A TBM friend of mine posted this link on how to "porn-proof" your children.

I think the three advice can be good for children in a way, but I think parents are fighting a losing battle.

Children are naturally curious and the older they get the more drawn they will be to explore natural urges. The idea that you can "porn-proof" someone is completely naiive to me, and I feel bad for the kids whose parents will take these steps and yet they will still look at porn. The child will be viewed as a perverted failure.

Also the article arbitrarily assumes that anyone who looks at porn will be into a "Trap" and have dire consequences. It even links to a post about how to avoid "gateway porn"

Why do Mormons think that viewing porn will lead to one becoming a serial rapist or child molester? If your kid sees porn that wont mean they are a useless individual destined for an eternity of ineptitude. I think the fear of porn is more unhealthy to children with parents over their shoulder yelling "that's porn!" everytime their kid shows an interest in a leg or shoulder...

http://pornproofkids.com/2014/04/14/3-secrets-to-porn-immune-kids/

Porn is actually very healthy. Sometimes mormon Women (especially) just aren't in the mood cuz we're taught that dirty thoughts are wrong; and it's hard to forget that when your doing the dirty. "Oh, I need to keep my mind pure and holy while my Husband F's the Sh out of me. Hmmm, Temple thoughts."

Porn is sexually stimulating so it helps get ladies in the mood and men need to F ladies that F them back, dirty and naughty.

News flash: if your kids are anywhere near average, they will get turned on at some point in their lives, and this will almost certainly happen before marriage. Trying to prevent that is psychotic.

The fear of porn began many years ago when Ted Bundy said in court that porn created the monster that he became.

The problem with very strict religions like Mormonism, is that the more you say to a child, "Don't look!" the more curious they will become.

It seems to be human nature. They'd be better off going, "Oh, yeah, porn. It's no big deal."

It's like the difference between how North Americans view nudity and the Europeans do. They think Americans are so strange on how uptight they are about naked bodies.

I wonder at times if all of the talk at the LDS church about the porn addiction problems with the youth doesn't just peak there curiosity. I know for some it can be a problem "my ex husband for example, but his mother let him have porn in his room at the age of 10yrs.weird mother" anyway the more they harp on it I think for some youth it just puts the idea in there mind kinda planting a seed of curiousity Just a thought

It's unpopular to hold any concerns that porn is problematic on a number of levels, even apart from issues such as addiction.

Those who have reservations about porn for non-religious reasons and believe that, on the whole, it is detrimental rather than positive are usually lumped in with religious fanatics and prudes.

Additionally, on a board for those recovering from a repressive religious corporation that ruthlessly shames normal human sexuality and devastates lives as a result, anti-porn arguments probably don't stand much chance of being heard.

I hear ya. Pornography is a feminist issue, as is using the female body to sell things. I get that.

But the religious anti-porn issue isn't in support of feminism. It's another aspect of sexual control. This article teaching children to repress sexual urges, isn't about rejecting the female body as a marketing tool. It isn't designed to support women's equality. It's to teach children to abhor their humanity, their naked bodies, their human feelings and urges. They must know that the "natural man" is bad and wrong. That way, they will always be dependent upon their leaders to tell them what they must think and do, since they cannot believe in themselves.

In this context, rejecting anti-pornography, and saying yeah, I look at porn, I get turned on, and I F. Big deal. Is as freeing as considering for a moment, what if the BoM was made up? Suddenly all the pieces fall into place. You are a complete human. You need not fear yourself. You can enjoy what there is to enjoy, without becoming depraved. You will not go off the deep end and destroy yourself. Yes, there is abuse and addiction; but this instinct to rabid prohibition is totalitarian and fanatical, and must be rejected.

Lorenzo's Ho's got it right (and why shouldn't she!). I read the article, and it's all about turning off children's sexual impulses. To the point that it advises teaching children they've a thinking brain and a feeling brain. The thinking brain is like a superhero that must conquer the feeling brain! And then it advocates teaching children how to use distraction, that is, drive out, sexual imagery from their minds. Of course, we all need to know how to use self-control to refocus our thoughts when thoughts inappropriate to the context arise. It doesn't help to think about sex at work, thinking about work is more effective.

But, there's nothing new about any of the techniques suggested. It's simply systematic sexual repression. Repression, taken far enough, turns into dissociation. Repression is where obsession comes from. Dissociation becomes acting out. These techniques may seem all well and good when the goal is to teach a child pornographic imagery is bad! But where's the positive sex education? Another news flash: having sex, even the good, procreative, marriage-sanctioned kind, exposes one to pornographic imagery. What then? A trained-in, indoctrinated abhorrence of pornography turns into a serious sexual dysfunction, for both men and women.

How many men are in marriages in which their wives claim "not to like" sex, or go on sexual dry spells for months at a time. Is it any wonder? The stress of overcoming years of childhood conditioning makes abstinence the preferable, and habitual, choice.

Let's program our kids to be sexual anorexics! Why not? It's the moral thing to do. They can sort their adult sexuality later, after the damage has been done and they've got adult jobs and insurance that can pay for divorce and extensive therapy.

These extremist Christians get these bugs up their butts, then use their children as guinea pigs to test the law of unintended consequences. No wonder they hate science. Real science casts a pall over their bizarre enthusiasms.