[Gumption]

that the less of it they experience while they are young ... the better they will be able to deal with it when they run into it.

Are you sure about this? I don't think that holds true under most circumstances. I'll go even further and say if you are shielding children from something they definitely WILL "run into later" (like seeing bad words, or knowing there ARE bad people out there) you are doing more harm than good. I would've hope a good parent would know that, comprende?

[litany_of_lies]

that the less of it they experience while they are young ... the better they will be able to deal with it when they run into it.

How convenient that you ignore the risk of exposing kids to things before they are mature enough to properly handle and evaluate it. I erroneouly thought that this might be a meaningful consideration for you.

Since you question the validity of trying to minimize kids' exposure to certain things until they're old enough to handle it, let's take it to the extreme:

- Have one kid exposed to pornography and vulgarity 2-3 hours a day, 7 days a week from age 12-16. (By the way, there are laws against this for a reason.)

- Have another one study the Bible and read the great works of Western Civ 2-3 hours a day, 7 days a week.

Who's likely to turn out to be the better person?

Oh, and why wait til the kid's 12? Why not expose them to filth and porn from age 7-8? Are you going to pretend it doesn't matter? Look around. It does.

[litany_of_lies]

You're pretending that evil doesn't influence people who are not yet mature enough to handle it. That's ignorant as all get-out, and not a credible argument. Buh-bye.