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?

@Insanityisnotastrategy My remark about suing my parents was a joke. It’s a bit of a laugh in our family about how “traumatised” my brother and I were by it, and how it seemed far worse than lots of stuff officially considered inappropriate for children. See also Romeo and Juliet: very bloody, yet teenagers are made to read it. Should it be banned, in case they kill themselves over lots love? Incidentally, on my parents’ shelves was a book “every mother’s nightmare - the killing of James Bulger”. I never read it, so I don’t know if it went into all the details, but I read those in the paper some years later: “Here is a reminder of what they did to James”.

When I was eight (before James Bulger was killed), I read Roald Dahl’s short story “The Swan”, which has a lot of parallels to that event: two thuggish boys terrorise a younger boy with a gun, and tie him to a railway line (which he survives), and do other nasty things. Lots of parents tried to get that book banned at the time. I read it at primary school, of all places!

It's the level of detail. There is usually minimal detail in fairy tales and bible stories. Its possible to know enough about the James Bulger case without going into all the details.

We tell kids that Herod killed all the baby boys but don't discuss the exact methods. We tell the story of Noah's ark without dwelling on baby elephants drowning in their hundreds. Etc.

I'd be concerned about your DH. He's normalising extremely unpleasant behaviour by the sound of it. It's one thing to know that such things happen; its quite another to discuss the acts in gory detail. Especially when he knows you dislike it; this is disrespectful to you.

Policing teens is hard I agree. My eldest is 12 and just like yours as all sorts of consoles but he has a time limit and all of it has his own personal profile which means because he’s a minor they can’t have access to adult websites. He’s not allowed on our phones unless he’s next to us and no social media.
Edited to say: I agree with you - you shouldn’t lie to them but giving them specific details at 13 is not a good idea.

Ironic as one of the issues raised in the trial was one of the murderers being exposed to inappropriate horror content such as "Child's Play" videos at a young age that contributed to him bring desensitised to violence (as well as a catalogue of domestic issues and abuse).

Understanding the headlines of what happened is one thing, but graphic details are unnecessary.

Exposing children (including 13 year olds) to inappropriate, unnecessary, distressing content can be emotional abuse.

His access to the internet and social media apps needs managing too. 13 year olds do not need Tik Tok and their algorithms are particularly poor at honing in on specific content after being exposed to it.

You can limit your kid’s phone use all you like, restrict internet access, ban social media etc etc
All it takes is for them to have ONE friend whose parents are more lax than this to text them a horrific video of something and you’re too late.
I don’t know what the answer is, but I do hate the smart phone childhoods

lol because his views are so controversial, interesting and important that they require censorship, what a bellend

I'm not too clear what point you're making. You referred to disembowelling and rape in your previous post so yes definitely far worse than Romeo and Juliet, unless there is some graphic detail in R&J I've forgotten about!

I remember reading The Swan at primary age too; it was disturbing but what stayed with me was the incredible courage of the boy being victimised, and it was really about that most of all - that it's possible to find the capacity to be 'unconquerable' in the face of evil and suffering. Quite a message for children who may feel powerless or victimised.

It shows the difference between literature that explores these issues and helps children develop insight, strength and empathy, as opposed to being exposed to just senseless violence IMO.

I agree this is a safeguarding issue. Letting a 3 year old see video games with scenes of gore and torture? Wtf is wrong with him?

Crass stupidity invites censorship. Ain’t nobody censoring sensitive intelligence.

Because OP is the one making sensible decisions. The father clearly doesn’t understand (or care?) about what’s appropriate and what’s harmful. Both have responsibility for their child, but only one is behaving responsibly.

I'm going against the grain but honestly, I think correcting your son in a straightforward, truthful way was appropriate.

As the programme very clearly depicts, 13 year olds are far more clued up now than their parents usually realise.

Being able to discuss anything/ask questions of your parents knowing you’ll receive honest answers is healthy, I think.