These people need to get laid.

Yeah, I'd love to see these parents teaching their kids about sex themselves.

"Puts the condom on its banana now."

I wish sex ed had stressed the importance of having sex a bit more when I went to school.

Believe it or not, the local AM talk station's morning show has been doing a pretty good job of presenting both sides of this issue. From what I've heard so far it sounds like a damn good idea. The only problem that I can find with any of it is that one school screwed up and let some kids in without the required parental permission.

"Do you want a 16-year-old boy teaching your 14-year-old daughter how to put on a condom by using a banana?" asked Lisa Westermann, whose son said the course had made him uncomfortable.

Apparently she's upset a 16 year old boy was teaching her 16 year old boy how to put on a condom using a banana.

I actually did this program in the early 1990s in Pennsylvania. It was mostly done in freshman college classes but I did 2 or 3 programs in high schools as part of their AIDS education. The kids asked WAY more questions because we were in their own age group and it wasn't the same as asking a teacher. It was amazing how many things the kids had wrong or just plain didn't know. We were well trained. It's not like they just threw a bunch of kids up in front of the class with a banana and a condom a and told us to wing it.

At the end of the demonstration we had a box of flavored condoms and dental dams...Yes dental dams. I dunno anyone who actually used them but it was part of the project.

This is a few parents making a lot of noise,

It's always a few who just won't shut up and let the system work its magic. There is nothing wrong with the way sex ed is being taught. the last thing these kids need is for their teachers to tell them not to have sex. It'll come off as insincere and would have no educational value.

Parents are upset that sex education doesn't stress not having sex.

It's sex education not abstinence education.
They should already know how to read the fine print.

Dee dee dee!

my 7th grade health class teacher told us (mostly aimed at the girls) that a cumshot has THIS MANY CALORIES (don't recall the exact amount she claimed, but it seemed exagerated). she was a gym teacher, too.

/yup

Have they made applying a condom with your mouth mandatory for girls yet?

Even though I wasn't having sex, I was far more knowledgeable than my public school sex ed teacher. Why? Because my church was that cool. The program was a little different in my day, but this outline gives you a good idea what a real sex ed program could look like.

Our Whole Lives (new window)

Are teenagers really so dumb that they need to be told "no sex=no disease/pregnancy?"

I'd like to think it would be obvious enough without having to devote a whole semester to the topic.

BilltheThrill: Have they made applying a condom with your mouth mandatory for girls yet?


if the statistics are correct, most teens seem to think you can't get any diseases from oral sex. So...

Hey, Sex Ed is very important. Without it, I wouldn't know who gets tied up, the proper uses of strawberries and chocolate syrup, and how much exactly to bribe the cops when they catch us on the golf course.

These people don't need to stress abstinence, they need to start stressing consequences. I volunteer at the local high school with debate and theater, and listening to them talk, it's exactly the same as when I was in school: everyone knows the mechanics of what goes where and why, but very few of them have any idea of what can happen afterwards. I know it's all a part of the idea when you're young that you're good-looking and bulletproof, and sex is a part of the rebellion that all teens go through, and that's why I say it. Teach them what can, and frequently does, happen, no exaggeration, no hype, and encourage open discussion of it, and that will do more than anything else to cut down on the sex you don't want them to have.

AirForceVet 2008-02-17 11:57:50 AM
Yeah, I'd love to see these parents teaching their kids about sex themselves.

No kidding; my parents' idea of sex education was sitting me and my sisters down in front of a sex-ed TV special. Afterwards, they asked, "Do you have any questions?" with a look in their eyes that said, "Please, don't have any questions."

Mind you, the age spread between me and my sisters was 5 years, so we weren't all at the appropriate age top get "The Talk," but my parents were utterly unprepared to explain things to us themselves.

Since then, they've morphed into Bush zombies who would probably condemn the fact that such explicit material was broadcast over the airwaves.

A tussle that began with a condom and a banana has morphed into all-out war at a New Jersey high school

This will only lead to bigger condoms and bigger bananas, until it destroys us all.

Why don't the parents just have their kids opt out? If I had children, (and I don't because I had a sex-ed program that taught me how to use a condom)I would be really annoyed if some jackass was trying to prevent my kids from getting sex-ed.

I'm pretty sure they can tell kids to quit screwing each other once every 1 hour sex ed class and still have 59:50 to cover something useful.

Sorry sheeple, too many factors, as always, both sides are too dumb to see it.

The major impact on someone's sexual health, like most emotional health, is their development environment (possibly genetics as well, but not as much). It's not like someone's going to grow up in a home where they are exposed to abnormal ideas of human sexuality and just turn out normal otherwise other than their point of view on sex, and it's not like someone who grows up in an emotionally abnormal/abusive environment that isn't specifically messed up sexually, is going to also come out with a 100% healthy outlook on sex.

You're also forgetting how much people vary. Some people develop much faster than others, and others take longer. The information one adolescent needs isn't the same information that another may be ready for or may be past needing. This is true regardless of your POV on what should be taught.

I'm tired of this false dichotomy crap. This is one of the reasons government has no place in schools. Each side wants the government in to force promotion of a certain POV and then when the other side wins an election and does the same thing, the other side starts griping.

If you want a school that teaches warped ideas on human sexuality, then get together with like-minded people and pay for it your damn selves. Stop whining all the damn time and stop using my money to do it.

It's not the same thing, subby.

That being said, sex ed should cover the gambit. Abstinence shouldn't be ignored, but it shouldn't be the focus of a sex ed class.

klymen 2008-02-17 01:11:08 PM

It's always a few who just won't shut up and let the system work its magic. There is nothing wrong with the way sex ed is being taught.

Which is why there is so few unwanted pregnancies and so few instances of STDs.

/wait...

If you are waiting until HS to speak to your kids about sex and the choices and responsibilities related to it, you're already too late. These parents give the lame bird/bees speech at home and no sex till marriage bit but don't talk the topic out in fear of exposing them to the dark side.

judan: Why don't the parents just have their kids opt out?

The kids have to opt in, and have parental permission to participate.

wydok: That being said, sex ed should cover the gambit. Abstinence shouldn't be ignored

I heard an interview with a student who participates in the program, and she said that abstinence is brought up quite often as the best way to avoid STDs, pregnancy, etc., but (in her words) "horny teenagers are going to have sex anyway." She then went on to make the point that it's better for the kids to be well-informed about contraceptives and disease prevention so they can at least be safe if (when) they have sex.
Abstinence, to me, is like communism. It looks great on paper, but the practical application of it never seems to work too well.

We hold these truths to be self-evident:

Each One side wants the government in to force promotion of a certain POV religious dogma and then when the other side wins an election and does the same thing, the other side starts griping wants to teach facts.

/Fixed, now with 100% more reality.

Abstinence only does not work, unless your goal is to increase teenage pregnancy.

We hold these truths to be self-evident: If you want a school that teaches warped ideas on human sexuality, then get together with like-minded people and pay for it your damn selves. Stop whining all the damn time and stop using my money to do it.

I think what happened is a bunch of like-minded people got together and came up with the warped idea that teenagers should know about birth control, as they didn't want teenagers to have babies. If you don't want your money used for public education, the only 100% effective way to do that is to abstain from paying taxes.

It's good to know that years from now I'll still be able to tell teen cum dumpsters that "yes, swallowing can get you pregnant". The looks on their faces are almost worth the crushing tax burden of providing for their unwanted spawn.

Murkanen

If you're telling me that there aren't people out there with non-religious motivations pushing certain points of views regarding sexuality in schools, then there's not really much I can say to you.

That's why I want government out of schools. The ability to force you're point of view on others attracts unreasonable people like you who can't see the beauty of a society where people agree to disagree.

You would like to think you're that much different from religious types who want to push their POV in schools via government, but really you're more alike than you know.


judan
the only 100% effective way to do that is to abstain from paying taxes.

Or if they stop being collected for that purpose.

This is really a dumb concept. So these goofs are getting credit for what we tried on weekends?

I see no problem with a little disclaimer stating kids should wait for sex. But again, they are letting teenagers teach other teenagers about sex...brilliant.

Subby, bad comparison.

The purpose of a driving class is to learn how to drive. The purpose of a sex education class is not to learn how to have sex.

I'm all for driver classes that preach not driving. I'm a pedestrian first. Any hoo, unless it is non-consensual, sex is a collusion, not a collision. You get to choose when you do it and with whom and when and where and how. That's not true of being run over by some a-hole who thinks she really needs the 0.6 seconds that driving through a crosswalk will gain her on her daily schedule, at the expense of life and limb.

I notice I said "when" twice. The first "when" is for losing your virginity and the second "when" is for occasion. That's my story and I'll stick to it.

BilltheThrill: Have they made applying a condom with your mouth mandatory for girls yet?

My school is ahead of the game on this one! Everybody got to put a condom on with their mouth.

We hold these truths to be self-evident:

If you're telling me that there aren't people out there with non-religious motivations pushing certain points of views regarding sexuality in schools, then there's not really much I can say to you.

You're right, religious dogma is only part of the problem. The more accurate phrasing should have been "myth and ignorance".

That's why I want government out of schools.

Because stupid people have more influence than they should? That's a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself.

The ability to force you're point of view on others attracts unreasonable people like you who can't see the beauty of a society where people agree to disagree.

I have no problem with agreeing to disagree. I have a problem with people scared of reality trying to teach falsehoods as fact because it will make them feel better. There's a very fitting saying about this concept, something about being able to pick your own opinions, but not your own facts.

You would like to think you're that much different from religious types who want to push their POV in schools via government

I don't have to think I'm different from them, I know I'm different from them. I want the facts taught, they want to stick their head in the sand and pretend that teenagers only have sex if it's brought up in a public school classroom.

You know.. in my opinion. I think that the schools should be forced to teach the controversy. Yup, that seems like the intelligent thing to do.

wydok: It's not the same thing, subby.

That being said, sex ed should cover the gambit. Abstinence shouldn't be ignored, but it shouldn't be the focus of a sex ed class.

Gamut, not gambit. A gamut is a range or spectrum, a gambit is a sacrifice play.

And any sex ed teacher who doesn't tell kids that the only absolutely certain way to not transmit disease is abstinence isn't doing their job. However, these whinging douchebags aren't complaining because abstinence is missing, they're complaining because they're talking about sex at all, and corrupting their precious little snowflakes who would otherwise become well-adjusted adults who only make the best health decisions about themselves.

And by that, I mean become pregnant or sick teenagers who spread disease and have children because they think it doesn't count if it's in the mouth or butt, or think that pulling out or timing it is an effective means of contraception.

Bush spent $800 million (yes, nearly a BILLION) on abstinence education and guess what happened? It went UP for the first time in 15 years!

and by UP I meant teenage sex went up.

Fact Man: Subby, bad comparison.

The purpose of a driving class is to learn how to drive. The purpose of a sex education class is not to learn how to have sex.

Well sort of, if you don't know the mechanics of sex then you're retarded or not ready for it, but it is used to teach safe sex and the consequences of certain actions involving sex.

So in a way it is like Driver's Ed.

jake3988: Bush spent $800 million (yes, nearly a BILLION) on abstinence education and guess what happened? It went UP for the first time in 15 years!

so, we spent nearly 7 TRILLION on the war on poverty in the last 30 years and poverty went down by less than a half of a percent

In driver's ed, they stressed the importance of not driving over wearing a seatbelt.

I wish they had stressed how to GET sex more than how to HAVE sex. If they did, I wouldn't be hanging around on Fark, that's for damn sure.

The sex ed I was taught was sex-prevention ed. All they talked about was the diseases you would get if you ever even looked at a member of the opposite sex. Even wearing (and this really did come up, and was said) 6 condoms won't stop you from getting AIDS.

Luckily, porn taught me all I need to know about doing the deed. And Foobies.com

014789 2008-02-17 06:28:01 PM
jake3988: Bush spent $800 million (yes, nearly a BILLION) on abstinence education and guess what happened? It went UP for the first time in 15 years!

so, we spent nearly 7 TRILLION on the war on poverty in the last 30 years and poverty went down by less than a half of a percent

"B-b-but the war on poverty! It only showed nominal results! While abstinence education had the opposite effect!"

You are a pathetic joke. You embarrass yourself and cheapen Fark with every post you make.

Here's a clue, Sherlock: Abstinence doesn't work. Know why? Because abstinence leads to the destruction of the human race. Got that? People have urges, and those urges are a survival mechanism. The complication is, with regard to young people, that they are experiencing those urges more strongly and earlier. The onset of puberty has been occurring earlier and earlier (blame, in large part, hormone-injected food), while the age that they are expected to responsibly start procreating has been increasing.

Oh, yeah, and STDs now have the potential to kill.

The best thing to do is to help adolescents deal with their sexuality in a responsible manner. That involves supplying them with information, not saying "Don't do it" and closing your eyes pretending that they aren't.

Murkanen

And other people know they're right too. Do you think wars start over crap like this because both sides think that they might be wrong?

I have no problem with agreeing to disagree. I have a problem with people scared of reality trying to teach falsehoods as fact because it will make them feel better. There's a very fitting saying about this concept, something about being able to pick your own opinions, but not your own facts.

Well then, apparently you do have a problem with agreeing to disagree. Agreeing to disagree means just that. You disagree with them over opinions and facts, and if you agree to do that, then you agree to go your own ways, not keep trying to make them think and do things you want them to. That's why I said you were like them. Obviously you have a difference of opinion with religious types on sex education, did you think I didn't notice? You responded with:

I don't have to think I'm different from them, I know I'm different from them. I want the facts taught, they want to stick their head in the sand and pretend that teenagers only have sex if it's brought up in a public school classroom.

Again, obviously you disagree with other people on how/whether to teach sex ed(vague term- part of the problem). I was saying you are similar in that you won't agree to disagree and that you keep pushing your opinions on others, just like they do.

We hold these truths to be self-evident 2008-02-17 08:22:25PM
Murkanen

And other people know they're right too. Do you think wars start over crap like this because both sides think that they might be wrong?

I have no problem with agreeing to disagree. I have a problem with people scared of reality trying to teach falsehoods as fact because it will make them feel better. There's a very fitting saying about this concept, something about being able to pick your own opinions, but not your own facts.

Well then, apparently you do have a problem with agreeing to disagree. Agreeing to disagree means just that. You disagree with them over opinions and facts,

Well, see, there's your code error right there. OPinions are subject to interpretation and thus disagreement; facts are not.

CaptainFatass

But people do have opinions about how to deal with facts or disagree that things are in-fact facts. Surely you're not so ignorant you don't understand that?

When factions start believing they have imperative to force people how to think and behave because they "know" they have the facts and the other side doesn't, sane people worry.

BilltheThrill: Have they made applying a condom with your mouth mandatory for girls yet?

That's in the final. Part of the oral exam.

Parents are upset that sex education doesn't stress not having sex.

That's cos it's sex education not marriage education.

/not bitter.

Driving classes encourage you not to speed. Drug education classes encourage you not to do drugs.

We hold these truths to be self-evident:

But people do have opinions about how to deal with facts or disagree that things are in-fact facts.

This is where that whole "ignorance and myth" thing begins to be a problem. Whether they agree that a fact is a fact, won't change reality one whit. Denying facts are facts hasn't helped creationists, it hasn't helped AGW deniers, it hasn't helped the Bush administration, it hasn't helped you, so why in the fark would it help a bunch of fearmongers about sex education?

When factions start believing they have imperative to force people how to think and behave because

The parents can withdraw their kids if they feel it isn't something they want their kids to learn, and last I heard these things don't take the "hands on" part of the class to that extent so no one is "forcing people how to think and behave".

"they "know" they have the facts and the other side doesn't, sane people worry.

Sane people only worry if the side claiming they have the "facts" are the ones bandying about nonsense like "condoms don't work" and "fairies live in your uterus!". They don't usually mind the ones that have statistics, data, and reality supporting their position.

/I honestly hoped you'd stop dealing with strawman arguments after pulling Ron Paul's cock out of your mouth
//which means either you haven't managed to detach yourself from him yet, or I have way too much faith in the intelligence of fellow farkers

Actually I would like a drivers ed class that told people not to drive. I want to put big signs up telling them the statistical probability of killing or maiming themselves or others.

Three different people tried to kill me today. Three. Why do we allow this bullshiat?

/sorry if anyone else already said this, didn't rtft