Investigation launched after mother posts photo of son with "drug pipe" on Facebook

Pace2008 · 25-06-2010 02:43PM

meditraitor wrote: »

Its my opinion, I might not be in the majority on this but it is my opinion and instead of stickin the boot in why dont you explain to me the error behind my thinking in an articulate and reasonable manner, tell me why it is wrong to think this woman is scum?

"Scum" is a very strong word and quite possibly unjustified as you have no idea as to her overall parenting abilities – one ill-judged photo does not a negligent mother make.

Do I think the picture was inappropriate? Maybe slightly, it’s not something I’d do myself but it’s all about context, and as mentioned by a previous poster, this isn’t something that’s going to embed itself in the baby’s psyche; it would be more serious and have a greater effect if it was an older child who might have a rudimentary idea about drugs. Do I think it was worthy of a newspaper piece? God no; it’s a non-story blown completely out of proportion, though judging by your reaction there’s definitely a market for this type of tripe.

meditraitor wrote: »

Ok I will engage if you will, do you have kids?

"When you have kids you'll understand." :rolleyes:

Thomas828 · 25-06-2010 02:43PM

Pooh! I go up Edgware Road and Camden Market and I see men sitting out in the open, smoking hookahs, for the whole world to see. And most of them are Moslems. But you can't expect the likes of the Daily Fail or those nerks in the US to tell the difference between a baby's play and grown-up culture.

meditraitor · 25-06-2010 02:44PM

ScumLord wrote: »

The Woman made a foolish mistake and we know nothing more than that. You've made up a stereotype for her being scum when you know absolutely nothing about her, you've never even seen her. She may well be scum for all we know but you can't honestly think you know a person so well from a picture that probably just happened out of the blue.

Come on man, I can only make judgments on what I see.... In my opinion anyone who purposefully (long enough to get a camera out and take a picture) lets their child play around with drug paraphinalia is scum.

You dont agree fair enough, but I shouldnt be abused for my opinion....From a fathers prospective I find it sickening.
I am not under the illusion that babies will not do crazy stuff (my little one has a thing for cigarette butts, picks them up of the street and puts them in her mouth) if left to their own devises but dont bloody post pictures of it for every cnut to see.

thebigbiffo · 25-06-2010 02:44PM

meditraitor wrote: »

So your only answer to why this picture is wrong is that people like me dont find it pallitable? This to me sounds like you are saying if people like me didnt find it knackery then it would be OK to post pictures of a baby simulating drug use?

You didnt really think this one out, parenting is about protecting children not using them to create funny pics

I have answered this before, read the thread

1: yes, i do find it 'pallitable' and i would only think it's knackery if the child was old enough to grasp what they were doing.
2: protecting this very young baby from what exactly? how is this baby under any harm (refer to point 1 please)
3: couldn't be bothered. you've assumed i'm a knacker because i'm defending the right to have my own sense of humour and find something funny if noone else is being hurt - nuff said

meditraitor · 25-06-2010 02:49PM

Pace2008 wrote: »

"Scum" is a very strong word and quite possibly unjustified as you have no idea as to her overall parenting abilities – one ill-judged photo does not a negligent mother make.

Do I think the picture was inappropriate? Maybe slightly, it’s not something I’d do myself but it’s all about context, and as mentioned by a previous poster, this isn’t something that’s going to embed itself in the baby’s psyche; it would be more serious and have a greater effect if it was an older child who might have a rudimentary idea about drugs. Do I think it was worthy of a newspaper piece? God no; it’s a non-story blown completely out of proportion, though judging by your reaction there’s definitely a market for this type of tripe.

What is the purpose of posting the picture, what type of person would find it funny?
I know there is a fair amount of pro dope heads so I would ask you do you think anyone of these guys would post this picture, I doubt it.... does it not strike you as a chav esk scum type scenario were chav parent thinks all the people on her social network would love to see her baby with a bong in its mouth?

A picture tells a thousand words,

mrblondecutsear · 25-06-2010 02:51PM

Seriously meditraitor your whole argument is seriously deluded. This photo will not effect this baby in any way shape or form. It doesn't make the mother scum at all. I don't see how you can think a photo like this is anything more than just a laugh.

meditraitor · 25-06-2010 02:54PM

thebigbiffo wrote: »

3: you've assumed i'm a knacker because i'm defending the right to have my own sense of humour and find something funny if noone else is being hurt - nuff said

Jasus christ man, paranoid or what. I get why your so passionate now.

For the record I dont assume anyone on this thread is a knacker, I might not agree with some of you but I havent seen anything posted that would make me think such a thing.

meditraitor · 25-06-2010 02:56PM

mrblondecutsear wrote: »

Seriously meditraitor your whole argument is seriously deluded. This photo will not effect this baby in any way shape or form. It doesn't make the mother scum at all. I don't see how you can think a photo like this is anything more than just a laugh.

See the difference between me and you is I find it reprehensable that a parent would think that posting a picture of their child in this manner is funny.

You think its funny, fair enough.

Hammer Archer · 25-06-2010 02:57PM

meditraitor wrote: »

You dont agree fair enough, but I shouldnt be abused for my opinion....

Preceded by:

meditraitor wrote: »

Get in line, I can only deal with one ignoramous post at a time.

:rolleyes:
I'd like to know your opinion on giving young children toy guns or seeing young children have mock gunfights. Again it's children simulating an illegal activity so it'll obviously destroy their innocence.

25-06-2010 02:58PM

Thomas828 wrote: »

Pooh! I go up Edgware Road and Camden Market and I see men sitting out in the open, smoking hookahs, for the whole world to see. And most of them are Moslems. But you can't expect the likes of the Daily Fail or those nerks in the US to tell the difference between a baby's play and grown-up culture.

Huh? You do know that hookahs are 100% legal? No different than people smoking cigarettes on the street. What do grown men smoking hookahs have to do with knackery people taking pics of their child pretending to inhale from a bong and posting it on Facebook?

thebigbiffo · 25-06-2010 03:02PM

meditraitor wrote: »

What is the purpose of posting the picture, what type of person would find it funny?
I know there is a fair amount of pro dope heads so I would ask you do you think anyone of these guys would post this picture, I doubt it.... does it not strike you as a chav esk scum type scenario were chav parent thinks all the people on her social network would love to see her baby with a bong in its mouth?

A picture tells a thousand words,

it sounds to me like you're done on the argument it wont harm the kid, you recognise that in that context then you can't argue against freedom of speech/expression (ie taking the photo in the first place) so now you've descended into assuming she's a chav and attacking chavs (tbh, you're probably right to an extent because a run of the mill person would never post it online)...my only opinion is you shouldn't be so damn judgemental. no ones hurt, in her chavvy way she finds it funny which is her right and this is just another filler story in a rag to pander to the likes of you...people who get wound up that there's actually scumbags in our midst. imagine

Pace2008 · 25-06-2010 03:03PM

meditraitor wrote: »

What is the purpose of posting the picture, what type of person would find it funny?

I found it kinda funny, though like I said I wouldn't do it.

I know there is a fair amount of pro dope heads so I would ask you do you think anyone of these guys would post this picture, I doubt it.... does it not strike you as a chav esk scum type scenario were chav parent thinks all the people on her social network would love to see her baby with a bong in its mouth?

Maybe, maybe not. It's all conjecture, really.

Friendly tip: Repeated use of the term "scum" takes away from the weight of your argument. On Boards, it's become an arbitrary, meaningless term that's used to describe everyone from mass-murdering child rapists to weekend weed smokers, right down to anyone who wears a tracksuit.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i · 25-06-2010 03:06PM

meditraitor wrote: »

You might think its funny for a mother to post pictures of her baby simulating drug use on a social network but I don't,

Who said I found it funny? Assume much?

she is scum in my eyes, you are obviously more tolerant.

No, I just don't judge people based on one picture which tells very very little.

Suggesting I've turned into a granny for posting my opinion on this is more indicative of your ignorance than my intolerence.

More assumptions. I suggest you take your own advice and read the thread maybe? Calling me ignorant because why?

meditraitor wrote: »

The picture shows a kid with its mouth around a bong simulating drug use, I find it offensive but hey.

So? It's quite possible that this bong has never been used and never will be used. It wasn't lit so what's the problem?

If yourself and the other guys find it funny then fair enough but I am not going to agree with the gang just so I dont come in for some criticism. Just speaking my mind brother!

I doubt anybody would accept you as a brother here, try stop making assumptions

meditraitor · 25-06-2010 03:09PM

thebigbiffo wrote: »

it sounds to me like you're done on the argument it wont harm the kid, you recognise that in that context then you can't argue against freedom of speech/expression (ie taking the photo in the first place) so now you've descended into assuming she's a chav and attacking chavs (tbh, you're probably right to an extent because a run of the mill person would never post it online)...my only opinion is you shouldn't be so damn judgemental. no ones hurt, in her chavvy way she finds it funny which is her right and this is just another filler story in a rag to pander to the likes of you...people who get wound up that there's actually scumbags in our midst. imagine

Your making more judgements on the thread than I am, firstly I never pander to that rag or any other for that matter. I have a mind of my own (may not use it as much as I should).
Your agreeing with me that she acted in a manner not befitting normal people yet you are still arguing against my point which is exactly that.

I dont get it,

Abrasax · 25-06-2010 03:10PM

meditraitor wrote: »

What is the purpose of posting the picture, what type of person would find it funny?
I know there is a fair amount of pro dope heads so I would ask you do you think anyone of these guys would post this picture, I doubt it.... does it not strike you as a chav esk scum type scenario were chav parent thinks all the people on her social network would love to see her baby with a bong in its mouth?

,

Psychologists refer to this as 'fundamental attribution error', ie. falsely judging somebody according to a particular context.
It'd be like judging people according to their posts on Boards.

AudreyHepburn · 25-06-2010 03:10PM

Personally, although I did laugh a little when I saw the photo it was a shocked laugh rather than an amused one.

If the child had randomlt picked up the bong ok (although it begs the question why there was drug paraphinalia lying around when there's a baby in the house) but I get the impression the photo was staged because lets face how likely is that a baby would be able to get hold of a bong on their own?

If the picture was posed I think it's wrong. Children should be playing with toys not drugs.

Not to mention I just don't like the idea of posting pics of children on social sites period. Who knows what kind of attention it could attract.

meditraitor · 25-06-2010 03:12PM

Abrasax wrote: »

Psychologists refer to this as 'fundamental attribution error', ie. falsely judging somebody according to a particular context.
It'd be like judging people according to their posts on Boards.

Now lads, can you see this. Dont judge poor meditraitor:(

Pace2008 · 25-06-2010 03:13PM

meditraitor wrote: »

Your making more judgements on the thread than I am, firstly I never pander to that rag or any other for that matter.

I'm sure you don't, but your initial posts in the thread suggest you at least take some influence from their writing style.

thebigbiffo · 25-06-2010 03:14PM

meditraitor wrote: »

Your making more judgements on the thread than I am, firstly I never pander to that rag or any other for that matter. I have a mind of my own (may not use it as much as I should).
Your agreeing with me that she acted in a manner not befitting normal people yet you are still arguing against my point which is exactly that.

I dont get it,

in short - it makes no f'uckin difference to me if some chav wants to put that photo on fb. i had a problem with your lack of objectivity on this matter. the first page of posts makes sense until people wade in with their moralising about 'protecting the children' and saying this is no way for a child to be treated...ie you.

it's that line of thinking i was arguing against

meditraitor · 25-06-2010 03:15PM

Abrasax wrote: »

Psychologists refer to this as 'fundamental attribution error', ie. falsely judging somebody according to a particular context.
It'd be like judging people according to their posts on Boards.

Now lads, read the post above.... Dont judge poor meditraitor to harshly

Greysen Numerous Quintet wrote:

doubt anybody would accept you as a brother here, try stop making assumptions

Lando Griffin · 25-06-2010 03:16PM

Its probably in some hick state where they will prosecute the baby.

meditraitor · 25-06-2010 03:17PM

thebigbiffo wrote: »

in short - it makes no f'uckin difference to me if some chav wants to put that photo on fb. i had a problem with your lack of objectivity on this matter. the first page of posts makes sense until people wade in with their moralising about 'protecting the children' and saying this is no way for a child to be treated...ie you.

it's that line of thinking i was arguing against

The manner of your posts reaks of objectivity :pac: for the sake of it rather functionaly.

meditraitor · 25-06-2010 03:20PM

Pace2008 wrote: »

I'm sure you don't, but your initial posts in the thread suggest you at least take some influence from their writing style.

I will say this with honesty and I hope you take my word for it, I didnt read the whole article just judged the photo.

I will refrian from using the word S***m again but I dont feel any different about the mother than I did 2 hours ago.

AudreyHepburn · 25-06-2010 03:23PM

Slightly OT guys but please stop picking on Meditraitor. I hate when people start insulting and beating on others just because they have different opinions.

He is as entitled to his opinions and arguments as you are. You don't have to agree with them but you can at least respect them and stop judging him. If he doesn't think this picture is appropriate that is his right.

Pace2008 · 25-06-2010 03:24PM

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Slightly OT guys but please stop picking on Meditraitor. I hate when people start insulting and beating on others just because they have different opinions.

He is as entitled to his opinions and arguments as you are. You don't have to agree with them but you can at least respect them and stop judging him. If he doesn't think this picture is appropriate that is his right.

Yes, teacher.

thebigbiffo · 25-06-2010 03:25PM

meditraitor wrote: »

The manner of your posts reaks of objectivity :pac: for the sake of it rather functionaly.

functionally? i function quite well by not getting wound up about some harmless photo

ScumLord · 25-06-2010 03:26PM

meditraitor wrote: »

You didnt really think this one out, parenting is about protecting children not using them to create funny pics

One of the few pleasures parents get from their kids and you want to take it away. :mad:

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

If the picture was posed I think it's wrong. Children should be playing with toys not drugs.

There are no drugs in the picture, for all we know this was taken while she was visiting someone else's house. It's just a funny picture that would probably have been forgotten about before the internet came along.

AudreyHepburn · 25-06-2010 03:30PM

ScumLord wrote: »

There are no drugs in the picture, for all we know this was taken while she was visiting someone else's house. It's just a funny picture that would probably have been forgotten about before the internet came along.

Regardless of where it was taken in my opinion it's in poor taste.

Drugs and Drug Paraphalia should not be anywhere near children.

meditraitor · 25-06-2010 03:31PM

ScumLord wrote: »

One of the few pleasures parents get from their kids and you want to take it away. :mad:

.

I missed the memo on this one, at least I know what chritmas presents to get the Brothers and sisters.

Bongs.ie....... I can just see the user manual.

Great addition to any household
Use for relaxation and fun baby pics

m5ex9oqjawdg2i · 25-06-2010 03:33PM

meditraitor wrote: »

Now lads, can you see this. Dont judge poor meditraitor:(

It's ok to say you disagree, but your manner in doing so was the bigger problem I think, that and calling people ignorant

Investigation launched after mother posts photo of son with "drug pipe" on Facebook

Comments