Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[wierd]

My school in typical US flyoverland (nestled deep in the bible belt, no less), featured all the basic mainstays.

Sexual anatomy
STDs
Contraception
Pregnancy education
Abortion education

I disliked that they did not more strongly address the risks of getting an abortion, as I feel that there is a dangerous attitude that they are 100% safe, and are OK to do out of pure convenience (and thus help to enable a sexually hedonistic lifestyle).  In reality, they pose significant, and cumulative risks to the woman who gets them. My class DID touch on that briefly, but focused more on what an abortion involves, making it more of a snuff horror film featuring unborn fetuses than a vehicle for proper health education.

IMO, the message should have been more strongly geared toward something like "Sex is normal, but has many natural consequences that you probably wont find nearly as pleasurable. There are countermeasures that are available, but they too are not without risk. No form of contraception is 100% perfect. For your own safety, you should probably not be out having sex until you are mentally, physically, socially, and financially ready to deal with these consequences. The countermeasures available are not there to allow you to freely engage in sexual encounters without proper consideration of those consequences."  (with a bit extra emphasis on the last sentence. Nothing irks me off quite like people misusing dangerous shit because they think it's "perfectly safe!" when it really is anything but.)

[Descan]

People against it here are saying stuff like "They'll teach kids how to masturbate/do anal/that it's better to be gay!"

You know, the usual crap people say about this stuff.

Yeah that has NEVER happened before... EVER!

Oh wait it has.

Sex Edd has had a very odd history.

I always have trouble understand exactly what you're trying to say.

Are you saying that there HAS been sex ed that showed people how to masturbate, perform anal, and/or promoted non-hetero orientations as somehow better? Or are you just agreeing with me that people always pull these things out when sex education reform comes around? It's hard to tell.

If the former, I'd prefer you to back that statement up, because I'd never heard of that and it sounds like something that would have some sort of sourcing.

[Neonivek]

Sources of sex ed gone wrong? Well, goodness... that might be a little difficult.

As for the latter naw.

[Loud Whispers]

I can't watch the video because I don't have my headphones right now, but I'm guessing it's not as bad as people are making it out to be. What's wrong with giving kids sex ed earlier in life? Human beings reach sexual maturity way earlier than highschool. According to the comments, there's even some trans-positivity in there, which I'm all for more of.
Speaking of which, I need to stop reading the comments on this video. I can usually put up with a lot of transphobia, but that level just makes me sad and angry enough to cry.

Lel, you really need the audio. You know them strawmans about sex ed? The vid fulfills it to a T. Morality aside the whole thing is just bats off the wall nuts, trying to teach babies how to masturbate is something I'd not exactly class as normal. And the presentation and symbolism... Wot.

-snip-

Mine spent more time talking about homosexuality than anything else. They'd also do these things where they'd run videos showing 30-something actors trying to play the roles of teenagers, and inevitably the video would devolve down to 'spot the gay.' The trick was, they'd always make the flamingo straight and the bully gay for some reason, as if to subvert expectation - but they did it so often as to become cliche.
It wasn't really educational for that matter either, thinking back on it.

[Frumple]

Are you saying that there HAS been sex ed that showed people how to masturbate, perform anal, and/or promoted non-hetero orientations as somehow better?

I'd personally be kinda' confused why the first two would be points against, myself. Safe practice for both of those would fall pretty comfortably under the umbrella of the subject in question, wouldn't it?

[Neonivek]

trying to teach babies how to masturbate is something I'd not exactly class as normal

Ohh the things I could say and that if I didn't give a source no one would believe me...

But lets just say you are not far off from something that actually used to be a practice... >_<

[wierd]

...... Yes descan, there HAS.  Sadly.  Let me find some sources.

Not the best source, but still... A little eye opening I think.

Most hits I get on google are mostly conservative groups going off the deep end. I admit that this particular news agency is not well known for its... quality temperance and objectivity... (ahem)-- but still, it DID make a token effort at undercover investigation of actual advice given to minors about sexual issues, and the conclusion they made was that these kids WERE being instructed to engage in dangerous sexual practices.

[Loud Whispers]

trying to teach babies how to masturbate is something I'd not exactly class as normal

Ohh the things I could say and that if I didn't give a source no one would believe me...
But lets just say you are not far off from something that actually used to be a practice... >_<

Defies belief; I wouldn't believe it too if there weren't some dodginess abound in social sciences already known to me... Words fail to describe what only ellipses can detail...

[Lord Shonus]

My school in typical US flyoverland (nestled deep in the bible belt, no less), featured all the basic mainstays.

Sexual anatomy
STDs
Contraception
Pregnancy education
Abortion education

I disliked that they did not more strongly address the risks of getting an abortion, as I feel that there is a dangerous attitude that they are 100% safe, and are OK to do out of pure convenience (and thus help to enable a sexually hedonistic lifestyle).  In reality, they pose significant, and cumulative risks to the woman who gets them. My class DID touch on that briefly, but focused more on what an abortion involves, making it more of a snuff horror film featuring unborn fetuses than a vehicle for proper health education.

IMO, the message should have been more strongly geared toward something like "Sex is normal, but has many natural consequences that you probably wont find nearly as pleasurable. There are countermeasures that are available, but they too are not without risk. No form of contraception is 100% perfect. For your own safety, you should probably not be out having sex until you are mentally, physically, socially, and financially ready to deal with these consequences. The countermeasures available are not there to allow you to freely engage in sexual encounters without proper consideration of those consequences."  (with a bit extra emphasis on the last sentence. Nothing irks me off quite like people misusing dangerous shit because they think it's "perfectly safe!" when it really is anything but.)

The biggest flaw in sex education classes that I've experienced is that they put too much emphasis on the physical dangers of sexuality (which simply aren't real to most people under 25), and not enough on the potential social hazards and complications (which are very real to that age bracket.)

[Bauglir]

-snip-

I, too, wish that Sex Ed classes weren't used as vehicles for social agendas (as, for example, with the snuff film approach). A straightforward assessment of the risks involved with everything, including the difference between perfect use and actual use statistics (and demonstrations of perfect use), would be good. It'd also be nice to clear up those lingering misconceptions (Hah!) about how pregnancy actually works, including the health risks (for instance, riskier than legal abortion), the frequency of miscarriages and spontaneous abortions (and failure of an embryo to implant), and for that matter how various contraceptives actually work (for example, emergency contraception doesn't induce abortion or even stop implantation; it prevents fertilization). Basically, yes, a "Here's the information, do with it what you will" sort of approach would be good.

[Neonivek]

Yes but you see that would require treating children like they were people...

And we ALL know kids aren't people right? They are some sort of animal that we herd around until they earn the right to become a person... at the age of never

[Loud Whispers]

The biggest flaw in sex education classes that I've experienced is that they put too much emphasis on the physical dangers of sexuality (which simply aren't real to most people under 25), and not enough on the potential social hazards and complications (which are very real to that age bracket.)

Quite so. Taking nude photos and sending them to love interests is something that should be talked about, as it runs afoul of child pornography laws for adolescents and law aside, I've seen one unfortunate nude photo ruin some guy in my old school several schools over. Forever attached to his name was a rather unflattering epithet.

[BlitzDungeoneer]

The biggest flaw in sex education classes that I've experienced is that they put too much emphasis on the physical dangers of sexuality (which simply aren't real to most people under 25), and not enough on the potential social hazards and complications (which are very real to that age bracket.)

Quite so. Taking nude photos and sending them to love interests is something that should be talked about, as it runs afoul of child pornography laws for adolescents and law aside, I've seen one unfortunate nude photo ruin some guy in my old school several schools over. Forever attached to his name was a rather unflattering epithet.

What, they don't teach about that sort of stuff over there? Seriously?

[Neonivek]

The biggest flaw in sex education classes that I've experienced is that they put too much emphasis on the physical dangers of sexuality (which simply aren't real to most people under 25), and not enough on the potential social hazards and complications (which are very real to that age bracket.)

Quite so. Taking nude photos and sending them to love interests is something that should be talked about, as it runs afoul of child pornography laws for adolescents and law aside, I've seen one unfortunate nude photo ruin some guy in my old school several schools over. Forever attached to his name was a rather unflattering epithet.

What, they don't teach about that sort of stuff over there? Seriously?

They didn't even teach you what the pregnancy laws are or how to take care of a baby.

[wierd]

In conservative christian land, there is this persistent vision that children dont have sexual impulses, and indulging that thought leads to "HEDONISM!" or something.

Couple that with "OMG! They are sending NUDE PICS, OF MINORS! OMG!! THINK OF THE CHILDREN!" from the adults who are pushing legal policy, and you end up with the reality where (SHOCK!) Kids are up to sexual things, post age appropriate pictures of themselves in the nude doing sexual things, and then get busted because -- GOSH-- they are UNDERAGE!

And, of course, "you dont want to look SOFT on those PEDOPHILES out there!", so the laws are zero-tolerance regardless of circumstance. That means that Little Timmy goes on the sexual predator list FOREVER because he posted a picture of his tiny boy willy and sent it to Jane, who asked him to send it to her.

The more reasonable adult mindset would be that Timmy should not go on the sexual predator list, and should get a stern lecture about propriety and proper social behavior--- but instead, we have to make everything so bombastic and out of control insane over here, that we punish kids for doing stupid shit, which they are want to do.