|
Sex education in schools (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Silky Johnson |
| quote: | Originally posted by R.j.
:stongue: I like that.
Anyway, I'll agree with you on that end.
But what I won't agree with, however, is that Sex Ed. the miracle cure-all for teen-pregnancy. What I'm more concerned about, however, is the fact that every couple of years it seems as though the youth of this world becomes more and more decadent; and what I feel what Sex Ed. does is stall an inevitable point where the problem will be insufferable, rendering the the idea of sexual education useless. Also, Sex Ed., I think, is society's way of coping with the problem it and the media have created.
In a way, or on some level or another, Sex Ed. encourages teenagers who do want to engage in sex just as long as it's "safe" sex. I don't care if people think that sex is normal (and yes, it 'is' normal); but we humans are intelligent enough to have enough sense to put off those natural 'tendencies' for more important matters, but teenagers don't think that way, I guess.
At any rate, I'm naively imagining that sometime in the near future, perhaps, this sexed-up, vain and superficial society will die away like a fad. I don't think that'll ever happen. |
Sex education is more about harm reduction than a "cure-all" for pregnancy. |
|
|
| R.j. |
| quote: | Originally posted by Theresa
Well good for you, but the average kid who is beginning to learn about the sexual anatomy, as early as 6 or 7 mind you, doesn't have the capacities to do research on the subject, and be able to accurately discern what is and is not truth. Further, it is difficult to learn about something you don't know what you don't know about, like STDs etc.
|
I'm not talking about sexual anatomy. I've been under the impression that we're talking about the actual sex lives of these kids. |
|
|
| Theresa |
| quote: | Originally posted by R.j.
I'm not talking about sexual anatomy. I've been under the impression that we're talking about the actual sex lives of these kids. |
It includes everything. The sexual anatomy, how sex occurs, how to prevent STDs and pregnancy etc. etc. |
|
|
| R.j. |
| quote: | Originally posted by Theresa
It includes everything. The sexual anatomy, how sex occurs, how to prevent STDs and pregnancy etc. etc. |
Well, look, how are bodies work; that's about as interesting as one branch of education gets.
Now, how we're supposed to use how bodies properly, I think I'd rather figure that one on my own.
edit: our* :wtf: |
|
|
| Theresa |
| quote: | Originally posted by R.j.
Well, look, how are bodies work; that's about as interesting as one branch of education gets.
Now, how we're supposed to use how bodies properly, I think I'd rather figure that one on my own. |
I think this is foolish and promotes the stigmatization of sexuality. Not talking about it gives the insinuation that it shouldn't be talked about because it's taboo/bad etc.
And not saying anything about intercourse, means not saying anything about STDs and pregnancy, something kids DEFINITELY need to know about.
This is like saying, "you don't need to potty train a child. They'll figure it out on their own." |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by R.j.
I must be living in a rock, then, to gather that we, as a whole, are wasting our intelligence more so than we had in earlier times. |
How are we "wasting" it? Do you think people in earlier times were constantly reading great literature and discussing philosophy? Go read Ulysses again - Leopold Bloom was the average man of the 1900s and he spends most his time thinking about food, reading crap pornography and wanking on the beach.
A lot of people in earlier times had no free time for using their intelligence because they had large families to feed and raise, a side-effect of a lot of ing and no sex education. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
a side-effect of a lot of ing and no sex education. |
:haha: |
|
|
| Arbiter |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
Why not make use of our modern privilege by keeping childhood a safe, quiet, and relatively sanitized place? |
What makes you think that's good for the children? |
|
|
| R.j. |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
How are we "wasting" it? Do you think people in earlier times were constantly reading great literature and discussing philosophy? Go read Ulysses again - Leopold Bloom was the average man of the 1920s and he spends most his time thinking about food, reading crap pornography and wanking on the beach.
A lot of people in earlier times had no free time for using their intelligence because they had large families to feed and raise, a side-effect of a lot of ing and no sex education. |
LOL. Why do you get so angry? While I wouldn't say they were allllll reading literature (but I'll confidently suppose that a greater deal were); I would say, however, that there was greater interest directed toward things of substance.
And Bloom is a genius compared to today's common man. His diversions are of base value, but those diversions, compared to today's common man, are not inordinate.
edit: Ulysses is a day-in-the-life of Bloom during the hypothetical most eventful day in Dublin. Given Bloom's intelligence, and despite his diversions that he indulges in that one particular day, I'm led to believe that his life, generally speaking, is rather more fulfilling on an intellectual level. |
|
|
| PivotTechno |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
Intelligence would be the same. Knowledge however, is greatly improved now than it was 70 years ago. |
But has the quality of the knowledge improved or have we merely discarded sustainable wisdom for largely superficial trim?
We've been to the moon, and seen the nether regions of the universe, but we're still too stupid to solve issues like overpopulation and the human-created demise of our ecology and environment. If anything, our so-called advancements have exacerbated our most pressing issues.
Science got us into this mess, wonder if it can get us out of it. |
|
|
| R.j. |
| quote: | Originally posted by Theresa
I think this is foolish and promotes the stigmatization of sexuality. Not talking about it gives the insinuation that it shouldn't be talked about because it's taboo/bad etc.
And not saying anything about intercourse, means not saying anything about STDs and pregnancy, something kids DEFINITELY need to know about.
This is like saying, "you don't need to potty train a child. They'll figure it out on their own." |
I think you're reaching too far with what I said. But that's your opinion. I'm not saying sex is bad, nor do I think it should be regarded as a taboo.
How old are you talking, though? |
|
|
| Theresa |
| quote: | Originally posted by R.j.
I think you're reaching too far with what I said. But that's your opinion. I'm not saying sex is bad, nor do I think it should be regarded as a taboo.
How old are you talking, though? |
I think sexual education should start as early as 7 and all the way to 15 at least. Obviously starting out with the anatomy, moving up to the functions (periods, masturbation etc.) and then onto intercourse, oral/anal sex, STDs and how to be safe. Although I think it would awesome if they discussed sexual positions, fetishes and sex toys etc. too, I don't think that will ever happen, or at least not any time soon. |
|
|
|
|
