Old subject - more horror (textbook censorship)

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-05-05 09:33pm

Einhander Sn0m4n wrote:BTW, Isn't not showing people of other colors/ethnicities than your own inherently racist?

I'd say it is. Especially when you retain the worst of the other groups but leave in your own best points.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-05-05 09:54pm

Nathan F wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:There's also this obscure little group called "The Christian Right", which virtually controls the federal government and which is responsible for virtually gutting the entire sex education campaign in the country ...
Correct me if I am wrong, but is that not a huge red herring that has nothign to do with the debate?

You brought up this "soccer mom" thing in the first place, hence me pointing out other groups responsible.

I just tried to post an article about textbook censorship. If you look at the people who sit on school councils and make these decisions, they're no more likely to be soccer moms than any other group. Soccer moms just get blamed for the decisions.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-05-05 09:58pm

Darth Wong wrote:I just tried to post an article about textbook censorship. If you look at the people who sit on school councils and make these decisions, they're no more likely to be soccer moms than any other group. Soccer moms just get blamed for the decisions.

They get blamed cecause they tend to be the group that does a lot of lobbying on the subject and tend to be the most unified group. They are the one that puts public pressure on the school boards.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-05-05 10:03pm

Stormbringer wrote:They get blamed cecause they tend to be the group that does a lot of lobbying on the subject and tend to be the most unified group. They are the one that puts public pressure on the school boards.

They are a convenient label we place on a social movement we don't like.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-05-05 10:07pm

Darth Wong wrote:They are a convenient label we place on a social movement we don't like.

So what does that have to do with anything? What's your point? I honestly don't follow.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-05-05 10:11pm

Stormbringer wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:They are a convenient label we place on a social movement we don't like.
So what does that have to do with anything? What's your point? I honestly don't follow.

My point is that everyone wants to point fingers instead of honestly looking at the underlying causes of this social phenomenon. Instead of asking why politicians have so much influence over the education process, for example, why do we simply try to slap a label on the problem and point a finger at a social group?

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-05-05 10:14pm

Darth Wong wrote:My point is that everyone wants to point fingers instead of honestly looking at the underlying causes of this social phenomenon. Instead of asking why politicians have so much influence over the education process, for example, why do we simply try to slap a label on the problem and point a finger at a social group?

Oh. I agree that it's more complex than just one group speaking out. I've just seen the soccer mom's pushing for a lot of this crap.

The problem that got them there are another issue entirely. I think that education needs to be put back in the hands of educators. There's a reason private and especially secular private schools do better in general.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2003-05-05 10:16pm

Darth Wong wrote:The real problem is the underlying mentality that children must be "protected" from facts and ideas which are deemed offensive, even if they happen to be true.

Not just children, though that is the worst. The idea children should be brainwashed and purposely misled. Surely they shouldn't be confronted with ideas they're not ready for, but we set up a vast amount of pretensions and inhibitions because of our "save the children" BS. It this precise denial of truth that results in Middle School kids having sex or promisciously spreading oral sex since when they finally overcome their inhibitions they have no real moral compass. We need education--guidance--maturity. The current attitudes are total bunk.

But it is everyone in general thinking that ideas foriegn to them, lifestyles foriegn to them, or other people's business will somehow cause undo societal harm and result in mass-horror or some bullshit.

Last I checked, people grew up in Somalia. And probably fewer pseudodepressive idiots than among the white middle-class of America.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2003-05-05 10:20pm

Nathan F wrote:BTW, since when has sex ed been gutted? I got sex ed in 6th grade and then later and more detailed in 9th, and I am in the middle of the Bible Belt in a very conservative rural community.

We're talking about real sex ed.

Not abstience education bullshit. We need kids to know honestly what's out there and give them facts and practical choices. We need them to understand the consequences and options whether they choose to have sex or not.

I can tell you I did not know any of the things I should have known before I lost my virginity from school--things kids need to know. Not everyone has the common sense and 26-year-old brother like me.

And trust me: from hearing things in the locker room and from other guys--they don't know anything they should.

Its a willful ignorance that has become a festering social and even a health program.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-05-05 10:29pm

Every minute they spend making these PC loads of shit is a minute that could be spent correcting real errors or making actual improvements. That alone pisses me off.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-05-05 10:44pm

Shinova wrote:
Nathan F wrote:BTW, since when has sex ed been gutted? I got sex ed in 6th grade and then later and more detailed in 9th, and I am in the middle of the Bible Belt in a very conservative rural community.
How old are you?

I remember having one session of sex ed in elementary school. That was it. There was zilch sex ed after that. And I live in California.

I am 19 and have been out of high school 1 year (well, end of my freshman year in college right now), so this wasn't all that long ago.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-05-05 10:47pm

Illuminatus Primus wrote:
Nathan F wrote:BTW, since when has sex ed been gutted? I got sex ed in 6th grade and then later and more detailed in 9th, and I am in the middle of the Bible Belt in a very conservative rural community.
We're talking about real sex ed.

Not abstience education bullshit. We need kids to know honestly what's out there and give them facts and practical choices. We need them to understand the consequences and options whether they choose to have sex or not.

I can tell you I did not know any of the things I should have known before I lost my virginity from school--things kids need to know. Not everyone has the common sense and 26-year-old brother like me.

And trust me: from hearing things in the locker room and from other guys--they don't know anything they should.

Its a willful ignorance that has become a festering social and even a health program.

I am talking about real sex ed too. Sure, abstienence was pushed and was given off as the only 100% effective birth control (of which if clinically is...), but, everything else was told as well.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-05-05 11:27pm

Nathan F wrote:I am talking about real sex ed too. Sure, abstienence was pushed and was given off as the only 100% effective birth control (of which if clinically is...), but, everything else was told as well.

How do you know about "everything else?" Have you performed independent sex-ed research to confirm that there's nothing out there about sex that you don't already know?

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2003-05-05 11:31pm

Darth Wong wrote:
Nathan F wrote:I am talking about real sex ed too. Sure, abstienence was pushed and was given off as the only 100% effective birth control (of which if clinically is...), but, everything else was told as well.
How do you know about "everything else?" Have you performed independent sex-ed research to confirm that there's nothing out there about sex that you don't already know?

Maybe he read everything from The Kama Sutra to how to break your back doing sex-aerobics.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-05-05 11:33pm

Darth Wong wrote:
Nathan F wrote:I am talking about real sex ed too. Sure, abstienence was pushed and was given off as the only 100% effective birth control (of which if clinically is...), but, everything else was told as well.
How do you know about "everything else?" Have you performed independent sex-ed research to confirm that there's nothing out there about sex that you don't already know?

I think I pretty much have the basics down, Mike...

What do you want them to do? Tell different positions and play 'Great Sex in 5 Nights' video tapes?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-05-05 11:38pm

Nathan F wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:
Nathan F wrote:I am talking about real sex ed too. Sure, abstienence was pushed and was given off as the only 100% effective birth control (of which if clinically is...), but, everything else was told as well.
How do you know about "everything else?" Have you performed independent sex-ed research to confirm that there's nothing out there about sex that you don't already know?
I think I pretty much have the basics down, Mike...

Well, for example, the dangers of underwater sex, the relative percentage effectiveness of birth control pills vs IUDs vs the sponge vs the rhythm method, the actual procedure for employing the rhythm method, the location of the G-spot and clitoris, the dangers of certain sex acts commonly shown in pornography, the pros and cons and precautions necessary for anal sex, etc... Did they cover all of that?

What do you want them to do? Tell different positions and play 'Great Sex in 5 Nights' video tapes?

I want them to prepare students for the real world, just as they're supposed to do for other endeavours in life.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-05-06 12:18am

Dangers of underwater sex? What, you accidentily spit the snorkel out while orgasming?

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2003-05-06 12:30am

RedImperator wrote:Dangers of underwater sex? What, you accidentily spit the snorkel out while orgasming?

Water getting into the vagina and causing all sorts of infections.

Lord Poe · Post by **Lord Poe** » 2003-05-06 12:41am

Darth Wong wrote:Well, for example, the dangers of underwater sex, the relative percentage effectiveness of birth control pills vs IUDs vs the sponge vs the rhythm method, the actual procedure for employing the rhythm method, the location of the G-spot and clitoris, the dangers of certain sex acts commonly shown in pornography, the pros and cons and precautions necessary for anal sex, etc... Did they cover all of that?

Actually, all that was covered when I went to high school. (I graduated in 1983) My health teacher (Ric Loya, now Mayor of Huntington Park, Ca.) was very blunt in class. He made sure the parental approval slips were explicit in what he was going to cover, and he wasn't going to couch anything in baby-language. He even covered gay sex, no winking or jokes at all.

This probably wouldn't fly these days, unfortunately.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-05-06 12:43am

Feck this shit. Feck it I say. Thank goodness for living in Australia.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-05-06 12:47am

Shinova wrote:
RedImperator wrote:Dangers of underwater sex? What, you accidentily spit the snorkel out while orgasming?
Water getting into the vagina and causing all sorts of infections.

Oh. D'oh! Shoulda thought of that. Too bad...bouyancy could make for some interesting positions.

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2003-05-06 01:16am

Vympel wrote:Feck this shit. Feck it I say. Thank goodness for living in Australia.

Been reading David Sedaris lately? "Stick your ceck in her pissy!" "Her rock hard nopples were glistening with josm."

On topic,

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-05-06 01:25am

Darth Wong wrote:as well as I can remember:

Darth Wong wrote:Well, for example, the dangers of underwater sex,
No, they didn't tell us that one. But underwater sex, wtf?
the relative percentage effectiveness of birth control pills vs IUDs vs the sponge vs the rhythm method,
Yes.
the actual procedure for employing the rhythm method,
Didn't really get into that one, seeing as how it is somewhat unreliable, or so I was told.
the location of the G-spot
No
and clitoris,
Yes, in anatomy
the dangers of certain sex acts commonly shown in pornography, the pros and cons and precautions necessary for anal sex

Not per se, but, we were told of an increased risk of STDs through that.

And on a side note, I think that it is a parents' responsibility to teach their children about this at the appropriate age, but, many times parents don't do this, hence the need for effective sex ed. But dangers of sex acts in porn and underwater sex? Did you learn that in school?

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-05-06 01:37am

Frank Hipper wrote:
Vympel wrote:Feck this shit. Feck it I say. Thank goodness for living in Australia.
Been reading David Sedaris lately? "Stick your ceck in her pissy!" "Her rock hard nopples were glistening with josm."

On topic,

Riiiiiiiiiiiggghhhht.

I am so glad I have no idea what you're on about

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-05-06 01:38am

Nathan F wrote:No, they didn't tell us that one. But underwater sex, wtf?

You've never tried? Come on, who hasn't wanted to try that?

the actual procedure for employing the rhythm method,
Didn't really get into that one, seeing as how it is somewhat unreliable, or so I was told.

If properly used, it is quite reliable. You were told just enough to scare you off, precisely as I expected. So much for your claim that they taught you everything you need to know about sex.

the location of the G-spot
No

I'd call that another strike against.

and clitoris,
Yes, in anatomy

Of course, they will always try to make it as clinical as possible. Do they tell you about its importance in female orgasm?

the dangers of certain sex acts commonly shown in pornography, the pros and cons and precautions necessary for anal sex
Not per se, but, we were told of an increased risk of STDs through that.

In other words, no information at all, just enough to scare you off. Precisely as I suspected from a sex-ed program which, to repeat the point, has been NEUTERED BY THE CHRISTIAN RIGHT.

And on a side note, I think that it is a parents' responsibility to teach their children about this at the appropriate age, but, many times parents don't do this, hence the need for effective sex ed. But dangers of sex acts in porn and underwater sex? Did you learn that in school?

No, because my school program was just as oppressed as yours by the Christian right and their "just teach them enough to scare them" policy.