Children's online privacy: 4+ years of breeder shit-flinging and nothing's changed

It wasn't all that long ago that Dooce, Julie Myserson and others caused discussion about oversharing their lives, leading to others writing about how they never share stuff online. Now it appears the debate is being re-ignited.

You can practically see the smug dripping off of this article by someone who has not only declined to share baby pictures online, but who has created a 'digital identity vault', presumably under the assumption that Facebook and Twitter will still be relevant in 18 years or whenever they decide to give her access to the accounts. She claims that it's about providing a "digital adulthood that’s free of bias and presupposition.” Yet, like the breeder who talks about her young child's future children, she's already making the assumption that her daughter will want an online identity uniquely linked to her name when she's older. No wonder the whole article reeks of breeder superiority - and of course by using her own name to talk about her daughter (although not by name), she's already violated her own policy to a certain extent.

Of course a breeder can't try to claim the high road without another one objecting, so it was only a matter of days before a duh made the claim that "Invading our children's privacy is part of what being in a community is all about." In other words, he justifies posting a lot of shit about his kids by arguing that in a world without privacy, kids should just be raised in public so that they "know what they're up against." Yeah, that's exactly how you should deal with complicated ethical and social questions: by effectively saying "fuck it."

And going even further into insanity, we recently had this thread where someone whined that those who don't want to look at baby pictures on Facebook are bullies.

Finally one person said what we're thinking:

Quote
(emphasis mine)
And that’s just the most obvious objection. It’s also grating for parents to be so hypersavvy about social media branding that they can’t let their kids sort out their online lives for themselves—later, when they have minds of their own and might choose not to ever have a real-name account on Twitter. And then there’s the way in which tweeting for your baby stands for the larger scourge of parental narcissism: of parents using their children as performance art. You pretend it’s about them, but it’s really all about you and your own cleverness.

Enough of plastering your ego all over the internet in the form of pictures of your spawn. It's obvious you don't care about your children's privacy or safety, let alone other people's lack of interest in your kids. STFU, breeders.