I genuinely don’t know where to begin.

submitted by julesburm1891 from (npr.org)

all 24 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]julesburm1891[S] 29 insightful - 1 fun29 insightful - 0 fun30 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Really, where to begin? Stating that homosexual sex should be taught alongside gender identity? Claiming that lesbians are at more risk for pregnancy than straight girls? Encouraging minors to watch porn to learn how sex works? There are endless possibilities here.

[–]NutterButterFlutterStill waving into the void 23 insightful - 9 fun23 insightful - 8 fun24 insightful - 9 fun -  (1 child)

From one of the studies they're quoting (lesbians have a high risk of pregnancy):

We employed multivariable logistic regression to examine pregnancy risk by sexual orientation, measured as self-reported sexual identity and gender of sexual partners

Well there you go. Gender identity strikes again. Also, take a gander at this lovely "fact":

Overall, 14.3% of female and 10.8% of male students had experienced a pregnancy

[–]julesburm1891[S] 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks for clarifying that!

It’s so patently absurd that this is not only a study, but a study parroted in a national news outlet. I suppose it goes to show that this isn’t all just teenagers being dumb online.

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 17 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 0 fun18 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I had full sex Ed. It escalated in maturity level. First it was focused more on puberty. By the time I was around a freshman in high school, the emphasis was on learning the different parts of the male and female reproductive system, overall safety, STD and pregnancy prevention, and debunking common myths. It was fairly clinical and not shaming. It was way better than anything they’re pushing for here. I would have been mortified for them to have gone into any detail about lesbian sex. All I would have needed to hear was that some people are attracted to the same sex, and some people exclusively so, and that’s OK.

If you click on the link to the website of Ericka Hart, it confirms she’s a total psycho. A “queer black femme” promoting BDSM, gender nonsense, and kink. This miseducation will only serve to increase pregnancy risk by confounding the rather straightforward concept of how babies are made and what kind of people and bodies can come together and make them.

I would also like to point out that there is no evidence that this Ericka broad is anything other than a heterosexual black woman who calls herself a “queer black femme” to gain intersectionality points.

[–]julesburm1891[S] 19 insightful - 2 fun19 insightful - 1 fun20 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

Why am I not surprised this was written by a straight person who really wants to be “special?”

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 19 insightful - 2 fun19 insightful - 1 fun20 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Yea she wreaks of the attitude of calling herself queer because she’s into BDSM and kink, thinks gay = subversive and that queer = low commitment label that suddenly makes her serious and worthy of an audience. But what can I expect from someone whose website headlines say things like “sexualizing cancer”?

These narcissists give zero fucks that they’re undoing all of the hard work of decoupling gay people from sexual perversion in the public’s mind because, of course people will assume she’s one of us.

[–]ArthnoldManacatsaman🇬🇧🌳🟦 16 insightful - 7 fun16 insightful - 6 fun17 insightful - 7 fun -  (0 children)

sexualizing cancer

For the love of God please, no.

[–]batwoman 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I hate how people link sexual orientation to "different and edgy." I'm a 100% lesbian and I'm more traditional about sex and relationships than my straight friends.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They're tourists tramping mindlessly through the lives of genuinely oppressed minorities.

[–]usehername 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I vividly remember seeing that pissplay and bloodplay were in a Californian sex-ed manual for kindergartners. Let me find it.

edit: Actually the pissplay and bloodplay (and there was bondage) were only for freshmen in high school (still revolting). They did start in kinder but not with such graphic topics.

[–]fuck_reddit 13 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I dont understand how people can write the sentence “lesbians have a higher pregnancy rate than their peers” and not see the colossal stupidity that underlies their thinking.

[–]NutterButterFlutterStill waving into the void 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

What age are they suggesting this kind of pleasure-oriented "queer" sex start being taught?

I started having sex ed classes in school when I was 10, IIRC. It's completely inappropriate to talk to a 10 year old about masturbation, porn, and "how to have sex". Hell, even 16 year old me would have cringed taking a course like that ... kids can be really vicious and mean to each other, especially about matters that are usually pretty private.

Seems to me like it's perfectly fine to mention - while discussing health and puberty - that boys like girls and girls like boys, and also there are boys that like boys and girls who like girls, and all are perfectly normal. But to get into the joys of sex or whatever, that doesn't sit right with me at all. I don't think schools should be teaching that unless it's a college-level course/workshop.

I don't know if schools are still doing it (since I'm old and all), but in my day, sex ed was mandatory. However, parents were given a curriculum/syllabus ahead of time, told how long the classes would last (typically 1-2 weeks), and given the choice to opt their kids out and into an alternative course or study hall.

[–]kwallio 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

My elementary school had sex ed in 5th grade, I was 11. It didn't really go into sex or relationships, just the facts of puberty, male/female anatomy, periods, etc. Boys and girls were separated. Our parents were given a heads up and people could ask their children to opt out. When I was in 8th grade we had a more comprehensive health class that had a huge part of sex ed. This was the late 80s, so HIV was a huge concern and there were no treatments for it at that time. When HIV was such a big deal people didn't play that much with sex ed, it was no BS this is how you stay alive stuff. Nowdays I guess no one cares that much about stds etc?

[–]PatsyStoneMaverique 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

I grew up in a very conservative state, so we didn't have a specific sex ed class. Do sex ed classes teach you to "find out what pleasure means to you?" You explore different kinds of sex and learn how to have sex?

We got taught how to put a condom on a banana and how scary STDs are.

[–]NutterButterFlutterStill waving into the void 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Grew up in a liberal state, but a somewhat conservative area of it.

We absolutely WERE NOT taught about different ways of approaching sex, pleasure, intimacy, or anything like that. I learned those things privately, not in school.

Sex Ed in schools was more about health and biology - differences between men and women, what to expect in puberty, STD awareness, things like that.

[–]PatsyStoneMaverique 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I thought that sounded like bullshit.

[–][deleted] 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I didn't grow up in a conservative area, but this was before all the crazy started. We learnt about the biology of sex (e.g. how ovaries worked), STDs, and different contraceptive methods. We didn't learn about gender or sexuality. It was taught by the science teacher.

[–]julesburm1891[S] 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Also grew up in a conservative area. Our sex ed was definitely akin to the coach’s lecture in Mean Girls.

I did think it was weird that the author said all that and then orgasm shouldn’t be the goal. Since women are constantly told it’s not important if we climax or not it was some strange messaging.

[–]PatsyStoneMaverique 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

To me that's creepy.

[–]Three_oneFourWanted for thought crimes in countless ideologies 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

My Florida school had a one day lesson in 5th grade that basically just warned us that puberty was coming and then in 8th grade there was a more in depth reproduction lesson over a few days. It never mentioned anything about pleasure and we didn't even get a condomed banana. I think there was a single slide about contraception and an ultra-highlight of that 1% fail rate in condoms. There was also the STD scare, of course.

[–]MrFahrenheit46 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

My class was taught about the anatomy, what happens over the course of puberty, how babies are made, all the normal stuff. When we were in high school we went more in-depth about STDs and the different types of contraceptives. We touched over LGB and T stuff but it was just a brief summary.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

https://archive.ph/8ygEi

[–]PenseePansyBio-Sex or Bust 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

At the risk of sounding shallow... I've gotta begin with that illustration in the thumbnail! Does it strike anyone else as, well, CREEPY?

I mean... the disturbingly-neuter body, with featureless chest and Barbie-Doll crotch? Looks like a Pod Person who got interrupted before they were done replicating! And what's with the multiple phantom-arms? Gives me a distinct creepy-crawly vibe. Did NPR's Art Department misunderstand the story as "Sex Ed. for Roaches"? Maybe they thought it was about erotic fanfic based on Franz Kafka's Metamorphosis?

Although, given the unsettling content that it's paired with ("let's ensure that kids are confused about sex by mixing it up with gender bullshit, infect 'em with our own freaky Kweer neuroses, and use 'em to score woke points!")... perhaps this eyesore is actually a good match?

[–]Bright_paintingLoad, lesbian biologist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I had sex ed when I was 14, and we were taught about the biology, puberty and STDs but also about consent, how a healthy and unhealthy relationship looks like and how porn might not be the best way to learn about sex. We never went into any grafic deatails about sex, but rather everything that surrounds it so both parties can feel happy and safe with each other, regardless if they have sex or not. That is how a sex ed should look like, according to me; not the trash that Ericka Hart promotes.