 2011 at 11:16 am #

    Wait a second… there’s such thing as infant pedophiles? Gasp!

    Let me get all of my naked baby photos off facebook STAT!

  3. Kimberly May 31, 2011 at 11:17 am #

    Good for you. More than 10 years ago I was accused by a co-worker of downloading porn. The picture was my cousin’s child from the hospital nursery. (Just realized that child is graduating HS this year so 17 – 18 years ago). My boss fired the other person (wasn’t her first slander against me).

    My whole family posts pictures of the kids on facebook. We are spread across 5 countries on multiple continents.

    A few years ago I had a parent upset. My screen saver on my personal laptop scrolls through my pictures. The parent’s child asked me who someone was by the time I turned around the picture was gone. The student describe the picture, and I shrugged and said one of my cousins. I actually got called into the principal’s office about this.

    I prepared a “6 pack” of pictures that matched the student’s description. The Mom insisted they were of the same child (3 boys/3 girls all cousins). Till I showed her a picture of all 6 kids standing together. Principal held in the laughter till the Mom stormed out. He agreed with me that my family could cast a movie about cloned kids very easily.

  4. Michelle Hedstrom May 31, 2011 at 11:28 am #

    You know, the more I read, and not just this website, the more I’m convinced that the people I really have to worry about are people like this person’s ex-co-worker who take everything to extremes and think the sky is always falling. I’m more concerned about having a run in with this idiots than anything else, honestly.

  5. Marie May 31, 2011 at 11:39 am #

    I love the response. Some people can pedophile panic about anything.

  6. Emily May 31, 2011 at 11:40 am #

    thumbs up for naked baby butts!

  7. Crystal May 31, 2011 at 11:52 am #

    That’s a quick way to land yourself off my friends list…and to lose your access to my baby’s cute naked butt pictures.

  8. Rich Wilson May 31, 2011 at 11:53 am #

    PBS has an article on ‘online safety’ that has some of this fear mongering. I can’t find it right now, but it has appeared on their home page a few times. I sent it to Lenore way back, but I think you were traveling at the time.

    Google seems to have some more sane online advice, including to not assume everything on the internet is true.

  9. Cass May 31, 2011 at 11:53 am #

    I encountered the same issue after posting a video on YouTube of my butt-naked 5-month old eating a scone.

    You see I was just trying to get my head around the food thing and was asking for advice on a ‘Baby Led Weaning’ message board. (was she too young, is this enough head control etc).

    I was inundated with responses from nervous forum members. Not because they thought I was feeding her too early but because a pervert could steal the picture and Photoshop a lewd act onto it… And imagine how that could scar her.

    As much as I don’t like the thought of a pedophile using a photo of my daughter I also fail to see how it would scar her (unless I located a copy and put it in the family album?!?!?).

  10. Rich Wilson May 31, 2011 at 11:59 am #

    Oh here’s the PBS article. I love the bit about the vague “cameras made after a certain date”. Last camera I bought (Christmas) didn’t have a GPS…

  11. Jill May 31, 2011 at 12:12 pm #

    My concern with photos on Facebook is the child’s privacy and parents in a rush to get them an online identity so early. It has nothing to do with pedophiles. And anyway, don’t people have their privacy set so that only trusted viewers can see photos?

  12. Frances May 31, 2011 at 12:41 pm #

    I don’t post photos of my child on Facebook, nor do I use his name. This has nothing to do with fear of paedophiles. This has to do with fear of targeted marketers! And respecting his privacy. I don’t show off his actual naked butt in public places, so why would I post a photo of it in the most public of all venues, the internet?

    I agree with Jill — my 2-year-old does not need an online identity. There are lots of other much more controlled ways to use my computer to share photos with family and friends.

  13. The Woman Formerly Known As Beautiful May 31, 2011 at 1:47 pm #

    Why is it when I post photos of myself flying commando on a bear skin rug all the sex perverts turn themselves in to the nearest police station?

  14. Larry Harrison May 31, 2011 at 2:29 pm #

    I agree so much with the original poster, what a sensible response. There truly is nothing to worry about.

    In my case I don’t use Facebook to “host” the photos, sites like Flickr are far superior, you can then “link” to it within Facebook if you wish. That’s how I do it. Those sites have privacy settings too, although I don’t care myself.

    As for the child’s privacy and then “not being able to speak so I do it for them”–in my youth I don’t recall kids having any say with having or not having their picture taken and shown to others, it was the parents who decided. If you protested it fell on deaf ears, if anything you’d been disciplined because it was seen as disrespecting that the parents were the ones with the authority over such matters, not the kids. That’s how we are, and I’ve even disciplined if they protested me taking their photo. Their free-range outdoor play priveledges were revoked if they pouted about us wanting to take their photo. We’re the parents, they’re the kids, they have NO right to protest. (I make exceptions if they’re sick etc.)


  15. LindaLou May 31, 2011 at 2:51 pm #

    To me, this is a good reason to only have actual FRIENDS on your FB friends list.

  16. Tuppence May 31, 2011 at 4:08 pm #

    I think Facebook is stupid. However, this particular urban myth of the hard working pedophile, trolling the internet for a glance at a bare cheek, (or even, just a cute kid, or even, a kid who only his/her mother could love, a mother and . . . a pedophile!) and, if he likes what he sees — and he will! — he’s catching the next plane to Hoboken, is much, much, much, more stupid. So kudos to Less-Worried Mom for pushing back against the utter nuttiness.

    Just heard it myself again a few days ago from an otherwise intelligent woman. Why? Oh why? I think Lenore once wrote about a theory that our brains have been wired to stop and activate “warning, warning, danger, danger” at whatever seems like the scariest scenario, however unlikely. Or people just like to imagine they’re “smarter than the average bear”. — Look at that fool, posting pix for pedos! That’s one trap I’ll never fall into! (Get it? Bear trap? O never mind)

  17. Emily May 31, 2011 at 5:06 pm #

    Very sensible response, I’ll have to remember it for the next time a concerned friend or relative complains about pictures of my son.

  18. Laura Noble May 31, 2011 at 5:58 pm #

    great response to such a silly concern!

  19. Jessika May 31, 2011 at 6:53 pm #

    There are people sexually attracted to trees so what to do with that? Cut down all forests?

  20. Dolly May 31, 2011 at 7:34 pm #

    Well on the other hand, since most molestations or kidnappings happen from people you know, I am wary of putting pics of my kids out there. My facebook is locked down so that only people I am fairly close to can see my posts or my pics. I don’t allow friends of friends to see pics on facebook. I want only people I know and trust knowing about us and seeing pics of us. I am a good judge of character and very picky so I feel confident the people I do allow in my inner circle are safe.

    I actually told my Mother in law not to post pics of my kids on her facebook and go around showing my children’s pictures to everyone she knows. Because I don’t know these people or know if they are okay. I don’t trust her judgement. I also don’t like her so you know, I didn’t feel bad about doing this. She ignored me several times and did it anyway. So I yelled at her and made her take them down. My parents don’t have facebooks or anything similar and they don’t go off showing my kids pics to random strangers.

    I don’t think that is being anti free range, it is just a precaution I like to take and doesn’t actually negatively effect anyone so no reason not to take it. It is not going to hurt my kids independence to have their pic all over the place. They will probably thank me for it.

  21. Dolly May 31, 2011 at 7:40 pm #

    Larry: I would not be so gung ho about forcing them to have their picture taken all the time. It might backfire one day when they are grown up and will get back at you by never letting you take their photo as an adult. If you just take pics like a normal parent, then no biggie. But if you go overboard about it, they might rebel like kids are known to do on anything parents are super forceful about.

  22. Rachel May 31, 2011 at 8:03 pm #

    That was a fantastic response. Thank you for sharing it.

  23. N May 31, 2011 at 8:33 pm #

    The reason I have Facebook is to share photos like that with my children’s grandparents, who live far away. And I’m comfortable making that choice for my kids.

  24. Uly May 31, 2011 at 8:54 pm #

    Well on the other hand, since most molestations or kidnappings happen from people you know, I am wary of putting pics of my kids out there.

    That logic makes no sense. People who know you don’t NEED pictures of your kids. They KNOW you and your kids.

  25. Marcy May 31, 2011 at 8:59 pm #

    I have done my first self-censor. An adorable pic of my two sons in the bath, facing the other way, the 1 year old giving his 5 year old brother a big hug. A hint of visible butt cheeks. However, one of the friends on my mailing list has kids around the same age and in the same school as the 5 year old. One girl has teased one of my boys based on private information from visiting our home, so I don’t trust her. If her mom didn’t have the link to that photo album, I probably would have posted it.
    I don’t worry about their “online identity” at this age. No one will hold a pic their mother took while they were small children against them. If they can even find it. We have very common first and last names. It would require some serious sleuthing in 20 years to pin that photo on my son. I don’t think my 5 year old would be targeted by bath soap companies because of a tub-time photo. I think that the benefit of sharing my kids photos with friends and families FAR outweighs the miniscule risk of posting their photos. With their real names.

  26. Donna May 31, 2011 at 9:03 pm #

    Really Dolly, you won’t let your mother-in-law show pictures of her own granchildren to her own friends? I’m not even talking about Facebook but it appears that you won’t let your mother-in-law show ANY pictures of your kids. No wonder, as you stated yourself, your mother-in-law is your enemy. I hope that grandma breaks that idiotic rule every chance that she gets.

    What exactly is it that you think is going to happen if grandma shows the pictures to her friends? Are your kids going to turn to stone? Do you really think that someone, who probably has his/her own grandchildren, is going to think that your little precious snowflakes are so adorable that the mere sight of them in a picture is going to send him/her into such a fit of uncontrollable lust demanding that he/she track you down and kidnap your children? That is extremely self-absorbed.

  27. Tara May 31, 2011 at 9:11 pm #

    Let me ask the question that has bothered me forever. So some sicko DOES steal my picture and use it for pedophile-esque acts. Yes, if I knew about it it would bother me, but how would I ever know???

    Try having a pedophile’s picture in your wedding album. I did. THAT’S bothersome. (Yes, he and my sister divorced. He’s in prison and has left a wake of destruction in his path.)

  28. BMS May 31, 2011 at 9:19 pm #

    I don’t put much of anything on line. I like my anonymity. Even places like FRK where I feel ‘safe’, I don’t use my real name. I don’t like the idea of feeling that I need to watch what I say in case someone from work finds it.

    But at the same time, when son #2 came home, we sent a naked baby picture with the adoption announcement to all the umpteen million relatives and friends. He was totally the cutest thing in the world in that picture. I never gave the slightest thought about someone using the picture for nefarious purposes. I don’t feel like I or my family desperately need an online self promotion site. But I also don’t think the world will end if someone sees a picture of my kids.

  29. Dolly May 31, 2011 at 9:38 pm #

    Well Donna, there are many things you don’t know. Maybe a good reason not to insult someone before you know the facts. For one thing, my sister in law (her daughter) still has contact with her father. The man that my husband has zero contact with for many good reasons one of them being he is on the predator list. Yep, so I don’t want pictures being passed on to this man of my kids. I don’t trust him not to try to find us and contact us. Sister in law has talked to him about us before and given him info about us and I had to yell at her.

    Another thing is mother in law showed pics of the boys after they were born to a mutual friend of hers and my father. So that friend then forwarded pics of the boys to my father so that he got pics of his grandsons before his own daughter had a chance to send him pics of his new grandsons. I was busy with recovering from a c section and trying to nurse and all that good stuff and I did not appreciate my father getting second hand pics of his own grandsons through mother in law when I specifically told her not to do that.

    You have no idea all the crap that woman pulls so don’t even start. How about that I registered as private patient at the hospital for privacy. So only way someone could call the hospital room was if I gave them the number. I told MIL the number but told her not to give it to anyone else. Yet, somehow BIL and SIL called my hospital room bothering me and tried to force their way into a visit. That woman has no boundaries so I have to put them on her.

  30. Dolly May 31, 2011 at 9:44 pm #

    Donna: It is also not her place to show everyone my kids. If I want someone to see my kids, I will send them a pic. Its that simple. My mom does not make it her business to send pics of my kids to everyone. She lets ME handle it. Same with my father. MIL has zero boundaries and was making the birth of my kids all about her. I stopped it. My husband supported my decision.

    This woman and I have not gotten along from moment one since she chased me out of her house and called the cops on my husband because he was 20 years old and had a woman in his bedroom. Oh LORD! What a crime! The woman is crazy and I won’t tolerate it. She wore black mourning dress to our wedding and threatened not to come unless we did everything her way. Enough said.

  31. Erin May 31, 2011 at 9:50 pm #

    Love your strong and assured (and accurate) response. Way to go!

  32. LRH May 31, 2011 at 9:58 pm #

    If my post is too long, I apologize, I really need to start making them shorter!

    I agree with Donna‘s last post absolutely. I don’t mean to be in “attack” mode for anyone personally (Dolly), but part of being a grandparent–or aunt-uncle etc for that matter–is sharing the joy that the kids you’re interacting with bring to your life. To wit, taking and sharing photos of said kids is the most natural thing in the world to do. Praise be to the parents who recognize this & let go a little there.

    By all means, the parents’ ultimate authority should be respected, especially where it regards us not hard-core lecturing them about how they parent etc, but for a parent to not recognize the natural nature of someone taking & sharing photos of your kids because of the joy they bring to your life, I just don’t agree with that. We have nieces-nephews from my wife’s sister (her kids), and she doesn’t throw a hissy fit if we photograph them and even share them. As an analogous courtesy, we forward any good photos we take of them to her so she can then use them as she sees fit as well.

    To answer Dolly about me photographing my own kids–I somewhat agree with what you’re saying. If my kids cooperate and I am able to take photos even for 1-2 minutes without a lot of resistance on their part (maybe a bit longer on holidays when they’re dressed up–their birthday, Easter etc), then I “release” them to play and that’s it for the photos. I don’t expect them to be statues for 10-15 minutes or such, or even 5 minutes (again I may push it to 5 minutes on those special occasions).

    All I am saying is that I know some parents who won’t photograph their kids at all when their kids pout about it under the heading of “honoring their feelings” etc, and I frankly think a child shouldn’t be allowed to be selfish that way. When I was little even things like making goofy faces etc would’ve earned me licks for not going along with what my parents said, and I’ve met people even in this present day who would scold their children if I tried to photograph them & they acted ugly about it, even though I was okay & made it clear to them “it’s ok, we will have many other chances” etc, but still the parents were really big on teaching their kids their doing this was disrespectful to adults. They were really big on teaching their kids that ALL adults deserve your respect based simply on the fact that they’re adults and you’re the child. I always liked that about their parenting.

    Not to be argumentative, because it’s not worth arguing about and it’s not a free-range issue, but I do bristle a bit when people say they post photos on Facebook “because grandparents can see them.” Grandparents have been able to see photos LONG before there was a Facebook. It’s called Flickr and an email address. Again, it’s nothing worth making an argument about and it’s not a free-range issue anyway, but I do bristle a bit at how it seems a lot of people apparently don’t realize sharing photos was possible, and in a convenient & private way, LONG before their was a Facebook. It’s similar to how some think Apple invented the touchscreen smartphone and MP3 players, when they did neither. There were and still are plenty of touchscreen phones long before Apple became involved (I used to have a Palm Treo, currently have a Samsung Galaxy S Android), same with MP3 players (all 4 of mine are SanDisk).

    In fact I still prefer to handle these things in a non-Facebook way, because Flickr, SmugMug etc give you FAR more control over your photo album layouts etc than Facebook does (including privacy settings–and yes, tags too), and as I’ve posted photos there since 2004 I see no reason to move them over to a site which is inferior for that task. I can always post links within Facebook anyway, and as a side note I am VERY glad Lenore is posting her articles here where I don’t have to go through the “Facebook realm” to see them.


  33. LRH May 31, 2011 at 10:04 pm #

    I posted this before I saw Dolly‘s response. I will make it quick.

    I am sorry, Dolly, really I am, for the drama your mother-in-law has apparently brought to your life. It does sound like she has been evil in many ways, and that’s not okay of her.

    I would only say this: if your mother “lets you handle it” and doesn’t disagree with that arrangement you two have made, that’s fine–but she shouldn’t be COMPELLED to in the general sense, and in general other parents should be okay with their parents, the grandparents, sharing such matters without having to get security clearances from them first. I am sorry, seriously, for what your mother-in-law has done, all I am saying is that IN GENERAL for parents to insist “all photos of my kids go through me” etc is a bit ridiculous in the general sense. I can tell you I’d refuse to honor it, and if that person cut me off, fine–but I won’t honor such demands because I think (again in the general sense) they’re ridiculous.


  34. Beth May 31, 2011 at 10:24 pm #

    I’m sorry, but a proud grandma showing a photo from her wallet to someone else is harmless, even if that person is not “okay” (whatever that means). It’s a one-minute interaction, if that, and it doesn’t matter what kind of drama grandma has brought to the family dynamic.

  35. Lola May 31, 2011 at 10:24 pm #

    In my case, all the cute bare-baby-butt photos are carefully saved until my kids bring their BF/GFs home to meet us… Not to give the pics away, but just to show them, you know, granny-style, to embarrass my kids in “revenge” for all the nuisance they’re causing now.
    About FB, I have to admit I’m not at all proficient with new technologies, so I rather not give too much information about myself, and thus I’m not even in FB. I’ve landed myself in too many commercial databases for my taste…

  36. Heather May 31, 2011 at 10:28 pm #

    I do know someone to whom this happened–his daughter’s picture found on a kiddie-porn site. I don’t think it was a tushie picture, either, which is more evidence that the sick will find *anything* sexual.
    This was at a public blog, though, not FB. Still, we went as a family to a Memorial Day parade this weekend. What’s to stop the local paper from taking pictures, publishing them, and some sicko seeing them? The only way to prevent that is to never let your child leave the house, the very antithesis of this site.
    You can’t live in fear like that. It’s not living.

  37. Mompetition May 31, 2011 at 10:28 pm #

    sigh, I posted a private photo album (as in you had to be invited to see it and enter a password) of the first month of our babies’ lives. One picture was of my daughter fresh out of the womb and showed her girly parts. I did get some comments on the inappropriate nature of such a provocative picture. Oh the evils of nakedness, it all started with a fig leaf.

  38. WendyPinNJ May 31, 2011 at 10:34 pm #

    Good for you! I’d say it’s time to “unfriend” the ex-co-worker.

  39. Nok May 31, 2011 at 10:41 pm #

    There are just some relatives that should not have pics to send out. My husband and I did not want our kids pictures on Myspace (back when it was popular) and we made the mistake of letting my MIL have a digital copy, she passed it on to everyone and two of my sisters in law posted the pics on myspace, with open pages that anyone could read. Including a lot of my husband’s x-gfs. Who are crazy. (His x-wife even stalked my myspace page)

    So no more digital pics for Grandma. We only gave her prints after that. (She’s far too lazy to try and make copies somewhere.) After that no problems with pictures.

  40. Anna May 31, 2011 at 10:43 pm #

    Oh lord- I got this message not once, twice but three times from concerned Mommy friends who freaked when I posted a pic of my girl when she was 4 or 5 mos old in the bath- her vagina was barely visible at the bottom of the pic. In another pic her tuches is visible as she’s laying on her belly having some tummy time at the ripe old age of 2 months. My profile is set to “friends only” as are all my albums- I don’t friend anyone I don’t know and those who are my friends online are also people I interact with face to face. Like the writer I post up pics of my kids to share with family and friends who live far away- I wish I’d been as composed as this writer- I basically told my friends thanks for your concern but myob! Lol!

  41. Dolly May 31, 2011 at 10:48 pm #

    LRH: I totally agree in normal relationships there is no problem with grandparents or others sharing pics of kids. But when some people have messed up families or no boundaries or bad relationships, then yes, sometimes restrictions have to be made. That is all I am saying and in my case, I made them because there was lack of respect for boundaries and messed up people involved.

  42. Dolly May 31, 2011 at 10:51 pm #

    Beth: Showing off a pic in a wallet is not what I am talking about. I am talking about posting pics on facebook publically or emailing pics to everyone in your address book or sending pics by phone to people. That is what I told MIL not to do and she did it anyway. Showing a pic in a wallet only reaches one or a handful of people. Emailing it, facebooking it, or sending it to everyone on your phone list by phone, is a MUCH different situation.

  43. Donna May 31, 2011 at 10:55 pm #

    Dolly, How is it not your mother-in-law’s place to show her friends pictures of her grandkids? My mother is amazingly proud of her only grandchild (my daughter) and likes to introduce her to her friends and show off her pictures. Why should I care? Having a grandma who gushes about her to all her friends is certainly not a negative in my daughter’s life. Same with my step-father, my mother’s boyfriend (Mom is not still married to step-father), my grandmother, my aunt, my brother, all of whom think my daughter is the greatest and like to show her off whenever they can.

    You seem to want your kids to be yours and yours alone with no acceptance that they are part of a larger family who loves them, is proud of them and wants to share them with people who are close to them (or the checker at Walmart or anyone else who will stop and look at the picture).

  44. Dolly May 31, 2011 at 10:58 pm #

    Another thing to note is with technology, it makes things a lot different. MIL wanted free reign to send their pics to be broadcasted to an entire church congregation by powerpoint and put in her work newsletter. These were things I was uncomfortable with. That would reach hundreds of people and that does up the possibility of someone seeing it that I would not want to see it like a predator or kidnapper. Women have had babies kidnapped out of their home because they had the storks in the front yard broadcasting they had a newborn inside. Sure its not common, but I didn’t feel comfortable doing it.

    If someone else feels comfortable doing that, I don’t judge them. That is their choice and chances are things would be just fine. It is not going to hurt a newborn’s independence to not have their picture broadcasted though. They are not going to care.

  45. megan May 31, 2011 at 10:59 pm #

    Yes! I very much believe that the more we hide our bodies, the more we teach shame in nakedness, the more “bad” and sexualized it becomes. I recently saw a mom scolding her 2-year-old for pulling her shirt up and patting her belly. What could be more innocent? Why scold? Why teach that skin is sexual and wrong?

  46. Dolly May 31, 2011 at 11:01 pm #

    Donna: thanks for totally not addressing anything I posted above. Is your mother associated with a know predator? Well my MIL is. Does your mother not respect any of your boundaries and go out of her way to do what you tell her not to do? Well mine does. Does your mother treat you like crap and only show interest in your children basically treating you like an incubator? Well my MIL did. To try to make your situation similar to mine is ridiculous because they are NOT the same!!!

    I don’t mind my relatives showing off the occasional picture to someone in person. Because my relatives are nice to me and care about me and not just the kids. They also respect my boundaries. MIL does not so I have to set limits on her.

  47. Sana May 31, 2011 at 11:06 pm #

    Life IS too short. Amen.

  48. Donna May 31, 2011 at 11:15 pm #

    Dolly, I don’t know if my mother is associated with a known predator. I don’t know 95% of her friends. Don’t particularly care either since they are no threat to my child. My mother is a narcissist who puts herself above all others. I could perfectly well do without her in my life more than occasionally for the rest of it, and only saw her a few days of the year for several years prior to my daughter being born. But, for whatever reason, she adores my kid and my kid adores her and Maya’s life will only be richer because of that. I don’t have to like her.

    “I don’t mind my relatives showing off the occasional picture to someone in person. Because my relatives are nice to me and care about me and not just the kids.”

    So it’s about YOU. Your family is nice to you so they are rewarded by being allowed to share pictures of your kids. You MIL is mean to you so she is punished by not being allowed to show pictures of your kids.

  49. North of 49 May 31, 2011 at 11:18 pm #

    Pedos don’t get off on “naked baby pictures.” They get off on specifically staged pictures where the children are made to do things and sit in provocative poses. The problem is that the average person doesn’t know the difference between “staged provocative pose” and “childhood innocence.”

    I have a few photos that I know if they ever went to a film lab to be developed, I’d get the police called on me – even though they are completely innocent photos of what my children were doing. I look at the photo with the eye of what someone who is over zealous in their job of “protecting children” and the photos stays hiding away on a drive not connected to anything we have. Maybe in another decade, I’ll be able to print them, but not now.

    When parents can and have been thrown into jail for innocent pictures because some “well meaning” jerk goes too far, you gotta wonder what society’s hive mind is thinking. 30 years ago, naked photos of kids were “fun” and “harmless.” today, they are potentially the reason why mommy and daddy, or grandma and grandpa, or auntie and uncle, go to jail.

  50. LRH May 31, 2011 at 11:20 pm #

    It’s off-topic, but I do agree with Dolly with one thing–you do have relatives who, upon your having a baby, now make it ALL about the kids, and yes you are but a mere “incubator” to them now somewhat. I have encountered that, and yes it is wrong.

    Yes it is normal, once you have kids, for the grandparents etc to now somewhat “dot” over them, after all you’re grown now. But they can also seem to show no respect for your needs. Example: I am into photography as a hobby, and like to play basketball and bicycle to stay in shape as well. Certain family members get upset when I talk about how I want to make sure I don’t get “swallowed” by the parenthood thing to where I don’t have a chance to “be me” anymore–to where I can still do the photography thing (as in landscapes or other people, not just my own kids), and can still bicycle and play basketball. Also, in fact even more than that, I speak of how I want to make sure my wife & I still have time to be loving to each other as man & wife rather than it being all about the babies.

    We do have certain family members which don’t like hearing me talk that way, they seem to insinuate “you have kids now, THAT’S your life, what you want doesn’t matter so much anymore.” Either that, or if I set up boundaries (with the kids’ behaviors, not the family) to help keep things in balance to make it easier to ourselves or to help us have time for our own pursuits, we’re called “selfish” for it. So I’m “selfish” if I don’t have the TV playing “Sponge Bob” all day because I don’t like hearing that every minute all day long. I’m “selfish” because I don’t let them scream so loudly in the living room & will send them to their room if they’re too loud–I want quiet for myself to a certain extent.

    I do agree with Dolly that way–people like that, I don’t appreciate it very much, and I wouldn’t accommodate them with certain things as much as I would others.

    The photographer in me, though, would STILL be okay with them doing whatever with the photos, though, I think.


  51. BMS May 31, 2011 at 11:25 pm #

    I just know that I wish my in-laws showed some interest in my kids aside from the obligatory birthday card. They never call to ask about them, never ask for pictures, and barely interact with them when we are together. Must be nice to have somewhat ‘normal’ grandparents who actually acknowledge the kids’ existance.

  52. LRH May 31, 2011 at 11:29 pm #

    PS–I agree 100% with what North of 49 says as well.

    With Donna, whose posts I often-agree with–in this case, I can go along with her 1st paragraph (most recent post), in terms of that even the family members I mentioned who aren’t understanding of my own needs personally & my desire to keep things “in balance” that way, I still will allow them access to pictures & even to come around so long as the “sermons” stay at the door.

    It is a tricky balance–not wanting to hear sermons all the time vs realizing that family members do have opinions to share and up to a point realizing they’re going to want to have their say. I was reminded of this when the story of the Canada couple wanting to have a “genderless child” (named Storm) was published. (link) When I read about that, and how the parents don’t even let their parents (the grandparents) know what the gender is, I couldn’t help but think–if I were the grandparents, I would not bite my tongue, they’d hear my thoughts most clearly. That is one situation where I would NOT expect family to “leave your sermons at the door” as it were. As much as I agree with a parent’s right to parent without the sermons, those parents are just schizoid, and deserve to be told so.


  53. N May 31, 2011 at 11:32 pm #

    LRH – just because there are other ways to share photos online doesn’t make those ways preferable than Facebook. My parents in-laws like being able to comment and see other people’s comments. We use Facebook to share photos and updates about our kids with their grandparents, and I think it’s a great way to keep them up to date and as involved as they can be from so far away.

  54. CM May 31, 2011 at 11:37 pm #

    There are rules & regulations on Facebook in reference to posting pictures. You are clearly asked if you have permission to use the photos you are posting. Quite simply, if you have an issue with someone using a pic of your child, yourself, etc. on the site and they actually haven’t asked your permission, report them if need be.
    It drives me bonkers when my Mother tags me in a picture on FB if I don’t like the picture (hot tubbing – geeze thanks Mom!) but I just untag myself so MY friends don’t see it. If it bothers me more than that, I will ask her to take it off completely. My Mom can drive me around the bend and back with apparent disregard for my feelings and my kids feelings, but I pick my battles – you have to look at the big picture.
    My Mom was the first one to be yelling out of the extreme danger of posting online – and now, well – we’ve done a 180.

    Extremists aren’t exactly centred, balanced, ya know?

  55. Lollipoplover May 31, 2011 at 11:41 pm #

    I sent out Christmas cards featuring my daughter’s naked butt one year when she refused to put on the matching dress I got to go with her two siblings and ran off naked.
    Everyone said it was the best card they got.

    People need to get a grip. Children love to be naked (better than itchy, fancy dresses) and we have to get over our stupid paranoia and enjoy some innocent moments.

  56. Irina May 31, 2011 at 11:48 pm #

    @Jessika, there’s a woman sexually attracted to the Berlin Wall, and they did demolish it!

  57. Sky May 31, 2011 at 11:50 pm #

    “Women have had babies kidnapped out of their home because they had the storks in the front yard broadcasting they had a newborn inside”

    Could you name three of these women? Or two? Or how about one? One woman who had a newborn kidnapped out of their home specifically because of the stork in the front yard.

  58. LRH May 31, 2011 at 11:50 pm #

    That’s one reason exactly why I don’t like using Facebook for hosting photos–I don’t have to worry about if someone has an issue with it, I can post anyway. I can do like Henri Cartier-Bresson (not that I’m anywhere near as good as him–in my dreams!) and just take the photos and not deal with all of these silly sensitivities people have nowadays. Obviously I’m sure they make allowances for slander and copyright claims, and that’s appropriate–otherwise I don’t have to worry about dealing with silly sensitivities such as a parent thinking a photo of their kid online means the Martians are coming to take them away.

    And as for commenting on photos–other sites allow that too, not just Facebook. Ditto “tags.” I consider Facebook to be sort of the “dumbed down for the idiot masses” way of hosting photos, sort of like suggesting that Hamburger Helper is as good as eating at a 5-star restaurant (or even “normal” homemade)–but then I actually make meals with Hamburger Helper so when all is said & done I subscribe to the “dumbed down for the masses” way of doing things myself–just in other realms, no difference really.


  59. Elissa May 31, 2011 at 11:56 pm #

    I think the response was fabulous! Naked babies have been photographed for forever, and before that, they were painted. They appear is cherubs on the Sistine Chapel and heck, even Jesus’s “front bits” are all over the place in museums and churches. And yes, there were pedophiles back then too.

  60. LRH June 1, 2011 at 12:00 am #

    I am probably over-posting andI need to wait awhile for my next reply. Anyway.

    What Sky said is exactly what Lenore is getting at, I think, in terms of free-range. Worrying about a stork on the front lawn because it might cause people to kidnap your child. People in nurseries who put stickers on the back of your children to identify them while they’re there–so far, so good–but then being hysterical about making sure they remove them (and reminding you to do so also) because some stranger might now do something criminal because they know your child’s name. (I keep the stickers on and write things on the back like ‘I’m daddy’s poo-poo head,” ha ha.) As Lollipoplovermentions, a child running around naked is natural for them & totally innocent, and people making it about something other than that, and Megan mentions about a mother flipping out over her 2 year old flipping up her shirt to pat her own belly–again, not flipping out in these situations is part of what Lenore is getting at with free-range.

    And I agree 100% with Lenore about the original poster’s response, and it is great to see someone who isn’t having a Charlie Sheen moment over photographs. That’s what I call “winning, duh.” (Ha ha.)


  61. Heather June 1, 2011 at 12:42 am #

    Guys, lay off Dolly. One of the things about Free ranging is that you make your own decisions about how free range you want to go, and that’s ok.

    Dolly prefers not to have her children’s photos posted all over the place. Some families prefer that, and her husband is comfortable with that too, so it’s not just her. Her MIL may be the grandma, but if we can ignore grandmas who gulp and gasp at every fall by a toddler, we can probably ignore this grandma’s wish to be grandmotherly all over her workplace and her church. That’s not about loving Dolly’s children, it’s about showing off.

    And if she was taking the kid off to stuff her with junk food and watch TV instead of running around outside, we’d all be supporting Dolly’s wish to ignore her.


  62. Dolly June 1, 2011 at 12:53 am #

    Donna: Well when I was pregnant, darn right it was about ME. I was the one carrying the dangerous and difficult pregnancy. I was the one who went through infertility treatments and tests and shots. I was the one who was actually putting my life in danger. Then when I had the babies. Again, for a short time it was still mostly about ME because I was the one recovering from major abdominal surgery and trying to learn to breastfeed premature babies. That was not going so well so I spent every bit of energy and time I had working on that.

    I had zero time to waste entertaining guests I didn’t like in the hospital room or dealing with people sending out pics when I asked them not to. I did not have a bunch of my relatives all up ins right after the birth either. We only had our parents visit and a few very close mutual friends of hubby and I. That was it. No aunts or uncles, no great Aunt Suzy on both sides. So it was beyond rude and intrusive for MIL to disrespect my wishes and give out my private hospital room number to BIL and SIL.

    I never presume to do stuff when someone I know has a baby. I don’t ask to come to the hospital. I will if they ask me too but otherwise I don’t. I don’t worry about getting my hands all on the baby. I will typically ask what I can do to help the MOTHER and FATHER by bringing a meal or something. I don’t take pics unless I ask first of the baby and I definitely don’t post pics of the baby on the internet for everyone to see without their permission. It is just common decency and manners. Sure I care about the baby and am excited etc just as much as everyone else. But it is not my day, it is not my baby, and I defer to the parents. That will not change even if it was my own grandchild. You win more flies with honey than vinegar so if they ask me not to do something even if I don’t agree with it, darn right I will make sure to do what they tell me. I don’t want to piss off a pregnant or recovering from birth mom. No way!

  63. Dolly June 1, 2011 at 12:59 am #

    That sounds precious Lollipop lover! I have no prob with kids with naked butts. As long as the parents are okay with it, then there is no issue.

    I had their 2 year old picture sent out to friends and family and one son was making a “Go to hell, piss off!” face at the camera. It was hilarious! We could not get him to smile or not look pissed off so we chose the funniest one and sent it and ordered it. Why not!? That was his personality at the time so it worked. Everyone loved it and found it too funny!

  64. Dolly June 1, 2011 at 1:01 am #

    Sky: baby Abby

  65. Dolly June 1, 2011 at 1:05 am #

    SKY: Wanted to add that again, I have no problem with people putting storks in yard or whatever and don’t think it will result in a kidnapping. But I personally just did not want that. My right. I was fairly crazy at first with my twins because they were after a long battle with infertility and miscarriages and they were fragile preemies so I went overboard on a lot of things. I have calmed down a lot as time went on. Either way, it is not going to hurt my kids if the stork is not there or if it is. That is for the parents, not the babies. I don’t mind doing without it, so its gone. Big whoop . That is the point I am trying to make. I was uncomfortable with it and that’s that. I am a private person about a lot of stuff.

  66. Dolly June 1, 2011 at 1:08 am #

    Thanks Heather. Exactly. I don’t let my pic get displayed everywhere on the internet (thus why my facebook is locked down) so why would I want my kids everywhere? I show them the same privacy I show myself. Seem a no brainer to me. When they are old enough to decide for themselves if they want their pic on the net, then I will let them make that call and they can make the call for their future children.

  67. Brian June 1, 2011 at 1:35 am #

    Heather: “I do know someone to whom this happened–his daughter’s picture found on a kiddie-porn site.”

    So your friend was visiting pedophile sites? I dont understand how else he/she would “find” the photo.

  68. Brian June 1, 2011 at 1:44 am #

    To me, the privacy of the child that is the biggest issue with posting these photos for public consumption. WayBackMachine and other sites actually record the internet. Taking down the photo does not means that a cute naked photo of your kid at age 4 wont show up to mortify him/her as a 12 year old in Jr. High.

    I have also requested friends and family not to “tag” my son in photos on Facebook because I think its unfair to him to have images published and out of his/my control.

    Fortunately there are settings and methods in place so that each parent can decide what they think is right. This is not a major issue precisely because we can each decide what is right for us.

  69. LRH June 1, 2011 at 1:52 am #

    When parents say things like “it’s unfair for my child to have images published out of their control”–again, I think this is part of the “psychobabble” parenting we see a lot of nowadays–and I realize I’m probably violating “free range” a little bit with disrespecting other parenting principles. (However FreeRange as I understand it is also about not freaking out about things not worth freaking about, and it’s also about community vs being so overly territorial.)

    But at some point, c’mon already. This strikes me as being no different than the parents who made headlines about how their child “Storm” was of an unknown gender even to their grandparents because they didn’t want society “dictating gender to them.”

    Be still my beating heart. When I was growing up, no one gave a fig what I thought about my image being in someone else’s camera–and that was the RIGHT point of view. I was the child, they were the adult, that was their priveledge, I was out of line and a total NOBODY to dare question it. And I think that was the RIGHT way. Yes that does open the door to abuse, but it MUCH MORE than that opens the door for kids to be spoiled brats who don’t obey anybody but their parents–if even them. This whole “my child doesn’t like they don’t have a vote in the matter”–please, they’re children, they’re not SUPPOSED to have a vote in the matter. They’re minors, they have no choice, nor SHOULD they.

    Dolly, what I think a lot of people are saying is this (and again I mean no disrespect to your specific situation per se): the environment should be to where EVERYONE shares in the joy of one’s new baby, and feels free & comfortable taking and sharing photos all they want and feeling free to “just show up” at the hospital wthout having make appointments first etc, because it’s part of the joy of life, it’s about bonding and sharing the experience with you the parents, and it never has been (and still isn’t) about infringing on the parent’s “space” or privacy etc. (Again I am talking in generalities & not attacking you and/or your specific situation.)

    What you are describing reminds me of friends we had recently who thought it was rude for you to come over to their house without calling first. Apparently they’re the CEO of Exxon and don’t want other people “just barging in unannounced” without making an appointment with their secretary first. Messy house concerns etc aside, I always thought that was pretentious–and I still do (and we’re still friends but I just don’t agree with that point of view). By contrast, growing up the people I knew were real big on “if you’re in the neighborhood drop on by.” An environment of openeness and comfort with sharing was created, and it didn’t mean the persons’ privacy was raped. If they (the people at home) were tied up in something that was occupying them, you quickly realized this, kept it short, and left–no hard feelings on their end for “just showing up unannounced,” no hard feelings on your end for not being catered to at the drop of a hat. If not, the host was glad to have you and made it clear that they were GLAD you just showed up. It was about buidling a community, which I think is the sort of thing Lenore is advocating.

    But now, it’s all about “my boundaries” and “my right to not have intruders barging in without making an appointment with my receptionist first,” as if people wanting to be a beneficial part of your life is now some sort of forced obligation being forced down your throat, rather than something beneficial for you AS WELL as them. I am all for, to a certain extent anyway, respecting such boundaries, but I think it’s gotten a bit ridiculous anymore. Don’t take photos of MY kids, you’re just trying to please yourself and exploit my kids for your own selfish purposes. Don’t come visit me unless you’ve been asked, it’s rude to infringe on MY SPACE unless I’ve given you MY PERMISSION to do so. This seems to be a recent change in our society and I don’t like it nor do I agree with it at all.

    That’s a different request to make than, say, asking people to not give your baby chocolate or soda without asking, or not overriding your parenting principles (rock to sleep vs crying it out, sleep in same room vs their own, boys having cute curls with long hair vs cutting it to make it short). Those are understandable requests for a parent to make in terms of not overriding how they’re trying to discipline their child’s behavior and diet etc. The other is all about tearing down and polluting what could be a wonderful community because wonderful gestures are now misinterpreted as “intrusions into my space and disrespecting my wishes.” Oh, puh-leaze.

    I’m preaching now, and I never started participating in this site to do so, and I hope I’m not offending Lenore in doing so (if she tells me I am, then by all means I will respond accordingly). But some of what I’m reading here is really–frankly, nonsense.


  70. BMS June 1, 2011 at 1:53 am #

    I want to save the mortifying photos for when they start wanting to date. I figure I can save myself all the ‘teenage sex’ problems by embarrassing them to the point that they never leave their rooms until going to college in another state (buahahahaha).

  71. LRH June 1, 2011 at 2:01 am #

    PS (darn PS again)–I’m fixing to leave to go the lake. And you know what? Lately my 4 year old hates going to the lake. Guess what? Tough tamales, little girl–we’re going anyway. I’m the parent, you’re the child, I feel like going to the lake–so that’s the end of that discussion. I’m not your personal taxi or playmate to pander to everyone of YOUR wants. You don’t get a vote.

    That doesn’t mean we don’t do things that she specifically likes, but it’s not tailor-made to what she likes either. We do listen to her wants etc, and will do things she likes as part of our lives–but if I feel like going to the lake and she says “I don’t want to go to the lake”–too bad, you don’t get a vote.

    (All of that said, last Saturday we were all at the lake and she was enjoying it, and that’s fine.)

    Other people we know, by contrast, when we try & discuss where to meet-up, they ALWAYS try and have everything changed because “my kids don’t like it.” Growing up, it was nothing like that–the adults decided based mostly on what THEY wanted where to go, and we kids just learned to fit in to that context of things. Yes some things were done for our specific enjoyment–Six Flags comes to mind–and I recall lake trips where they let us go to the pinball machines & helped make that happen for us, but in the OVERALL sense, it was adult-centered.

    If my aunt wanted to take a photo of me, she didn’t have to ask my mother, she just did it–and if I was a brat about it and my mother got wind, she didn’t chastize my aunt for “exploiting MY KIDS!!!” Instead I was the one in trouble for not doing as I was told by my aunt. And yes, my aunt was not one to override my mother’s parenting principles in ways Dolly speaks of. In return, she could discipline and direct EQUAL to my mother in such instances–and if there was any disagreement, it was taken behind closed doors. NEVER did I get the idea that I could whine to my mother and weasel out of what my aunt was doing, because my mother understood this would cause me to be a brat to everyone, including herself.

    So yes–if someone wants to take a photo of my kids and my kids act the brat for it, THEY will be the ones in trouble, not the adult.

    End of sermon, off to the lake.


  72. Donna June 1, 2011 at 2:04 am #

    “And if she was taking the kid off to stuff her with junk food and watch TV instead of running around outside, we’d all be supporting Dolly’s wish to ignore her.”

    Actually, no I wouldn’t. My mother has been known to stuff my child with junk food and let her watch way more TV then I would. It’s a fun time with grandma and what child can’t handle a little spoiling here and there. If she was doing this every day, I’d find something else to do with my child so she wasn’t around grandma constantly, but an occasional saturday night of junk food and TV is not going to kill her.

    I also let grandma gulp and gasp at every fall if that’s what she wants to do when my daughter is with her. I don’t have this need to monitor every second of my child’s life to make sure that it complies with what I would do. My mother, for all her faults, managed to raise two intelligent, mostly well-adjusted children. I think that I can trust her not to completely destroy my child over the weekend.

    “I don’t let my pic get displayed everywhere on the internet”

    You may not post your picture everywhere on the internet but you have no control over what other people do with their photos of you. Your MIL can send out pictures of you to her everyone on her mailing list. Some friend could post pictures of you at her birthday party on facebook. You run the risk of ending up on the internet simply by leaving your home and interacting with other people. Even if I never posted a picture of my child, I would completely understand that some pictures of her are going to exist on the internet in other people’s albums just by virtue of the fact that I don’t choose to live like a hermit.

  73. Donna June 1, 2011 at 2:13 am #

    “Taking down the photo does not means that a cute naked photo of your kid at age 4 wont show up to mortify him/her as a 12 year old in Jr. High.”

    What doesn’t mortify a 12 year old? The mere existance of parents mortify a 12 year old. My god, if we made our decisions about what might possibly mortify our children at 12, we’d have no children.

  74. Kimberly June 1, 2011 at 3:32 am #

    A few years ago, someone nefarious got onto my facebook, and stole pictures of mine that I posted, and emailed them out to her male friends, with my email address. I was hit on constantly to the point that I had to lock down my facebook, and it was a very rude awakening of “Omg seriously, who does that?”, with that said.. I just had our third child, on the 25th, and I’ve posted pictures anywhere I can, because I am excited about showing her off, and really what someone does or thinks of my child’s pictures doesn’t really concern me, the fact is that people are ultimately going to do what they wish to do, with or without your consent, you have on control over anything you ultimately post or write online once it’s there, it’s there. If you truly are worried about showing pictures on websites, or grandparents etc.. then stop taking pictures, else that’s the risk you take upon posting pictures, anywhere. (Sorry if that doesn’t make sense, newborn, lack of sleep.. etc)

  75. Kimberly June 1, 2011 at 3:33 am #

    no control* I can type. Honest.

  76. Jenny Islander June 1, 2011 at 3:58 am #

    @Kimberly: The modern equivalent of writing somebody’s number on the bathroom wall with “For a Good Time Call–.” I had that done to me in grade school. And, yes, some pimply-faced classmate actually called me. However, our number was listed in the phone book just the same in the next edition. You’re absolutely right–there are things we can’t control, and other people’s decisions to be jackholes are at the top of that list.

  77. Dolly June 1, 2011 at 4:09 am #

    Donna: I have said it before, but I will say it again. I am fairly chill about pictures and most things with people I like and care about. My friends post pics of me and my kids on their facebooks all the time and link to it and there are no problems. I don’t mind because they are my friends and I know they love us. It is when someone has dislike for anyone of us that I start to restrict what they can and cannot do. Meaning my inlaws because I know they don’t like me and they have done nefarious things in the past not just to me, but to all of us. Like taking unflattering pics of me on purpose and then blowing them up. So motive does matter. I was just using inlaws as an example. I do have my facebook locked down, but when I know you and love you and the feelings are mutual, take all the pics you want and do with them as you please, because I know you will do so in a respectful way. Does that make sense?

    In the end I do like to think I maintain control of my image and my children’s images as long as they are underage. I do have one or two pics of us on the main internet but I was the one to approve the pics and their usage.

    Larry: Well I go by etiquette standards and it is not polite to drop by without calling or being invited first. I don’t care your intent. I follow it and I expect others to do so too. If you just want to drop by to drop something off that is fine to just show up, but without calling first I am not letting you into my house. Like I said before, I like my privacy.

    When I am nursing two infants or pumping breastmilk and just starting to try to do it, the last thing I needed was people I don’t know that well or like, staring at my boobs or wanting to chit chat. Not to mention I was still bleeding from several orifices. Sorry, not going to happen. I needed my rest and privacy. If they want to see the baby they can visit once we all have recovered and got used to our routine and when I invite you over. Or you can wait till I send you pics. You wait 9 months for a baby to be born, waiting a week more, won’t kill you.

    I very much support community. We just did a lemonade stand the other week to try to meet some of our neighbors. We are outside playing all the time and wave at every car that passes by and play with the neighborhood kids. I have lots of friends and family I invite over to visit regularly. The difference is that it is on my terms. It is when it is convenient for us I show others the same respect. I don’t think that makes anyone anti-community. It makes you polite.

  78. BMS June 1, 2011 at 4:09 am #

    LRH, I had to laugh.

    If we stopped doing everything our kids whined about, we would be reduced to staying in the house, in an empty room, staring at nothing. They whine about who chose which movie. They whine about going to kung fu, going to school, going to anywhere they didn’t choose. We ignore them, go anyway, and they generally have a great time.

  79. Dolly June 1, 2011 at 4:11 am #

    That’s awful Kimberly. :( Sorry that happened to you. That is the type of thing I try to prevent exactly.

  80. Donna June 1, 2011 at 5:35 am #

    “You wait 9 months for a baby to be born, waiting a week more, won’t kill you. ”

    It’s natural to be excited to see the new additions to the family. I might bust into the hospital room too if my bro was refusing to even send me a picture of his new baby.

  81. Dolly June 1, 2011 at 5:43 am #

    Donna: No one refused to send anything. We were too busy you know, caring for the babies and he was also caring for me. We don’t have a fancy cell phone with internet and cameras. So only way we were sending photos was when Hubby had a chance to go home and send some. He did on like Day 3 but not the first two days. It was non stop baby care and nursing attempts. That is the attitude that bothers me right there. That an Aunt’s feelings are more important than establishing nursing or caring for the baby or resting or recovering. That is just selfish, sorry.

  82. Jackie June 1, 2011 at 6:12 am #

    Dolly, at first I thought your initial post was a little harsh, but after reading your first explanation, I totally empathize with your MIL issue. You must have a clone of my step-sister’s MIL and in fact, entire family of in-laws. They are nuts, truly, and my step sis and her hubby are close to actually taking out a restraining order or charging them with harassment. She just had a baby, and there is no way her IL’s are getting to see her, ever. I understand where you are coming from and it’s just too bad.

  83. Dolly June 1, 2011 at 6:40 am #

    Thanks Jackie. I would be fine never seeing them again but hubby has a limited relationship with them.

  84. Cass June 1, 2011 at 7:20 am #

    The majority of this conversation is completely missing the point of the original post. The post is about the risk of pedophiles taking photos of children and using them, not about online privacy or whether you have a right to show pictures of your children around. While this is an interesting and debate worthy topic I would love to see some more comments regarding the original topic.

  85. Missy June 1, 2011 at 7:22 am #

    LRH writes:

    What you are describing reminds me of friends we had recently who thought it was rude for you to come over to their house without calling first.

    It IS rude to just drop by unannounced. How do you know your friends don’t have other things to do? Or just don’t want company? Maybe they want to lie in bed and read all day, or work, or dance in their underwear to Madonna, or have sex uninterrupted. Why are you more important than they are in their own home? What makes you think that your desire to visit trumps their desire to be asked if it is convenient for them or not?

    Yeah, no. I work from home, and people who just drop by without calling me first – whether it’s a regular work day or not – will find the doorbell unanswered. I am the Queen of my castle, not J. Unmannered Passerby.

  86. LRH June 1, 2011 at 7:30 am #

    Missy No it ISN’T rude, anyone who thinks it is a flatout bitch.


  87. LRH June 1, 2011 at 7:41 am #

    Okay, LRH, that’s enough! Yes, Missy I owe you an apology for that last post, and I sure owe Lenore an apology, this isn’t the sort of thing I think she wants at her site–name-calling, mud-slinging & all of that. That was very juvenile, totally wrong–and I owe an apology to everyone here, especially you Missy and you Lenore. It was WRONG what I did, no excuse for it. Period.

    Now that I’m calm, back to debating the issue in a more mature manner.

    I nonetheless do stand by my original assertion–it is absolutely a very anti-community and anti-friendship attitude to say that people have to call you first before coming over. It isn’t about selfishness when a person happens to be in the neighborhood–it does happen by the way–it means they love you, they value you, they desire time with you, and they are offering themselves as friends to you. It used to be a common thing that people looked it at that way, now all of a sudden you have people like Missy and Dolly–and many others, let me not just pick on them (and no name-calling the rest of this post–again, my sincerest apologies, that was wrong) who think you’re invaiding their soveriegn domain to stop in & say hello.

    That’s just a ridiculous attitude to have, I’m sorry, but it is just ridiculous.

    Again, it has NOTHING to do with me asserting that, say, I have the RIGHT to “invade your palace” or whatever at my realm, such is not what I’m thinking at such times at all. And I know what you’re saying–I dance to my underwear to Hanson tunes (yes, Hanson) all the time, there are times I’m just tired and “vegging out” watching old “Sanford & Son” re-runs–by the way, even Fred Sanford, as much as he hated Aunt Esther, didn’t tell her she had to call before she came over, nor any of his friends either–and so maybe I don’t feel like company at the time either.

    But if someone DID show up, I’m not going to be all hostile and tell them what a bunch of rude “who do you think you are that your life is more important than my solitude at my home” or whatever load of horsecrap (that’s not name-calling, is it?) they’re coming up with these days. I am going to have the perspective that these are people who LOVE me and desire fellowship with me, and that’s a GOOD thing.

    Screw all that nonsense about “it’s my house how dare you invade it without making an appointment with my receptionist first.” To name-call a person–again, I am apologizing for the 3rd time because I should, that was wrong to say–HOWEVER, that whole attitude, it is pretentious and ridiculous, simple as that. I don’t respect that difference in opinion because–frankly–it’s just full of anti-community horse manure.

    Calling it that I DO NOT apologize for (but the other, yes, for the 4th time, that was wrong–please forgive me Lenore especially, that was just wrong).


  88. null June 1, 2011 at 7:52 am #

    @Dolly To me, “on my terms” especially as you stated is extremely arrogant. I am so glad not everyone is like that. That’s not friendly of you at all. Someone comes over to give a genuinely sincere “hello” and all you can think of is how they violated your precious protocol? What a witch. That disposition of yours isn’t community at all, it’s selfish arrogance. Maybe the people you wave at oughta flip you off–who are you to intrude into their space without asking first?

    If this atttude of yourals is the reason your mother-in-law hates you, good for her. As someone else earlier stated, who do you think you are, the president of Walmart? News flash honey–you ain’t all that and a bag of chips. You sound more like a stale can of bean dip if you ask me, and as full of gas as what the beans would do to you.

  89. Dolly June 1, 2011 at 7:52 am #

    I appreciate your apology to Missy and Lenore. They definitely deserved one.

    If you are comfortable with people just dropping by-great. Let people know that and maybe they will. Even if someone tells me I can drop by, I typically don’t. I just find it hard to do that since I worry about bothering someone and I was raised to always call first.

    Just because you are okay with it though does not mean everyone else is nor are they wrong for feeling thusly. With some houses like mine you can tell if we are home and not answering. We have a window on our front door and you can see right into the house. So there is no pretending to not be there. But we rarely get unannounced visitors so its not a big deal.

    There are some people like my mom or my best friends that can come by and I would probably be cool with it because I know they won’t judge a dirty house or whatever. They are the exception though and I really want them to call first too. That is just me. Does not make me hostile or rude.

    Anyway, back to the original topic for Cass. I also don’t worry about naked pics being considered dirty or worry about pedophiles getting their hands on them. Because I don’t put them out there for everyone to see. Its that simple. If someone else wants to put those out there, more power to them. That is their choice. Just try not to humiliate your kid by putting something embarrassing out there that might embarass them later on or even now with their friends.

  90. Dolly June 1, 2011 at 7:54 am #

    Null: is that you MIL? LOL!

  91. Dolly June 1, 2011 at 8:00 am #

    Another thing: My hubby works at home. My hubby also NEVER wears pants at home. EVER. So if you stop by unannounced be prepared to see his wang or butt. LOL! The few times people came by unannounced they got a good look at Hubby in his boxers running past the door to go get pants. You can see right into our hallway at eye level at his butt (split foyer). So yeah….probably best to give us a call.

  92. LRH June 1, 2011 at 8:06 am #

    Yeah Dolly thanks, I feel a lot better.

    If I can laugh about it for a bit.

    If you saw the movie “Gran Torino,” the Walt character (played by Clint Eastwood), I’m a little like him, a LITTLE anyway. That is, when Sue (the Hmong girl who “saw the good in him” or whatever) invited him over and was explaining their various customs (he was asking “how come everyone looks away when I look at them” etc), he respected what they asked but still made the observation “God you people are nuts.” But in the end he ended up with the observation “I have more in common with these people than with my own family.”

    That’s sort of me with such things–I’ll do as you ask, but ultimately I will be inclined to give the “God you people are nuts” bit to go along with it–because I do think it’s nuts, frankly.

    But I’m old-fashioned that way. In like manner I don’t screen calls, I mean, what if it was my wife in jail (not that she does things that merit it, you understand) or she’s at the hospital and is using their phone because her cell’s battery is dead or doesn’t work due to all the funky hospital equipment? How about the time she tried to call me using a new TracPhone she had just purchased, when I wasn’t at home and she was wondering where I was at? I know we free-rangers aren’t big on panicking based on far-fetched “what-ifs,” but what harm is going to come–other than being momentarily irritated for 5 nanoseconds–from just answering the phone? It’s not going to blow up on your head. (I DO understand, however, not answering 1-877 calls that you are SURE are telemarketers etc.)

    It goes along with how, when I was at the lake earlier, my kids kept going up to people they didn’t know, which I didn’t discourage, although I did make sure it didn’t aggravate them. None of that “stranger danger” stuff for me (although I do intend to teach them to not RUN OFF with someone or take candy etc.) Heck, for another light-hearted moment to share, he actually went up to one young girl who was holding her hand out for her younger brother and took her hand! I almost died laughing! It was so sweet.

    It is that sweetness and innocence, rather than assuming someone wanting to spend time with you etc must be in it for selfish reasons or is violating your boundaries, that I try to embrace. That’s all. I do tend to, in general, honor and respect most people’s boundaries (although, again, in public, candid photography is legal and not discourteous), but I think we as a society have gotten a little carried away & pretentious with it in some ways. It’s not like all of us are a famous person like the coach of a famous pro team in sports or someone like that who must have an unlisted number to keep from being mobbed for autographs & financial favors from low-lifes. We’re not THAT important.

    Hopefully I was more respectful this time.


  93. LRH June 1, 2011 at 8:16 am #

    Dolly PS–your husband’s wang or butt? Ha ha, I like that, seriously. And I will agree with you on that count–whether or not a person knows to call first or just shows up not knowing, they have NO RIGHT to complain that they saw what they saw.

    I will agree with you on that count–your husband is at home, he has EVERY RIGHT to make himself as comfortable as he sees fit in whatever way he sees fit, and anyone who shows up–oh well, no right to complain. In like manner, if someone shows up & you’re in the middle of your meal, don’t expect that I’ve anticipated it and made enough for you. It would be NICE if “we have plenty, help yourself,” but the reality is that we probably won’t, and my family and myself are my priority for providing food for.

    What I have found is this: even if I am in the middle of something that I don’t want to be interrupted with–I work out playing basketball almost daily for one thing–I have nonetheless found that I will be able to catch things up ultimately, the spontaneous visits don’t seriously muck all of that up. In the end, community is fostered and I still get my own needs taken care of, however serious or frivolous those “needs” are–laundry, basketball, and yes, dancing in my leather jacket, sunglasses & jammies to Hanson, ha ha.


  94. Kimberly Hosey (Arizona Writer) June 1, 2011 at 9:23 am #

    You know what? A pervert DID steal and use a photo of my son. On a pervert site, featured prominently in a pervert forum for perverts, wherein they discussed it in all kinds of perverted and detailed ways.

    I was pissed, way grossed out, and a little disturbed; but after the ick factor wore off, I figured, oh well. He lived (allegedly) across the country from me, his “name” was Fap23 or something, and we’d never encounter one another. I told him to quit stealing my photos, and take that one down while he was at it, or I’d get him for stealing my work.

    He took it down. I’ve shared approximately ten kazillion pictures of my kid since then. Amazingly, tragedy has never befallen us.

  95. Missy June 1, 2011 at 9:31 am #

    Wow, LRH. Just wow. Yes, that apology was definitely owed. Thank you for that.

    That does not, however, change the simple fact that you don’t get to set the rules for someone else’s household. Period. Not ever.

    No one has the right to interrupt my 80 hour work week simply because they think it “fosters community”, or whatever nonsense one thinks one’s inconsiderate behavior is masquerading as. I have things called “deadlines”, set by the people who pay me good money to meet them. I’m sure they don’t care what you think about my rule that if you want to come by, you need to call first. The considerate visitor has no wish to be an imposition.

    Thankfully, my friends and family were brought up with good manners and have the decency to call and ask if I’ve time for guests, rather than simply show up to impose, whether I have time for them or not.

  96. Jenn June 1, 2011 at 9:37 am #

    I am very carefully about what I post on Facebook about my kids. Not because of pedophiles but because I’m trying to think `if I was in their shoes’. I don’t think I’d want my life available for all to see from birth to current age, embarrassing or not (that’s what the old fashioned photo albums are for when the gf/bf come over). I know people who have not been accepted for jobs they applied for/been fired because of pics/posts of them on fb. I have family all over the planet and I want to share with them pics of the kid growing up but our entertainment and/or bonding shouldn’t put at risk my child’s future goals. I usually put up the standard family poses at holiday venues and posed milestone pics. Anything more candid, I usually send privately or print for them to laugh over and place in their albums, which trust me, will be shared on their wedding day!

  97. Melissa June 1, 2011 at 9:48 am #

    I find it sad that people are so extremely paranoid today. To have the first thoughts in people’s heads when seeing pictures of a cute baby who happens to be naked be of pedophiles is just sad! Talk about an obsession that sucks the joy out of life!

    As for the people who are so concerned about facebook, there are privacy settings that work just fine. My privacy settings are very strict. Only friends can view any part of my profile, and I am only “friends” with people I actually know.

  98. Missy June 1, 2011 at 10:05 am #

    Melissa writes:

    As for the people who are so concerned about facebook, there are privacy settings that work just fine. My privacy settings are very strict. Only friends can view any part of my profile, and I am only “friends” with people I actually know.

    Yes, exactly this. If we don’t have an actual face to face relationship, you don’t get to see my Facebook.

    I also make it a policy to never put anything on Facebook that I would be upset to find on the evening news. Would I be upset to find my Elder Monster’s bathtub pics on the news? Nope. And his girlfriend was utterly delighted to find them on Facebook!

  99. Bugged June 1, 2011 at 10:34 am #

    Dolly, my MIL is a nut job, too. I’m constantly fighting the urge to restrict all kinds of things as “punishment” for one thing or another. She’s inconsiderate and always asking for pictures and I hardly ever send them to her, because like you’re saying, they’ll get plastered all over the internet whether I like it or not. I’ll print copies for her before I’ll email something.

    And Donna, yes, people who are nice to me get more privileges than people who are rude and inconsiderate.

    And LRH, you would quickly stop being my friend if you dropped by my hospital room unannounced. I feel like a hot pile of crap after having a baby and I want to sleep, not entertain everyone I’m acquainted with. I had a million visitors with the first baby, and that’s a mistake I won’t make again. I also want people to call before they come over. My husband works the graveyard shift for 13 hours a day, and is asleep in the other room the rest of the time. So my house is generally not open for visitors. I have a couple chairs on the porch, so if someone comes over and I’m not busy we can sit outside and chat. But droppers-by are not welcomed into my home with open arms and a “let me drop everything and interrupt my schedule for you, oh grand visitor!” attitude.
    Also, LRH, your are opinionated and smug and I’m sick of you telling everyone that their opinions are wrong (but Lenore, let my lick your shoes real quick before I type some more insults). You sound like a tyrant of a parent and I can’t tell you how glad I am that you’re not my dad. My parents had rules that I followed, too, but they would never FORCE me to do something as ridiculous as get my picture taken. Because your kids are PEOPLE with FEELINGS, even if they’re only 5. So how about you ease up on the preaching (and holy crap, if you talk about being a photographer one more time, I might cut something) and keep your responses to 1 paragraph and about the post instead of responding to every single comment as if it’s directed at you.

  100. LRH June 1, 2011 at 10:37 am #

    Missy Thanks for accepting my apology, I meant it.

    You are correct in that I or whoever doesn’t get to choose the rules of a house, but I can disagree with it or call bull or whatever on it. I can also elect to have nothing to do with people who worry about irrelevant protocol because I disagree with it. Yes good friends respect wishes but true ones also can voice their disapproval at being treated like an appointment. Frankly if you work 80 hours I’d say that’s a lot, and frankly I couldn’t be friends with someone who was that difficult to pin down for anything, their career is their entire life and they’re really only “compatible” with other workaholic friends who can appreciate where they’re coming from. An average 40 hour type of person cant handle it, nor should they be expected to, it’s destined to fail. It happens, oh well.

    I would suggest the way you were raised has nothing to do with manners, and everything to do with being a snob. I am NOT name-calling you personally nor so I mean to insult your parents, but I am saying I think the whole “friendship by appointment only” point of view is a snobby one. It is YOUR RIGHT, yes, and the planet will go back to spinning because it’s not about “God you’re needy” because I’m not–but I wouldn’t appreciate someone treating me like an appointment and thinking that otherwise I’m “intruding into my space inconsiderately.” If someone is a friend you don’t consider a visit from them a rude thing, I don’t care if you’re an accountant & it’s April 15th. Just say “let’s make it another time” and a reasonable person will understand–yes, even me.

    No I’m not going to keep barging in unwanted, but I will tell you that I don’t agree with treating friends like appointments to keep, and if you call needing my help I’m apt to hang up on you–and tell you why. I generally do respect differences in points of view enough to not be hostile & argumentative about it, but with certain ones like this I also can elect to have nothing to do with such persons because there are too many others who don’t have that complex so I can just be friends with them instead.


  101. Bugged June 1, 2011 at 10:44 am #

    “Thanks for accepting my apology. By the way, you’re a snob.”

    Seriously, Larry, quit while you’re ahead. We’re all very clear on how you feel about drop-ins versus appointments.

  102. LRH June 1, 2011 at 10:56 am #

    Melissa exactly.

    Well Bugged you are entitled to your opinion, but if you’re compelled to “cut something” just because I say that I’m a hobbyist photographer, I can’t help you with that. And yes my posts are long, I’ve acknowledged as such, beyond that–oh well. Maybe the submission form should have a 3000 character limitation or something like that.

    And as for my parenting–I don’t know what age you are, but I can tell you–asking a child of yours to pose for a picture is not ridiculous. Everyone has a story about “the way I was raised,” and I can tell you that the way I was raised, if an adult wants to take your picture, you don’t act like a pissy brat and pout your face. If I had done that when I was little–to my aunt, even–my mother would’ve slapped the shit out of me for being a brat–and GOOD for her. Yes kids have feelings–they feel like eating candy, they feel like pooping and peeing on the couch, they feel like throwing their clothes into the comode–so what? I’m the parent, I’m the one in charge. They get plenty of fun anyway, due to my being free-range in attitude among other things, but at the end of the day I’m in charge, they’re the child & I’m the parent. Period. Just like anyone who disagrees with my free-ranging–anyone that doesn’t like it can suck a raw egg.

    Maybe you’re glad I’m not your parent–so what? I love my kids and play with them and do things that they like etc, but I’m still the boss. If they hate it–guess what–I don’t give a shit. If they grow up & resent me, oh well–that’s on them for having a pissy attitude towards a parent’s authority. Yes you’re not supposed to “exasperate your kids,” but I’d hardly call asking a child to respect you enough to pause for 30 seconds or so while you snap their picture as “exasperating” them.

    And I’m not licking Lenore’s boots, I genuinely respect the woman. Sometimes I’m an ass in here–I was on that one occasion for sure–but I respect the woman, I just failed to act like it with that one posting. On the other hand, I do NOT respect a person who would treat my stopping by the hospital to wish them well as some sort of an annoying act. I mean, c’mon–you’re tired & all of that, fine, but someone stops by to wish you well and all you can do is gripe & moan about the “forced entertainment obligation?” Oh good grief, what a load of horse manure that is. If you don’t feel like it, by all means, have the nurse put a sign on your door “visitors only from 5-6 pm” or whatever, but if someone shows up & you act all crabby on them when they were trying to be a friend to you–what a crock of bologna that is.

    Don’t worry, anyone with that attitude, I have no interest in being their friend either. Other people actually have love in their hearts rather than using an illness as a reason to have a pissy attitude. THOSE are the people I’m friends with.


  103. Dolly June 1, 2011 at 11:48 am #

    Larry: The fact that you are a man kinda means a lot here. You have never given birth. You have no idea how exhausting or painful or emotionally charged or hormonal it is. So for you to judge a woman on how she feels after giving birth is kinda a ballsy move. You have never cried because you have been unsuccessfully trying to nurse your premature infant for hours and hours and it not work and your nipples hurt so hard you are gritting your teeth and muffling a scream into a pillow (and don’t say that was because I was nursing wrong because a lactation consultant came in and said I was doing it right, my babies were just bad suckers and my nipples were sensitive). I know what that feels like.

    So excuse the heck out of me if I get annoyed when BIL and SIL whom I dislike and whom showed ZERO interest in me when I was pregnant, call my private hospital number to tell (not ask, tell) me they are coming to visit to see the babies. They are just lucky my hands were full of baby and I didn’t answer the phone or they would have heard some choice words. My mom answered and dealt with them for me.

    Some women have an easier time with nursing and giving birth than others too so even if one woman is up to being friendly after giving birth, others might not be and that does not mean anything is wrong with them. It just means they had a horribly exhausting birth and recovery. Hell I still had a catherer in when BIL and SIL wanted to come visit. Umm no…..

    Larry: Would you mind if someone you didn’t like wanted to come visit you after a hernia surgery when you were still pooping in a bag? Probably not. Well that is how I felt.

    Sorry to get off topic again, I just don’t like a man telling women how to feel about labor and delivery because you know, YOU ARE A MAN!

  104. mollie June 1, 2011 at 11:50 am #

    “but still the parents were really big on teaching their kids their doing this was disrespectful to adults. They were really big on teaching their kids that ALL adults deserve your respect based simply on the fact that they’re adults and you’re the child. I always liked that about their parenting.”

    Uh-oh. Really. I’m worried here. Teaching children that they must consent to the authority of adults no matter what their comfort level is the sure recipe to make them vulnerable to exactly what this culture seems to fear the most: assault by a pedophile.

    It’s not the weirdo in the bush that’s the threat to you and your kids, it’s Uncle Walt or Coach Bill. Training your kids to be “respectful” to adults, to give hugs when they don’t feel like giving hugs, to receive kisses when they are shying away, is training them to ignore their own inner voice of comfort.

    Respect goes both ways, whether you are five or 50. And the most important respect, I think, is respect for one’s self. Kids who understand that respect can be translated as “holding the needs of both yourself and others equally” are better off than those who understand a definition of respect as “do what adults tell you, or else.”

  105. Dolly June 1, 2011 at 12:29 pm #

    I agree with Mollie. Sure it is not going to hurt a kid to pause for a sec and snap a pic. But to tell them to do whatever an adult tells them just because they are an adult. I don’t preach that. I follow the rule of respect going both ways as well as there needing to be a reason why you need to do what the adult tells you.

  106. Dolly June 1, 2011 at 12:34 pm #

    I guess Larry would dislike my special needs child too. He has always had a problem with cameras. He would hide his face or pout at the camera or give you a go to heck look. He was just a baby and small toddler at the time. He didn’t know any better. I would try to get him to smile, but I never forced it. As I said earlier in the thread, I finally accepted it for what it was and embraced his frowney face. I love that frowney face pic so much!

    Besides when we go for professional pics I never force a picture to be taken. Mine will pause a sec and smile now but no way in heck would I discipline them for being too busy playing to want to take a pic. That just is not worth it to me. Luckily for me, since I never forced the pic thing, my son know smiles when you take a pic but he closes his eyes for some reason so we have a lot of huge grins with closed eyes pics. Oh well, love those too! They also love to wink at the camera. Those goobers! :)

  107. LRH June 1, 2011 at 1:09 pm #

    Dolly I don’t think my being a man is relevant here, nor that I’ve never given birth. Both genders have their own struggles, too numerous to list, and I don’t participate in “you’re a man or woman you don’t understand” etc.

    Also, at the risk of being petty, I assume by BIL and SIL you mean brother-in-law and sister-in-law. Why not just type it out, sorry if I’m nit-picking, I just don’t care for Internet acronyms. I don’t even like using FRK for free-range kids. DVD or NASA are one thing, or FM radio (whoever expects me to type out “Frequency Modulation” sorry), CD or that sort of thing, but I’ve never cared for “AFAIK” and “BRB” and “IIRC” etc. Do forgive me for being petty, though, it’s not the real point here, but I couldn’t restrain myself from commenting. (Maybe I need to–as they say–pick your battles, stick to the topic etc?) It’s just a quick aside, and my apologies if I’m being too argumentative.

    Getting back–I am sorry, really, for what you endured–again, I don’t think being a woman & having unique woman problems entitles one to be difficult–I’m not saying you ARE being difficult, I’m just saying having unique “woman problems” doesn’t make it any different. It also doesn’t mean that someone else can’t make appropriate comments about the matter in certain realms. For that matter, the same goes with male-specific problems as well. Me having issues with erectile dysfunction (no I don’t have that, regardless is the usage of that term in the realm of “too much information”–no, not “TMI,” but *too much information*) or hernias or “beer gut” or whatever male-specific problems there are, it doesn’t excuse any inappropriate behavior, it doesn’t make me special either, and most relevant again, it doesn’t mean that you can’t comment on my opinion or the way I handle things because “you don’t understand, you’re a woman” etc.

    People like to play that card “unless you’ve been through so & so you don’t understand,” and that’s something else I don’t agree with. I don’t have to have been raped to know that rape is wrong, I don’t have to have a daughter who’s been raped to know that I’d probably want to shoot & kill whoever did it, and yet to also know that you will go to jail for murder. You can tell the police officer all day long “unless you’ve had a daughter who was raped you don’t understand how I feel,” but he’s going to arrest you for murder anyway. That your specific experience wasn’t shared by the person commenting on it doesn’t mean the commenter is out-of-line for commenting.

    Hey, at least I’m not repeating my earlier mistake I had to apologize for.

    Mollie You are correct in that Uncle Walt or Coach Bill is more of a threat than a stranger, but that said, I think we have mis-applied this whole “telling kids to obey all adults opens the door to molestation” mentality and I think that’s why you have brats now. If there is anything I have a problem with (okay, I guess it’s more than one thing, I’ve been on a roll today), it’s parents who think they and only they can correct their children. That’s just wrong. I have always said I don’t want other persons telling me how to parent my kids in terms of trying to override my free-range philosophies, but a person in a position of authority should nonetheless be able to correct an unruly child.

    If, say, I work at a department store stocking shelves and your child comes in there raising cane and knocking stuff off the shelves, you darned right I better be able to tell the child to stop it. Like in the Arnold Schwarzenegger movie “Kindegarden Cop,” if a child is kicking the back of my airplane seat, I should be able to look the child in the eye with an intimidating look and warn the offender that you had better stop.

    Trouble is, if you do that, rather than the parent doing the proper thing & holding their child accountable, they scold you “don’t you tell my child what to do.” Others say “tell me since I’m the parent, I’ll handle it”–yeah right, 9 times out of 10, from what I’ve seen and heard, do that, and the parent, rather than apologizing for their child’s misbehavior, now will excuse it and rationalize it.

    The idea behind telling a child they must obey all adults is to avoid raising a child to be a brat. It’s also because a parent can’t be everywhere and needs a break, and when other adults help to reinforce the parent’s authority by being authority themselves, you have the “community of support” which, I think, is one of the things free-range is about. So my aunt could tell me “get off the couch, you know your momma doesn’t allow that” or whatever, and if I didn’t do so, I was in trouble the same as if I disobeyed my mother directly. That sort of “involvement” from family members is something I welcome & appreciate, unlike them trying to override my free-range philosophies.

    Yes there are the unfortunate molestations when children are taken advantage of, but that can be reconciled–and besides that, for every one of those situations I’d hedge a bet you will have 10 million of the “brats out of control” situation if you teach them to only obey you the parent.

    As for the “reason why” the adult told you to do that–you do it because they said so, because they’re an adult, they’re above you in authority, they aren’t to be questioned, and you do what they say. Period. (And yes, you can train them about exceptions–if Uncle Charlie tells you to stay still while he feels for ticks in your panties, DO NOT consent to that, run and yell and tell mommy, or whatever.)


  108. Cera June 1, 2011 at 2:00 pm #

    I laughed out loud because the lady I babysit for found me on Craigslist. Too funny.

  109. LRH June 1, 2011 at 2:07 pm #

    Cera Me too, well, that is, the babysitter we were using was one we found on Craigslist, and she was a blessing. She was low-priced but her home was decent, she had him on a good schedule, loved on him well, and I personally LIKED it that she wasn’t “officially state-approved.” So she didn’t have to worry about the state telling her that she had to get rid of her drop-side crib or other such nonsense–everything was between her & us the parents, period, no government meddling, just as it should be.


  110. LiseyDuck June 1, 2011 at 5:29 pm #

    I needed people to call, text or whatever before coming to my old flat, because it was on the top floor and I didn’t want to spend all day running up and down the stairs letting my annoying neighbour’s annoying friends in to play loud music and smoke dope on the off chance it was one of my friends ringing the doorbell one time in 100.

    On a more relevant note, anyone seen this yet?

  111. jen June 1, 2011 at 6:39 pm #

    Great responses to this post! I have many things to say!
    To the point about worrying about privacy and children having an online identity:

    1. I think it’s important to teach children about what an online identity is and keeping credit card and personal info safe in terms of preventing identity theft.

    2. Worrying about putting a pic of their second birthday on FB is going to far. You’re telling me your kids are going to be emotionally scarrred from seeing that later in life….and feel like thier rights have been violated? Wow, there are children who have no food, and yours are scarred about not being asked about pictures.

    3. If you tell your children to be upset when their picture is shown and act like it’s a travesty, they will learn that and freak out when their picture is taken or shown…so now we have adults running around who can’t deal with and feel violated with regards to being photographed in the company picnic. Always the victim!

    4. Pedophiles. REALLY, whats to stop a phedophile from watching your kid and you go into the grocery store from the house across the street with his teloscopic zoom lens carmera and taking pictures of your kid as you come out……hmmmm NOTHING! The likelyhood of that happening…….hmmmmm….miniscule. Stop going to grocery store with kid……hmmmmm unneccessary over reaction. It’s the same with facebook.


    I wish my mom had taken more pictures of us when we were babies and kids. Now as an adult I have very few pictures to show my own kids and my mom doesn’t have a lot of pictures to look back on and share memories.

    Of all of the pictures we do have there is one of me naked as a baby. I didn’t even know about that pic until my late teens as we didn’t have it in our possession. It was at my grandmother’s house in another country. My mom went for a visit and brought it back to show me. It’s not my fav. pic in the world and I wouldn’t use it as my profile pic, but hugely embarassed and scarred for life at seeing it???? NO.

    Who knows who’s seen the picture over the years and who cares??? I vaguely connect with the baby in the picture because see I was a BABY and I don’t recollect the event. Also, I’m glad someone loved me and thought I was cute so they took a pic of me.

    I put pictures of my two year old on facebook because I think she’s cute and want to share with family and friends who are far away. I just gave my mother in law and mom a whack of pictures. My MIL takes them to family funtions and shows them to every distant relative she can. My mom takes them to work and shows them to everyone…and I say more power to them.

    If you teach kids to worry and be upset about a simple thing like having their picture taken they will grow up to be neurotic control freaks. This is not the gift of “respect” it’s taking away a persons right to feel safe and happy.

  112. Dolly June 1, 2011 at 8:10 pm #

    Larry: Common freaking sense- I type BIL, MIL, SIL because it takes three key strokes instead of 12, 13, 11 keystrokes. How more obvious could it be? You don’t have to like them. Don’t use them. You know what they mean, that is all that matters. They are fairly obvious.

  113. racheljoyhatten June 1, 2011 at 8:17 pm #

    OP: Great reply! Other people mean well and have good intentions with their concerns, but sometimes they’re just silly.

    As for the pages of responses that have followed, it’s been amusing to read!

    IMHO—and I must say I do not yet have kids—that posting pictures on FB or any online site, sure, it comes with some ‘risks’ if you will, but like others have said, so does taking your child out in public, or letting them play on the playground, or, you know, driving a minivan (because really who drives those unless they have kids?). Might someone take the time to connect your baby’s picture to your address, and then learn your routine and take the kid? Sure. But, a serial killer can break into your house and murder the entire family in your sleep because you know, people sleep at night that opens yourself up to things like that to happen.

    A friend of mine had this adorable picture of him at the beach, his back to the camera, with his little son between his legs, also facing away from the camera, butt-naked. It was adorable! But he took it down because he said he got too many “that’ inappropriate” comments.

    Well, for those who don’t believe in the whole Garden Of Eden story, this wide-spread sense of shame over nakedness had to come from somewhere, right?

  114. Cynthia June 1, 2011 at 8:57 pm #

    I took an adorable picture of my 3- or 4 -yo. I had hung some some clothes on the line, and he ran out , took of his pants and underwear, and hung them up too. Got a cute shot from the back of his bare butt (from a good distance, and with the clothesline and other things taking up most of the space- and Wal-Mart wouldn’t print it. They didn’t say anything, it just didn’t come back with the rest of the pictures.

  115. BMommy June 1, 2011 at 9:31 pm #

    Perfect, thanks for posting

  116. Donna June 1, 2011 at 10:23 pm #

    ” I know people who have not been accepted for jobs they applied for/been fired because of pics/posts of them on fb.”

    This fear is as ridiculous as the pedophile one. If you are posting pictures of your kids that would get them fired from jobs, you really need to rethink your relationship with your children. Naked toddler butt pictures do not impact future job prospects. Naked pictures from your Girls Gone Wild spring break just might. Routine family pictures don’t get you fired. Pictures of you on the beach in Mexico when you are supposed to be at your grandmother’s funeral probably will.

    Potential employers/employers may review YOUR facebook, MySpace and other internet sites. They are not going to scour the internet for baby pictures of you. They are not going to hack into your family members’ facebook pages to see what you were up to when you were 12.

  117. Missy June 1, 2011 at 10:50 pm #

    I would suggest the way you were raised has nothing to do with manners, and everything to do with being a snob. I am NOT name-calling

    You most certainly ARE name calling. And insulting the solid work ethic my grandparents had and instilled in me. And assuming that you are better suited to determine what is good for me and mine than I am.

    Frankly, LRH, you’re acting like a buffoon, and you’d do well to look to your attitude. You’ve got a NERVE.

    My friends and family have no problem “pinning me down” to do things. They CALL, we make PLANS. Easy peasy, and much better than just expecting me to drop everything at their whim. Because they are considerate like that.

  118. LRH June 1, 2011 at 11:28 pm #

    LiseyDuck I can understand that, actually. It makes me glad I live in the boonies. Also, regarding the story you linked to–the real problem I have with the subject nature of the article, besides the obvious extreme overreaction (and the burden it puts on parents to find clothes that conform to a silly rule), is that schools around here, if such guidelines were proposed, even though it’s supposedly not a RULE, I bet you the farm & all its contents that any parents who don’t go along with it will probably get a call from Child Protective Services, as the newer article Lenore just posted makes clear.

    Donna Your post, as usual, makes so much common sense, but then, if your privacy settings are up to snuff, shouldn’t the employers be unable to see any of it anyway?

    I take the position that what I do outside the workplace–even the “Girls Gone Wild” spring break deal–isn’t any of their business, I don’t care if it is on the World Wide Web for all to see. It’s done outside of company time, it doesn’t rise to the level of something like being a drug peddler or loan shark, so it’s none of their business anyway. Employers are really getting ridiculous about making such things their business which AREN’T any of their business. Who ISN’T going to go wild on a spring break, and what the hell does that have to do with how a person performs on a job? It’s high-time laws were enacted that forbid companies for hiring-firing based on such criteria (although I don’t know how you’d enforce it).

    Jen What a wonderful post, it makes so much sense. Especially starting at #2–exactly. Amen, amen, amen! This whole “my child’s dignity has been violated because you took a picture of them without asking THEM what THEY thought of it” and especially “I don’t post photos of my child because I want to respect their feelings about it” etc, oh puh-leaze. As I’ve made clear already, I think children who would complain about Aunt Flo taking a photo of them are being bratty and ought to be corrected (if not disciplined) for it, but besides that–what you mentioned in #3 makes so much sense, and I never thought of it that way, but you’re right. You’re training a child to complain later in life (or in the present) about their “rights” in ways that are petty and frivolous, and that something as normal & innocent as a routine picture is something to make a federal case out of, when it isn’t.

    Dolly I don’t mean to pick on you so much, others do the “MIL” and “AFAIK” and “IMHO” thing too, so you’re hardly the only one, and it’s probably not worth bickering about when we have other things going on which are more important (coming later–and yes, I admit, I’m the one that brought it up), I just think there’s a difference between typing DVD or USA or NASA–who could POSSIBLY complain about that, even I don’t–as opposed to MIL or SIL or DS (dead son, for all I know what it means).

    It’s about balance, as with a lot of things. Telling someone they’re committing the sin of “lazy typing” because they type NASA instead of National Aeronautics Space Administration is being silly. Even I would be one to type NASA & not care for someone telling me that doing so was “lazy typing.” I just submit that, at some point, it DOES become about lazy typing, and I think SIL or BIL or IMO or AFAIK are exactly that.

    I remember in the days of typewriters you’d been scolded for doing it, and if one can be reasonably expected to type out “in my opinion” on a typewriter instead of IMO, surely with all that computers, word-processing and spell-check etc (and yes, etc instead of et cetera is understandable, I think) have brought us, it’s kind of silly that all of a sudden we think typing “brother in law” or “in my opinion” instead of BIL or IMO is a ridiculous expectation to have, when I think we’ve gotten kind of lazy.

    It’s not as big of a deal as, say, the abortion debate or the CPS article which was just posted, though, which I will get to.

    All I am saying is that I agree with what many teachers are observing that people are saying “gr8” and “c u l8r” etc even in formal-writing, and acting all aghast and shocked that teachers would find that tacky. It’s not limited to just texting on flip-phones without a QWERTY keyboard (nor is it like people abbreviating in Morse Code because you have to hit that fingerpad thingie 80,000 times to type out 3 words), it’s starting to seep into more “formal” typing, and I understand teachers tend to mark off and take points off for it–and I say good for them, they ought to, and I say this realizing this blog isn’t school or a class, and I sure ain’t the teacher no matter how smart I might THINK I am, but I submit it’s not texting on a flip-phone either.

    I think at some point it goes beyond “efficiency” or “it’s easier, duh” and it gets sloppy and lazy. Otherwise, I might as well come in here and type “TODIWPWMSO” instead of “the other day I was playing with my son outside”–after all, it’s fewer letters, isn’t it?

    BUT, all of that said, as the new post about the parent having to deal with the evil empire that is Child Protective Services (or CPS) makes clear, it helps that I or whoever remember that the MAIN purpose of this blog regards that sort of thing, not other things so much. I’m not calling you on anything for digressing on other things, maybe I am calling myself on it, I don’t know. I’m not necessarily apologizing for stating my belief on lazy typing, but I am saying I’m not intent on smacking someone on the knuckles with a ruler (in a “virtual” way) everytime I see it here.

    Most of all, I am most certainly trying to remember the MAIN point of this blog, which is free-range, and threats to our right to practice it–and that the new CPS article highIights a very real threat to it which ought to be legally destroyed, frankly–and compared to that, the why’s & if’s regarding using MIL and AFAIK etc vs DVD or USA etc are kind of brought into perspective quite a bit.


  119. LRH June 1, 2011 at 11:34 pm #

    Oh, PS, Missy–I still think the whole “you have to call before you come over” thing, unless you’re the CEO of Exxon or a famous celebrity who has to have an unlisted number to keep from being hounded by everybody, is still highly pretentious and snotty. I call it as I see it, honey. It is what it is. (But again, the one person who mentioned, in a very casual way, about how they have to handle things that way because they’d otherwise be letting drunks & druggies into the premises–I can’t argue with that, I’d do whatever I have to in that case as well.)

    Regardless, as I said in my prior post, the new CPS article makes it clear what the REAL purpose of this blog is for, and I’m trying to make a concerted effort to stick to that sort of thing and not focus on these other things as much, and to TRY and make my points without being a jerk about it, but if I’m failing, I guess I’m failing. Let the journey proceed thus.


  120. Missy June 1, 2011 at 11:52 pm #

    I’m trying to make a concerted effort to stick to that sort of thing and not focus on these other things as much, and to TRY and make my points without being a jerk about it, but if I’m failing, I guess I’m failing.

    Which is actually just a long-winded way of saying “I’m a self-important asshole, and the rest of you need to just suck it up.”

    Got it. Good to know.

  121. LRH June 2, 2011 at 12:01 am #

    No Missy, it’s more like–people who throw a fit over protocol because you stopped in to say “hi”–oh the horror!–and didn’t make an appointment with them first like they’re the First Lady or something are being very pretentious and snotty. I don’t care who raised who that it’s courteous, they were WRONG. It’s not the same as raising a child to be a hooker or that sort of thing, but it’s WRONG.

    Mainly though, I’ve experienced the “other side”–people who DON’T throw a fit over it, and I find that much more civil and refreshing. I don’t visit people a lot anyway, but when I do, it’s nice to know that if I “pop in” I’m not scolded for failing to violate some protocol that probably exists in San Fran-wacko or somewhere like that.

    But the new Child Protective Services (CPS) article makes it clear there are bigger fish to fry, and I’m as guilty as anyone else, I imagine, on getting off-topic from what actually matters. Can we move on to what matters? It was fine at first, MAYBE, but at this point, it’s starting to get a bit ridiculous on BOTH of our ends of things.


  122. Donna June 2, 2011 at 12:11 am #

    “if your privacy settings are up to snuff, shouldn’t the employers be unable to see any of it anyway?”

    Many people, myself included, are friends with people at work who have access to their facebook pages.

    “Who ISN’T going to go wild on a spring break, and what the hell does that have to do with how a person performs on a job? ”

    It’s not the fact that you went wild on spring break as much as the fact that you don’t have enough sense not to post pictures of you going wild on facebook. I may have done crazy things on spring break but what happened on spring break stayed on spring break, not fodder for everyone I know. I’d question the discretion and decision making abilities of someone who didn’t know that the pictures of her doing a striptease on the bar in Cancun should probably remain in her private collection.

  123. Stephanie Lynn June 2, 2011 at 12:22 am #

    My daughters pics are on facebook, I don’t think I could actually get them all down if I wanted to because they are posted on multiple family members and friends pages and tracking every single picture down and demanding it’s removal would be more trouble than it’s worth. Plus I put her pictures up myself. I actually remember right after I gave birth to her, not five minutes after, people were texting me while I was being sewn up from a tear, saying they had seen her picture on facebook and she was beautiful. Apparently friends and family were taking pictures of her right away and putting them up on facebook from their phones. Gotta love technology!

  124. LRH June 2, 2011 at 12:23 am #

    Donna Okay, that’s what I figured. That is why I don’t friend co-workers personally. At my last job, if someone requested it, I denied it every-time. When I return to work, as I will look to do soon (long story), the same thing will certainly apply.

    Only “friends” are my Facebook friends, not co-workers, and in fact I don’t host any photos there anyway (this being one of the many reasons why), because I’m one that believes that what one does on the Internet–yes, even posting photos of your spring break excursions–isn’t any employer’s business. (But since the photos are elsewhere under an alias that only “real” friends know of, I do think that’s different.)


  125. mary June 2, 2011 at 1:58 am #

    LRH, I’m pretty sure you don’t ‘friend’ your coworkers personally because they can’t stand you.

    You’re absolutely right that you don’t have to get raped to know that rape is bad. And you don’t have to give birth to know that labor is painful. But until you actually experience it for yourself, with all the pain and emotions and exhaustion and bleeding that comes with it, YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT IT’S LIKE. So don’t sit here being a snob and acting like you personally know every emotion a person could suffer through. Even our husbands are smart enough not to claim to know what we’re experiencing. You should take a lesson from them.

    To say that we can’t play the ‘you’re not a woman’ card in the woman-problem area is a load. Until you grow a uterus and then have it ripped out of you, we will continue to claim that. If you’re so sure that there really isn’t a difference between the 2, then how about I kick you in the nutsack with my kung-fu force and then tell you that you need to suck it up and immediately run a marathon.

    If friends care enough to come visit in the hospital, then they should care enough to make sure you’re up to it. My family CALLS first. I rarely tell them no, but it gives me a chance to gear up for them. I’m not a fan of having my dad walk in unannounced while the nurse is doing a pelvic exam of my bleeding cervix. They also understand that right after birth, sleep is a rare and precious commodity. The last thing they want to do is walk in and inturrupt the only sleep I’ve had for 2 days. So you know what? THEY CALL FIRST. Because that’s what people who love you do. They care more about your needs than their wants.

    Now shut your pie hole.

  126. LRH June 2, 2011 at 2:11 am #

    Mary Bitterness doesn’t become you, sweetie. And “shut your pie hole” doesn’t wok on me either, my dear.


  127. mary June 2, 2011 at 2:14 am #

    Apparently, it does because this is the shortest response I’ve ever seen from you.

  128. LRH June 2, 2011 at 2:28 am #

    Mary My dear woman, must this continue? I’ve already made my point, and you keep making yours–you have a uterus, I don’t, so what right to I have to state my opinion? Can we not agree to disagree on this, however strong our opinions on the matter?

    I’m not “shutting my piehole,” I’m directing it towards other more important things now.

    Whoever is at fault for digressing–mine alone, yours alone, others with me, all of us in some sort of wacko way–regardless, there are real issues at play going on with a mother losing her child to CPS over a bunch of nonsense. That is where our primary focus should be. Things got off-track, I don’t think that I am the ONLY one to blame, but I am at least partially and I can own up to that.

    Enough with the bickering, we’re losing focus here, this is not “” or “” or “”or “” or whatever, and again I may be just as guilty of the sideshow antics as anyone else for going beyond just stating my opinion and getting a bit inflammatory with it in a tacky way. Let’s not do this anyone more okay?


  129. Lppmpetra June 3, 2011 at 6:53 am #

    Agree with the writer… Not to worry a lot

    Less worried father

  130. Victoria Byres June 3, 2011 at 10:22 am #

    This comment made me raise my eyebrows! A free range mum asserting that she doesn’t “look for babysitters on Craigslist.”
    That’s funny because if she did she might find me. I’m 35, kind, fun, creative and a very experienced primary teacher. I have a degree in Early Childhood Studies, a post graduate in teaching, my hobby is practicing and teaching yoga to adults and children, I’m bilingual and after 15 years of babysitting experience I am awesome at getting children to sleep!!! I’m police checked and first aid trained. I’m a great babysitter and I can be found on Craigslist! Is it really so bad to find a babysitter from the internet?

  131. Karin June 3, 2011 at 7:55 pm #

    Nothing wrong with posting a few snaps of your kid and posting them on Facebook. Even little naked ones. Just remember that you are playing to an audience of “friends” that probably aren’t really your friends. Don’t be a Facebook over-sharer. Think of Facebook like a cocktail party with acquaintances, friends and some family. When you post on FB – you are speaking to the entire “cocktail party”. You wouldn’t discuss certain things to just ANYONE in that room. I read the blogs STFU Parents, STFU Believers and STFU Conservatives (there are plenty others). These are people that truly over share every stupid thought in their head!

    The parents are the worst – it’s 1 thing to post a pic of your newborn son and be proud! It’s another to post pictures of the birth, afterbirth and then the baby’s’ first poop in the diaper (yes – there are parents that do that).

    Before posting a naked baby pic, or any pic for that matter pause and think. Look at your list of friends and ask yourself…would I show this picture to that person if we were at a dinner party?!?! If the answer is no then don’t post the picture or get rid of the “friend”

  132. Dolly June 3, 2011 at 10:41 pm #

    Karin: Good way to explain it. :) I actually only have 74 friends on facebook because I only put people on there I talk to in real life regularly or at least recently. So in those cases you can be a little more personal but what you said makes sense and is a good way for people to think about that.

  133. Krista June 4, 2011 at 11:35 pm #

    I put naked bottom pictures up on my blog, so that’s no big deal to me. Recently my sister took naked pics of my kids (3 and 1) and put them on her Facebook. Several of them were from the front.

    I asked her to take the frontal ones down. A bit of it was because they were from the front (it does bother me a bit, but because it’s on my sister’s account, not mine, I don’t know all of her friends), but mostly because she didn’t ask. People, just ask the parents before showing off naked pics of their kids, it’s the polite thing to do!

  134. beth June 5, 2011 at 4:41 am #

    I was at a botanical gardens today with my daughter. There’s a children’s garden with a little waterfall and paddling pool for the kids to play in. Many of the parents didn’t seem to have a problem with stripping their kids down naked in front of everyone (even the adult males…gasp!!) to get them changed. I even did it with my daughter. It was refreshing to see a group of adults not so paranoid about who might see their child’s naked butt.

  135. Dolly June 6, 2011 at 11:44 am #

    Beth: I also strip my kids down naked sometimes out in public. That is not the issue. If I stripped them and then someone started taking pics of them while I was getting their dry clothes back on-then I would have an issue. Because why are you taking pics of my kids naked?

  136. Mammasaurus September 6, 2011 at 4:01 pm #

    Totally agree with you ! Just written my own post on this over at

  137. Grace Blyth November 24, 2011 at 5:23 pm #

    i completely understand this, i took a very stunning photo of my niece who is 16 yrs old she is my niece through marriage and her mother completely dispises me, has done everything to ruin my life, i had the daughters permission to post it on my photography site, and now i have her mother threatning me with the rcmp because apparently the theme of my site is inappropriate for her age and that the photographs are revealing … when she is wearing a dress and is sitting on a couch cradling her legs and resting her chin on her knee to make herself look sad and lonely as that was the emotion she wanted protraiyed she has stated i am solicitating her daughter, in which i am not as i am not a professional photographer and am only taking photos for fun to share with my family and friends as i build my talents in hopes to one day be a proffessional photographer. it is a shame how low some poeple will go to try and create drama and dramatics in poeples lifes,

  138. ally January 28, 2012 at 10:54 am #

    You may take a different approach when your child is abused and 2) strangers got a hold of your childs pictures(fully clothed)and are using them on their websites. Both of which have happened to my family – since we have removed ourselves from facebook. Disturbing how scared we have to be of these freaks of natures!! BTW, police do nothing about is up to a parent to protect the family!

  139. Sohail January 29, 2012 at 9:34 pm #


  140. micheal February 2, 2012 at 12:02 am #

    this spell caster gave me a baby after searching for how to get my own baby for three years of marriage.
    thanks for introducing me to this spell caster i,m great full to you. you can meet him via: and have your own baby. he can help you to reunite your broken relationship and marriage back.

  141. Puddentane February 28, 2012 at 7:54 am #

    NO ADULT HAS THE RIGHT TO HUMILIATE THEIR CHILD BY TAKING PHOTOS OF THEIR NAKED BODIES. IT WASN’T RIGHT 100 YEARS AGO AND IT’S NOT RIGHT NOW. IT’S THEIR BODIES- NOT THE PARENTS, NOT THE GRANDPARENTS, ETC. They are going to hate you for it in the end. doesn’t matter if the perverts make something sexual out of anything. as the adult you are supposed to be looking out for them. Would you want them posting naked photos of you on the internet without your permission?? People for the love of God & everything that is holy stop this madness!!! Children have rights too!!!

  142. Tori February 28, 2012 at 9:52 am #

    I wouldn’t really be that bothered if naked pictures of me were on facebook. For the love of god you probably believe that he made those naked bodies so why all the fuss about covering them up!?

  143. Julie April 2, 2012 at 7:56 pm #

    Today, I’m here because I was doing a search after seeing some pictures of a friend on Facebook, she posted her 3 years old daughter topless. I’ve seen other posted their 3 years old daughter topless, but they look more like boys due to their short hair, but that friend, her daugther was all girly with long hair, so I saw differences, I was concerned.

    Most of the molestation/rape cases were done by people who know the victims. But most of these molestors/rapists never really seen naked pictures of the victims, mostly because they were seeing others. With so many unconcerned parents posting their children’s naked pictures out there, making it so easy for others to distribute it around.

    When you shared with your friends, your friends may share with their friends, the circle keep getting bigger/looser, & at the end, it ends up on these molestors/rapists who use it to fantasize, & finally may decide to target children. In the end, you may say that nothing happened with your sharing, but you can only say nothing happened to your children with your sharing only.

    I do not know how these children will feel when they’re older & being told that their naked photos were shared on the internet for all their friends to see, & the pictures are still on there (which could’ve been distributed long time ago). If these children asked the parents to remove their naked photos, I wonder if these parents would still think if they did the right thing.

    I took naked photos of my daugther, but I don’t share it with anyone, especially online. Only my spouse, myself & my daugther can see it. And when she’s older, we’ll let her decide if she wants to share it with anyone & with whom. It’s the same thing with my nieces who’ve children of her own, she only shared her own naked photos of a baby to her husband, she chose not to share it with others, but she has few which she is comfortable sharing with some close people. It’s her own naked photos of a baby, she gets to decide it.

  144. Julie April 2, 2012 at 8:08 pm #

    Yes, parents can strip their kids naked at waterfall/beach, the parents are there watching the kids. So, even if there’re bad adults around, they can’t do anything. They can’t keep staring either, knowing the parents are watching. But if there’re bad people, it does gives them the imagination in their fantasy. And of course, the child who got harmed is always not yours if you’re watching them closely. It only happened to those parents who really let their kids wander freely on their own with little surpervision.

  145. Julie April 2, 2012 at 8:15 pm #

    Here, parents are saying that other parents are promoting scare, but what that leaves you & others? Your kids & others’ kids get to play at waterfall/beach in their swimsuit, run in the field with their Tshirt & pants, etc, they still have fun. Kids just want to play, they don’t care about having their parents & strangers watching them playing in naked.

    On the other hand, other parents can also say that these parents aren’t actually parents but bad people disguising themselves as parents, that they purposely promote nakedness in children so that more parents would freely let them watch naked children.

    Just showing 2 sides of a coin.

  146. Julie April 2, 2012 at 8:52 pm #

    I only pity those people who were raped as a kid that went unreported. Yes, I knew these people from forums, quite many of them. These people weren’t running around naked as children, didn’t have their naked photos shown online, but they were target. Why? Because their parents let them roamed freely with little supervision, & when something like that happened to them, they were confused & didn’t tell, but it haunts them even as an adult. And you bet, these bad people really love seeing naked children, aren’t they? They would go online looking for naked children’s pictures, probably your children’s, but it’s not your children who got harmed. So, yes, it does make some sense if you couldn’t be bothered.

  147. kdob June 18, 2012 at 1:20 am #

    This entire post only defends the parent’s freedom. God forbid we remove an adult’s freedom to do as he or she wishes. Their ability to control that which is around them; god forbid they take the time to think out a logical sequence of thoughts to come to a deduced, logical conclusion.

    And you are right … it is only in the eye of the beholder. A foot is porn to some but not to others. A foot can turn someone on but not others. Many people happily masturbate to a naked foot. For other people this is not a turn on. So why don’t YOU put a naked picture of your foot on the internet.
    Same goes for the human body. For some, the naked human body is just art. They will not get excited about a nude body. Others will get aroused by a nude body. It is all in the eye of the beholder. So why don’t YOU post a naked picture of yourself onto the internet? For it is only in the eye of the beholder.

    Of course one reason you don’t post naked pictures of yourself is because you would like to keep your job and may be illegal in some places. For many, that is the only reason for not posting entirely nude pictures of themselves on the internet … the only reason for them to not drive their car in the nude; take a walk around the block nude it to keep a job and not get arrested.
    For others though, it is disturbing to think of some grubby old man or woman getting excited while looking at a picture of his or her completely exposed and nude body.
    So in this respect, you can group people into those who don’t mind their bodies looked upon regardless of the implications and those that do not like to be exposed.
    So, porn is not just in the eye of the beholder, but also how it affects the subject being looked upon.

    So in conclusion, parents posting nude pictures of their babies are, in effect, speaking for not only themselves, but also for their child … since their child cannot speak … since their child does not have the Freedom of expression yet. They are stating, for their child, that the child automatically fits into the former group of human beings; those who do not mind their body being looked upon, regardless of the context. The parents posting naked pictures of their children are stating that the parent as well as the child accept the fact that there are men and women who will masturbate over nude baby pictures; men and women who daydream about sticking their fingers up into the child’s nice wet vagina, or who daydream about massaging your child’s penis as they stare longingly at your child’s naked picture. And if the parent is fine by that then it is no skin off my back. I don’t have kids (and sure don’t plan to). But acting like it is infringement of ‘Freedom’ to have someone merely suggest that you might not want to post pictures of your nude child is a bit foolish and hypocritical. I don’t care how long you carried the child; the child’s body is not yours. So if you wish to take the argument to ‘freedom’, the parent would actually be infringing on the child’s rights because it is the same as posting nude pictures of someone who cannot yet speak for themselves. So if it is okay to post nude pictures of someone because you are their ‘caretaker’ and because they can’t speak for themselves and because, surely if they could talk … they wouldn’t mind, then I suppose it would be perfectly okay to take pictures of human beings who are mentally handicap. What? Do you find that gross? I guess it is all in the eye of the beholder.

    Again, if people want to post naked pictures of their babies, that is fine. It is not illegal; you won’t get fired from work for it. But the arguments for allowing posting of cute naked baby pictures are completely illogical. I believe the true reason for the illogical arguments come from the fact that a logical argument takes too much time and most do not want to put too much thought into every action … don’t want to have to analyze the possible consequences and outcome … so chalk everything up to … an infringement of freedom … when it is merely just an infringement on your ability to be a lazy non-thinking bum. Those people will more than likely be even too lazy to take the time to read this because, ‘there are too many words. It infringes on the freedom of my eyes’.

    So it is completely okay to post naked pictures of your child on the internet. It is completely okay to post pictures of a naked foot on the internet. And if you work for a company that doesn’t do through background checks there are no problems with posting nude pictures of yourself on the internet. And if you post … the odd people will come; the ones who daydream about having sex with you after seeing a nude picture of you; the ones who daydream about having sex with your foot after seeing your bare foot; the ones who daydream about having sex with your child; being able to touch your child in every unimaginable way possible after seeing your cute child naked. And if you are fine with this; then it is absolutely, positively … no skin off my back.


  1. Never Post a Baby Photo on Facebook? | Parenting News - May 31, 2011

    […] See the original post here: Never Post a Baby Photo on Facebook? […]

  2. Paranoid Parenting: Worrying Too Much About Perverts And Naked Pictures | Mommyish - June 10, 2011

    […] mom wrote back: Oh, you can’t see his front bits. I’m not worried. Perverts can make something sexual out of […]

  3. 23snaps Tries Its Hand At Being The Facebook For Families : hotNews Indian News | India Newspaper | India Latest News | News From India | India News Daily | Current India News - June 2, 2012

    […] encourages you to share, share, share your kids’ pics, videos and news, something which there’s still a bit of a stigma about on broader social networks like Facebook. And frankly, too much kid-pic […]

  4. 23snaps Tries Its Hand At Being The Facebook For Families - The Review Blog - June 2, 2012

    […] you to share, share, share your kids’ pics, videos and news, something which there’s still a bit of a stigma about on broader social networks like Facebook. And frankly, too much kid-pic […]

  5. 23snaps Tries Its Hand At Being The Facebook For Families | Technomania.. - June 2, 2012

    […] you to share, share, share your kids’ pics, videos and news, something which there’s still a bit of a stigma about on broader social networks like Facebook. And frankly, too much kid-pic […]

  6. 23snaps Tries Its Hand At Being The Facebook For Families | News Line Blog - June 3, 2012

    […] you to share, share, share your kids’ pics, videos and news, something which there’s still a bit of a stigma about on broader social networks like Facebook. And frankly, too much kid-pic […]

  7. 23snaps Tries Its Hand At Being The Facebook For Families | Tech Chatter - July 4, 2012

    […] encourages you to share, share, share your kids’ pics, videos and news, something which there’s still a bit of a stigma about on broader social networks like Facebook. And frankly, too much kid-pic […]

  8. 23snaps Tries Its Hand At Being The Facebook For Families « - August 5, 2012

    […] you to share, share, share your kids’ pics, videos and news, something which there’s still a bit of a stigma about on broader social networks like Facebook. And frankly, too much kid-pic […]