DH says I’m censoring him when he talks about disturbing things in front of our teen (13)

[SpottyDottyD]

Example-I was watching the new Netflix series Adolescence and the subject came up about child killers (killers who are children) our son knew about the James Bulger case having read about it online. He began to describe what had been done to the child and DH corrected him saying no they actually did this (extremely graphic description) I told him I’m not comfortable talking about that as I find it very upsetting especially going into disturbing detail in front of DS. I’m not happy with him knowing all the gory details anyway. DH said I was censoring him, that this is the real world and I can’t hide from it. I told him I’m not hiding from it, I’m just not comfortable discussing disturbing details about a child’s murder with our son. Again I was censoring him and I won’t let him speak etc. I’ve had this issue before where I’ve been uncomfortable with certain topics that DH mentions in front of DS but again deeply disturbing stuff that I don’t believe is age appropriate (going back a few years)

Hes got a chip on his shoulder about me controlling him and censoring him. Yes bad things happen and DS should have an awareness of news events but in an age appropriate way.

AIBU?

What a load of bollocks. You do realise it was the OP watching a show about child killers with her 13 year old son - do you think she was also "inducting the child ...into an obsessive interest in torture porn"?
The son already knew lots about the case because clearly neither of his parents are paying any attention to what he looks at online. It's better to at least correct misinformation he has heard than let him spread lies about a child's murder.
As for the whole rape being encoded in her husband, like I said before what a load of bollocks.

We all live in the real world, but there's still no need for anyone to be going into graphic detail about children being abused, tortured and murdered.

I mean; the fact that your DS had read about it online and knew the graphic details entirely undermines your point. You have to control what he’s looking at, especially if he’s reading incorrect things… not many well-meaning sites are going to have graphic and incorrect descriptions.

It’s not something I’d want my 13 year old particularly knowing the intricate details of, but you seem to allow yours fairly free reign of the internet, and he will be coming across far, far worse.

Separately your husband sounds like a knob, but I can see his point that you’re unhappy him discussing what happened as you think your DS is too young, but have accepted that DS will look it up himself… if he is going to be exposed to that stuff, he needs to be able to talk about it to process it. DH was not introducing the topic to him.

Your 13 year old knows something so graphic that you didn’t want him talking about it, so you shut him down. He should have absolutely no access to anything that unsuitable. If you facilitate access to it; you have to be prepared to talk about it.

Just listen to some 13 year olds talk. They can be graphic in all kinds of dreadful ways - they pick stuff up online and from reading material and they often misunderstand and misinterpret. Look at porn, for example - they shouldn't see it but they do and then they talk about it among themselves and it becomes totally warped because they are talking into an echo chamber.

I think speaking to them factually about things actually can help.

Just to say I think you are right to be concerned and I think your husband is unreasonable and it’s pretty poor behaviour on his part to say you are censoring or controlling him if you disagree with him.

Ash copilot or similar AI or even just google the link between exposure to violence and outcomes and you will find plenty of research on it finding extremely strong correlations between violent exposure and poor behavioural outcomes, especially in males.

Males exposed to very violent content (ie games or movies) when aged 3.5-4.5 showed a higher rate of antisocial personality and lower empathy.

Males exposed to violent content as teens showed 2 different negative patterns - higher rates of craving violent stimuli and desensitisation, or conversely a fear of the world and poor sleep. Girls didn’t show as much of the same pattern.

Once boys get to 20s it’s not as harmful as they are able to critically judge content and not have it embed so deeply in their psyche.

So it does matter in the same way that boys watching Andrew Tate or how to build bombs does matter. Plenty won’t be radicalised but these are formative years and some will be but even just some will be intrinsically shaped by this content even to a small degree.

Your son is watching this or reading it anyway so it’s a chance to discuss it and definitely a chance to talk about how poor childhoods and certain personality types lead to the creation of psychopaths and narcissists. But I don’t agree it’s an opportunity to discuss in detail the violence. You are right to feel this is inappropriate and I think your husband is sadly clearly one of those men exposed to ultra violence early on who now craves it and finds this normal.

If you find him the studies and show him the evidence it is actually factually proven harmful in boys would he listen? If no then you have a DH problem. I would personally stand my ground as sometimes when you are right - which you are - you do have to take a stand. I would also actively get your son involved in the psychology of these sorts of crimes but also try find good male role models to expose him to. Lots of true life crime stuff involves really tenacious male and female police or even parents and to me that’s a better way to learn about true crime and the world rather than the details of the torture which is let’s face it gratuitous.

Ugh, I’m still annoyed by a colleague sending an email with graphic details of this terrible murder (she was sharing a petition) and it was 25 years ago. I didn’t want to know then, I can’t forget it now and I was a fully grown adult.

Anyway, agree with the many comments about your husband prioritising his ego over being a caring parent. Citing freedom of speech is the defence of the belligerent

My issue is then how would I control what my 13/nearly 14 year old views online? He’s got an iPhone, a laptop, X Box (which connects to YouTube and at his age he does deserve privacy in his bedroom. He’s on TikTok like all his friends are, chats to friends in his room, online games etc. The internet is so vast and all his friends have access to it that I cant see how parents would control what they view as they will just view it with friends instead. Luckily he seems to mostly read historical articles, read about other countries, look at maps and learn about wars, battles etc. His knowledge about history and geography is impressive but obviously there’s a chance he’s stumbling on other stuff especially on TikTok. DH and I have checked his search history just to be safe and it’s all national geographic and history websites. But what he sees on TikTok might be different.

How to police teens though?

This reminds me of friends on facebook sharing graphic images which then came up on my feed. Really awful stuff that I still can’t get out of my head. Yes you can’t hide from the awful stuff that happens in the world but I do think it has a negative effect on one’s mental health to view such images.

Personally I think the real issue is not your DS's age (although I agree with you that at 13 I would still be keen to protect him from some of the most gruesome aspects of what humans are capable of doing to one another).

To me, the issue is that it's just an incredibly distressing and unnecessary subject to be discussing full stop. The fact that they both actively want to discuss the precise details of how a toddler was tortured is deeply unpleasant.

Your DH was very inappropriate, I don’t think it’s an appropriate thing to discuss with anyone really let alone a child.

I’d also be a bit concerned about what your son is searching for online, perhaps he came across it by accident but it happened a long time ago now so it’s not something that pops up online regularly. Maybe this is a good opportunity to check search history or have a chat with your son, he’s probably just over curious but I’d personally want to shut it down.

This is really concerning OP.

It is likely your husband has been influencing your son with his unhealthy interest in violence.

'@pikkumyy77
I think your dh is—and always has—been abusing your child by exposing him to graphic images and discussions of violence and torture. Some people get off on that.'

I completely agree with the above.

There is a big difference between being aware of the murders and relishing retelling every sordid and brutal details.

I would not want to live with a man like that OP and I think he is damaging your kids.

YANBU. This is really horrible, letting a 3 year old see violence like this. Actually a form of child abuse.
In terms of now with him at 13, I think it's very odd and damaging behaviour to normalise such horrific things by talking about them almost casually it sounds like. I wouldn't be able to read the details of the James Bulger case and then discuss them with someone without being very distressed and it doesn't sound like either your DH or DS are having that appropriate reaction. Does your DS now play the same sort of ultra violent games that your DH does? Sounds like they're both desensitised to extreme violence which would seriously worry me. Your DH is absolutely in the wrong.

Did you actually speak to your kid about why you thought it was inappropriate to discuss things in that level of detail, or did you just freak out and shut his dad down in front of him?

Your DS can find out exactly what happened in that case by looking at Wikipedia or with a 5 second Google search. Better to have it discussed with adults out in the open.

He's 13 and his dad is right, you don't get to police what he says to his son.

Wow! That’s a very extreme reaction from you.

The man was correcting his teenage son on factual points relating to a case that child had already been reading about. Children of this age will be learning about the holocaust, and watching the news about Gaza, and discovering that humans are able and can do the most horrific things to other humans. It’s important to know this. It doesn’t glorify it. Quite the opposite, discussions about these awful acts teaches children right from wrong.

That is what he “said” he was doing but not what he was doing—there is a bug difference between joining with your child in an age appropriate way as they learn the horrors of the world and desensitizing them and treating tragedies like the Holocaust or the Nakba or torture/murders as a place to show off fake realism or dicker over details. Its just part of the “well ackshually” school of male indifference to the underlying moral meaning —the horrors of the world and a child’s exposure to them are not like a pub quiz places for dh to show off his skill at memorizing shit.

You did ‘censor’ him but only because he isn’t prepared to responsibly censor himself. Surely as a grown adult he can understand that we all have to censor our opinions or what comes out of our mouth from time to time, depending on the situation or the audience!

@ouipamplemousse "I can’t imagine why anybody other than the jury would need to know these disturbing details. And still less why they would want to discuss them as point of fact with their teenage son."

I agree. I grew up in the 60's when very few things were censored from children. There wasn't even a watershed on TV and in many ways children were treated as small adults. My parents in particular were very open and pro discussion. But whilst my dad discussed the Myra Hindley/Ian Brady case with me, he would not have reeled off every minute detail of horrific torture. I don't think the majority of parents would, no matter how enlightened or keen on transparency they were.

You lost me at it’s difficult to control what a 13 year old reads online.

You've given your 13yo son unfettered access to the internet, and you're here complaining about your DH thinking you're censoring him?

I think you need to go back to the drawing board. And hope and pray that you have the full picture about what your son is doing and has been exposed to. Your sound EXTREMELY naive (and fragile).

Perhaps I should sue my parents for exposing me to the comic opera Candide when I was eight, in 1988. The aftermath of war was vividly described, in a comically silly voice, and one of the milder things was "young girls with their bellies torn out, having satisfied the needs of several war heroes..." They didn't explain what that meant, though.

When I show part of a documentary on the Moors murders to Sixth Form
students of 17, I always explain that there will be distressing details and that they can leave if they feel uncomfortable. They are much older and nearly adults. A 13 year old at home also can’t leave if they feel uneasy.

Ban tiktok for a start or he can only access it downstairs. Honestly the way you've got things set up it's anyone's guess what he will have come across. He's thirteen - you need to be a parent, not just do what he wants. Privacy in his bedroom - yes, but that doesn't extend to unrestricted tech. Look up some information on online safety for teens (NSPCC or similar) because it sounds like you're being very laissez faire.

Well, you wouldn't get very far suing them, but what a shit thing for them to do.

Its quite normal and common for people to get a kick out of all the gory details and true crime stories.

I’m sorry, what?!!!!