Oh, I just love when someone tries to go all European on us. Oh, those uptight, Puritanical Americans......uh-huh. The Puritans emigrated from Europe....but I digress...
BBJ, I think you have a healthy attitude toward sex, using toys, body image, etc. You are not a prude. Me either. I enjoy porn every now and then too.
But that is a hell of a lot different than leaving crotch shots on the family camera. It is a hell of a lot different than the kids finding magazines in the nightstand. It is a hell of a lot different than a kid's normal curiosity. It is a hell of a lot different than just about everything that dan thinks is ok.
Ok, so let's review:
IC, and some here, say don't mention anything to dan. Why?
It might cause an unpleasant confrontation? So what? Why is it wrong to try to protect your children before the fact rather than after?
It might embarrass him? Boo-f*cking-hoo! So what? He SHOULD be embarrassed.
Kids are naturally curious? Ok, does that mean that they won't be harmed by curiosity?
It's not illegal? Um, many things that are inappropriate for kids to witness are not illegal.
So the idea that the IC has is ridiculous. Sure, kids find their parents' LEGAL magazines, porn videos, sex toys, pictures, etc. At least the pictures in the magazines are not of their very own, wonderful role-modeling, fine upstanding (insert joke here) dad's crotch.
Since when is finding a Larry Flint magazine HIDDEN in the nightstand equal to finding dad's erection AT THE KIDS' BASEBALL GAME in the camera?
And when the kids find dad's lovely self-portraits, and chances are excellent that they will, given dan's carelessness and the unwillingness to address this uncomfortable issue, would the discussion/explanation following their discovery be exactly the same as the one that would take place following the discovery of a Hustler?
I still think your IC has her head up her @ss since she's incapable of distinguishing between Larry Flint and dad.
