>>>Ok, I think were done. You have no children to base on personal experience on, which is evident in your response wondering why the age would be relevant. I actually was trying to have a decent exchange with you regarding this; an obvious mistake on my part. My apologies.
>>>
>>>>What makes you think I have any children? And why would that be relevant?
>>
>>I fail to see how an ad-hominen attack on me has any relevance to the issue of trust between Steve and his son. A "decent exchange" addresses the issues.
>>
>>My experience is in giving "the talk" to children of a number of my clients, at my clients' request. These are technically astute young people, typically between 12 and 15. They "get it".
>>
>>Bear in mind that by 16, one can drive a car, take a full time job and pay taxes. By 17 or 18 one can join the armed forces and potentially shoot people. By 18 one can vote and have a say in who runs the country.
>>
>>So, I think it's fair to say a 17 year old should be mature enough to surf responsibly, as long as he's been made aware of the potential consequences of not doing so.
>
>Not an attack, an observation. I disagree with you, and believe that knowing that you lack the experiences of being a parent, I could never take your views on this very seriously.

Being taken seriously requires that one address the issue, and the points being made, rather than one's perception of the background of other participants in the discussion.