Mississippi Passes "More Dead Kids Please" bill. Texas responds w/ "hold my beer"

[Jarhyn]

Of course I don’t think that people must be told about something before they try it out.

Which is a huge part of the point. Those so inclined will discover their own paths to pleasure.

A basic: if it hurts, don’t do it is comprehensive and sufficient,

Which doesn't address anal safety 101: Nothing goes up there that doesn't have a flared base. That's a safety rule that needs to be taught, not learned the hard way.

Also, smooth. And we'll lubricated. And nonfragile. Nothing with knobbly or sharp bits.

I will also note how difficult it is to acquire appropriate tools, especially at that age. Not that there's anything that can be done about that problem in particular, but it is a safety issue.

Just saying, but I bet a lot of vintage old-school game controllers have probably gone in a lot of really nasty places, too.

 

[Toni]

Girls in middle school and high school are already pressured to engage in sex acts that they are not ready for, and that do not give them pleasure. I am fairly certain that this is also true of at least some boys. Introducing butt plugs to teenagers is unlikely to do anything except increase the pressure on teenage girls. You know: half of the student body.

Please think about te countless hours that teachers, administrators, parents and press will spend discussing this particular topic which would really better be spent discussing how to ensure that kids have a decent comprehensive education, know how to read and write and do math and understand science and government and how their bodies work in general.

How is there any pressure from the library having a book that talks about butt plugs? (And presumably other sex toys but I haven't looked for the context the page was in.)

Really? You don’t think that parents and community members and even some faculty and staff will know and object—vehemently? Loudly? Endlessly? And turn it into another cultural war and excuse to demonize ( fill in the blanks—plural)?

The purpose of education is not to provide and endless well on facts and information. It is to teach students how to figure things out on their own, where to look for and find answers, to explore, to use their imaginations. Education provides basics, and frameworks on which to build new knowledge and understanding.

Kids today are growing up in a world that is very different than the one that you or I or even my kids grew up in. They don’t merely have access to a seemingly infinite stream(s) of information: they are bombarded with it from all sides. That seems to me to be a terrible burden. And more so when there is so much

I definitely remember learning how sex worked or sometimes dud t work or go as planned, with both horrible and wonderful results. I know that having the instruction manual, the recipe, the step by step directions does not guarantee that a good time will be had by anyone. There is significant chance that experiences will fall very flat if the joy of exploration is suppressed by rote following the directions. Art is so much more beautiful than paint by number.

What we absolutely must do is to instill the ethos that sex is intimacy, like it or not, some of you. Everyone’s feelings and needs, wants, desires , fears, insecurities must be honored. Mutual enthusiastic consent first! In tandem with safety.

What a terrible burden it is to believe there is nothing left to be discovered for yourself! No more mysteries.

We must prepare students to meat the future that we will never see and cannot predict.

 

[Jarhyn]

You don’t think that parents and community members and even some faculty and staff will know and object—vehemently? Loudly? Endlessly?

They already do that with every imagined slight.

As it is the same ones who will object, will object as vociferously to math questions asking about "Esteban" instead of "Steven".

There is no good faith there.

More, it sounds like you're one of the folks who would be objecting to their kids learning, at a bare minimum, the few things they need to know to avoid hurting their assholes doing the things everyone knows they are going to do anyway and might as well do WITHOUT injury.

Education should be an endless well to learn all the fact for which personal discovery is either unavailable or dangerous. And sticking things in your ass is "dangerous" without education, and also extremely likely.

 

[Toni]

You don’t think that parents and community members and even some faculty and staff will know and object—vehemently? Loudly? Endlessly?

They already do that with every imagined slight.

As it is the same ones who will object, will object as vociferously to math questions asking about "Esteban" instead of "Steven".

There is no good faith there.

More, it sounds like you're one of the folks who would be objecting to their kids learning, at a bare minimum, the few things they need to know to avoid hurting their assholes doing the things everyone knows they are going to do anyway and might as well do WITHOUT injury.

Education should be an endless well to learn all the fact for which personal discovery is either unavailable or dangerous. And sticking things in your ass is "dangerous" without education, and also extremely likely.

This is an issue that would draw in a lot more people than those who object to Hispanic names or someone having two dads.

Should sex ed also discuss bondage? Nipple rings? Piercings?

I also see it as unnecessary. A good comprehensive sex education would include information about being careful about what one inserts into any orifice in one's body. And that porn is not a good place to learn about sex acts or techniques or pleasure. And if something hurts, don't do it. And do no harm.

 

[Jarhyn]

Should sex ed also discuss bondage

Not in highschool.

Safe-word play and asymmetrical relationships (the core primative tools of consensual bondage) are a college level subject, that should be offered for free to anyone, at colllege quality.

The whole point of "no sexing the under-18" is that this is the current social boundary point at which controlled asymmetrical relationships are acknowledged as "possible and not entirely repugnant to participate in as a person in the power-role"

They are still strongly discouraged in any setting of real asymmetry! Prostitution places the asymmetry on reliance for bread, necessity of transaction; rarely does the mixture of optional ongoing freedom from the activity, and desire to engage in it for sustenance meet so as to create a prostitute whose johns have the luxury of not raping them. Bosses have no business sexing their employees. And so on.

Older people have no business sexing significantly younger people because it's not a role at that point, it's a reality of actual asymmetry, perversely enough except when all parties acknowledge an at-will transactional arrangement

I think someone needs to be at least 21, probably older to participate in something like that, or have it gated behind a free 21+ pass/fail class that expects at a minimum regurgitation of the basic knowledge of things that are problematically dangerous, and the predictable, tragic, and all too often comic results of fucking around and finding out.

There are ages at which we say "enough is enough, we expect consequences be observed, and refuse the trouble of preventing those consequences." There are rites of passage at which we start asserting consequences for irresponsibly reckless, dangerous, or violent behavior, and there are classes and understandings we expect people to take up before engaging in what we as a society view as reckless, dangerous, or violent behaviors, usually before those behaviors start getting pursued.

16 year olds stick things in their bums. Probably younger folks, too, but I'm happy with telling them that the discussions about people putting things into their bums on purpose is for older people and that if they think adults are super weird and messed up sometimes, learning more about that core subject (sex and sexuality) is one of the core reasons we get that way, and in an effort to NOT get them quite as messed up, they should hold off on investigating that until they are at least 16, at which point you will answer any questions.

And then immediately rush to a bookstore, buy an orientation and sexuality-agnostic book about anal safety, and tuck it into the bookshelf in the A's before they have the idea to check your library.

Or better yet, already have that book living there on the shelf, because they probably won't listen to you.

Either way, the book will disappear, maybe a little while, maybe forever.

I expect that the biggest problem with Loren's approach would be kids just stealing the books rather than ever checking them out OR returning them. The school probably wouldn't want them back anyway. Every new semester they would need to order a case of them, in paperback only.

I guarantee glossaries of terms, the book about anatomy, and MAYBE one or two select titles about improving the quality of the experience would vanish in large quantities, with books on anal (ones that say "for the most part, it's just uncomfortable and painful if you lack an effective prostate") probably coming up missing around a quarter as often.

 

[Toni]

Should sex ed also discuss bondage

Not in highschool.

Safe-word play and asymmetrical relationships (the core primative tools of consensual bondage) are a college level subject, that should be offered for free to anyone, at colllege quality.

The whole point of "no sexing the under-18" is that this is the current social boundary point at which controlled asymmetrical relationships are acknowledged as "possible and not entirely repugnant to participate in as a person in the power-role"

They are still strongly discouraged in any setting of real asymmetry! Prostitution places the asymmetry on reliance for bread, necessity of transaction; rarely does the mixture of optional ongoing freedom from the activity, and desire to engage in it for sustenance meet so as to create a prostitute whose johns have the luxury of not raping them. Bosses have no business sexing their employees. And so on.

Older people have no business sexing significantly younger people because it's not a role at that point, it's a reality of actual asymmetry, perversely enough except when all parties acknowledge an at-will transactional arrangement

I think someone needs to be at least 21, probably older to participate in something like that, or have it gated behind a free 21+ pass/fail class that expects at a minimum regurgitation of the basic knowledge of things that are problematically dangerous, and the predictable, tragic, and all too often comic results of fucking around and finding out.

There are ages at which we say "enough is enough, we expect consequences be observed, and refuse the trouble of preventing those consequences." There are rites of passage at which we start asserting consequences for irresponsibly reckless, dangerous, or violent behavior, and there are classes and understandings we expect people to take up before engaging in what we as a society view as reckless, dangerous, or violent behaviors, usually before those behaviors start getting pursued.

16 year olds stick things in their bums. Probably younger folks, too, but I'm happy with telling them that the discussions about people putting things into their bums on purpose is for older people and that if they think adults are super weird and messed up sometimes, learning more about that core subject (sex and sexuality) is one of the core reasons we get that way, and in an effort to NOT get them quite as messed up, they should hold off on investigating that until they are at least 16, at which point you will answer any questions.

And then immediately rush to a bookstore, buy an orientation and sexuality-agnostic book about anal safety, and tuck it into the bookshelf in the A's before they have the idea to check your library.

Or better yet, already have that book living there on the shelf, because they probably won't listen to you.

Either way, the book will disappear, maybe a little while, maybe forever.

I expect that the biggest problem with Loren's approach would be kids just stealing the books rather than ever checking them out OR returning them. The school probably wouldn't want them back anyway. Every new semester they would need to order a case of them, in paperback only.

No, the biggest problem would be the parents and community members getting all up in arms. Enabled in part by what kids brought home. Seriously, parents get all bent out of shape at teaching kids anything about sex. For myself, the only time I got upset was when my kid's biology teacher told them stuff that was wrong and wrong in ways that likely would lead to a bunch of unintended pregnancies. My kid was not happy that I corrected the teacher's 'facts' and backed it up with actual medical information--but to their great relief I did not storm the school and ask WTF??????

 

[Jarhyn]

the parents and community members getting all up in arms

They have no right to keep kids in ignorance of things that injure them.

Your opposition appears entirely to be on the basis of "other people" opposing it.

It has entirely the bendt of someone who opposes it themselves.

The fact is that we can clearly observe from the reactions of the likes of Oleg that it isn't actually about "preventing smut from being distributed" as it is about keeping them in a state of easily-exploited ignorance, and from the likes of Emily Lake in the form of supporting rhetoric on reproductive supremacy.

Do you not think a 16 year old, any 16 year old, all 16 year olds deserve access to a book that will keep them from injuring themselves in stupid ways and scarring themselves for life (literally and/or figuratively)?

Because those folks? Fuck what they want. I don't want a world where people have no access to information pursuant to their own health.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Sex ed should be about safety and reproduction, not sexual gratification. Students need to be taught that:

• porn is fake sex and should never be considered an accurate depiction of sex.
  • This can be done by showing a scene from an action movie
    • You all get that this is completely fake right? Porn is the same thing, just with sex!
• sex is not the same for everyone, especially when compared to porn stars, but still from person to person
• girls (and boys) have a right to veto ANYTHING
  • And ignoring such a veto is tantamount to sexual assault.
  • Silence isn't approval either.
    
    • Yes, it isn't as much fun to ask things, but especially among teens, most of this stuff is new and there are no cues to work off of
• you have to crawl before you walk, but if it hurts you are either doing it wrong or it shouldn't be happening at all
• don't be an anecdote of a woman in her adulthood about the time she was assaulted

...among other things.

 

[Trebaxian Vir]

It is with much relief that I reflect upon my formative years, and the absence of the insidious influence of those who would have sought to lead me astray.

Had I been exposed to their malign influence during my late childhood and early adolescence, I would assuredly have been convinced to take hormone-blockers, and even chop my own penis off, so desperate was I to avoid the inevitability of manhood.

My desire to delay adulthood was so strong that I even resorted to the extreme measure of refusing sustenance, in the belief, gleaned from some volume or another, that malnutrition would arrest my physical development.

How fortunate it is that I was not exposed to such pernicious counsel, for the psychological toll that such a decision would have taken on me would have been so disastrous, that the likelihood that I would have brought an end to my own life would have been all but assured.

No wonder so many of the people who have undergone these operations commit suicide at such an alarmingly high rate.

I would have killed myself a long time ago by now, if I were in their shoes.​

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Pure evil.

It is with much relief that I reflect upon my formative years, and the absence of the insidious influence of those who would have sought to lead me astray.

Had I been exposed to their malign influence during my late childhood and early adolescence, I would assuredly have been convinced to take hormone-blockers, and even chop my own penis off, so desperate was I to avoid the inevitability of manhood.

My desire to delay adulthood was so strong that I even resorted to the extreme measure of refusing sustenance, in the belief, gleaned from some volume or another, that malnutrition would arrest my physical development.

How fortunate it is that I was not exposed to such pernicious counsel, for the psychological toll that such a decision would have taken on me would have been so disastrous, that the likelihood that I would have brought an end to my own life would have been all but assured.

No wonder so many of the people who have undergone these operations commit suicide at such an alarmingly high rate.​

You mean the smaller rate compared to those that don't get the procedure?

Also, there seems to be the peculiar attitude that transgender procedures are common and considered a formality... someone says something, then the surgery is that afternoon like if they had a burst appendix. That isn't how this works. So I'm uncertain why people are going as if it is.

 

[Trebaxian Vir]

​

Also, there seems to be the peculiar attitude that transgender procedures are common and considered a formality... someone says something, then the surgery is that afternoon like if they had a burst appendix. That isn't how this works. So I'm uncertain why people are going as if it is.

Per contra, it is a procedure most foul and odious, which incurs a higher rate of self-slaughter among those who undergo it than among those who do not. This is, of course, an inevitable outcome, for the result is maladaptive & contrarious to one's biological nature. It also does not resolve the underlying problem but only reinforces it. Yet population reduction is the objective behind the promotion & sanctioning of such procedure. It is an added boon to those who would see certain members of our society removed, a policy with which you unwittingly agree. I must say, I find it curious that you support the manipulation of breeding, a course of action that is not in keeping with your apparent values. It is a eugenical sterilisation policy that you are supporting. I suppose this was the only way to secure left-wing approbation for such measures. Well, I've got to hand it to the ruling powers; it worked like a charm. Millions of midwits got trickt by it.​

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

A ton of allegations in there, and nothing more. Is it common for you to think the absolute worst of people? That their motives are those of genocidal maniacs?

 

[Toni]

Not at all. Kids in high school ( and younger) do not need additional pressure to engage in more sexual acts, including ones which are unlikely to give pleasure to at least half of the students.

You are really presuming far more ability for teens to navigate their own sexuality much less deal with the interest of others in pursuing their own pleasure irrespective of the feelings and needs ( physical, emotional, sexual) of others. Even more than sex, there is an enormous amount of social pressure, and other power dynamics at that age, without the experience and emotional maturity to navigate this new and ever changing miasma of feeling, expectations, responsibilities, needs. Frankly, the pressure for girls to perform unreciprocated oral sex is more than enough pressure.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with letting some information be discovered after high school.

Reality: Sex ed on average delays the age of first intercourse.

Where have I suggested that I disagree? I am
whole heartedly in favor of good, comprehensive, age appropriate sex education. Starting in elementary school.

 

[Trebaxian Vir]

​

Is it common for you to think the absolute worst of people? That their motives are those of genocidal maniacs?

Not at all. I see that you have not paid proper heed to my words. How many instances of that you have just accused me of can you recall? Perhaps one, or two at most? Let me remark, in passing, that I do not believe that the individuals who so fervently embrace the ideology of this society,—useful idiots, as Lenin and Trotsky rightly called them,—are motivated by such calculating considerations. The poor fools actually believe in this humbug. Their convictions are, I am certain, genuine. However, those who hold the reins of power and steer the direction of this society, they, I have no doubt, are guided by the calculations and motivations of which you speak. To them all ideology, whether left-wing or right-wing, is but a tool,—not a belief. They regard the people who actually believers in these ideologies as fools. I agree with them, and I will be the first to confess that I too was once a fool in this regard.

​

 

[Trebaxian Vir]

Reality: Sex ed on average delays the age of first intercourse.

That is precisely the point. See above. This is very connected with the promotion of transsexualist ideology. Why indeed is it promoted? Do you think the ruling powers care about the well-being transsexuals? Assuredly not. It is all about convincing as many people as possible to sterilise themselves by way of castration, the taking of hormon-blockers, and/or the adoption of sterile lifestyles generally incompatible with having children. It is publicly admitted that the ruling powers harbour a desire to bring down the population, to a number they have deemed desirable, by the year 2040. Have you ever wondered how they intend to achieve this ambitious goal? Why, the answer is before your very eyes. The methods they are employing are clear and unmistakable, with their ultimate objective being the reduction of fertility rates and increasing the death rates. It is not to say that their useful idiots, the true believers, are driven by similar motivations. The intentions, however, of those who hold the reins of power cannot be denied. Conspiracy theory? No, by definition it is not; for it is publicly acknowledged. They cannot be held accountable for conspiring to commit any crime, because they have wisely taken the measure of publicly declaring their goals and intentions.​

 

[Toni]

the parents and community members getting all up in arms

They have no right to keep kids in ignorance of things that injure them.

Your opposition appears entirely to be on the basis of "other people" opposing it.

It has entirely the bendt of someone who opposes it themselves.

The fact is that we can clearly observe from the reactions of the likes of Oleg that it isn't actually about "preventing smut from being distributed" as it is about keeping them in a state of easily-exploited ignorance, and from the likes of Emily Lake in the form of supporting rhetoric on reproductive supremacy.

Do you not think a 16 year old, any 16 year old, all 16 year olds deserve access to a book that will keep them from injuring themselves in stupid ways and scarring themselves for life (literally and/or figuratively)?

Because those folks? Fuck what they want. I don't want a world where people have no access to information pursuant to their own health.

There is an enormous difference between ‘keeping kids ignorant’ and providing a comprehensive list of every sex act and type of sex act that there is. If we are going to talk about butt plugs, then why not talk about nipple clamps, bdsm, nipple rings, auto-asphyxiation. ( which can be life threatening if you don’t know what you are doing!)? I think that very clear information about lubrication, and which body parts produce their own and which do not—and that one can use purchased lubricants, and that Vaseline degrades condoms, etc. should really cover everything.

The basic premise: if it hurts ( anywhere, anyone) stop immediately!

I used to live across the street from an ER nurse. Among her frequent flyers were a person who, on multiple occasions, was in the ER because he had inserted a light bump into his rectum. Another made several trips because of priapism. Surely they knew fir certain after the first trip to the ER what they needed it not do.

 

[Jarhyn]

...​

Also, there seems to be the peculiar attitude that transgender procedures are common and considered a formality... someone says something, then the surgery is that afternoon like if they had a burst appendix. That isn't how this works. So I'm uncertain why people are going as if it is.

Bad faith, a desire to see kids hurt for personal amusement or vindication, a desire to spin rhetoric towards reproductive supremacy, or some other such thing.

To quote someone who is most certainly not three kids in a trenchcoat:
Pure evil.

 

[Trebaxian Vir]

desire to see kids hurt for personal amusement

Such as penile inversion vaginoplasty, which is done on children in the U.S.A. Worse than female castration.

 

[Jarhyn]

The fact is, I have already discussed why there's no need or call to discuss the cornucopia of kinks other than to help someone know from all the rest of us that it's normal to like, really be into sniffing smelly socks or whatever, and that can be accomplished by a book on the shelf on the library.

My biggest question for all the parents who would object to reference material on the observed divergence of the human sexual condition is if they really actually want their kid to grow up unable to ask his perspective sex partners if they're into having them sniff their feet at an appropriate stage in pursuit of a relationship, as if they want them to live in a world where when the discussion is broached, they are laughed at or scolded rather than simply answered, allowed to be either happy or disappointed, and step forward to ask the next person (or not, as needs dictate).

Learning how to have healthy social and yes sexual relationships requires understanding that certain things are a lot more normal than a teenage peer group may be aware of.

That involves having open access to books, and, yes, teachers that will answer their questions honestly and openly as appropriate, and explain through the reasons inappropriate questions are not answered.

If parents are up in arms about access to information that keeps people safe and delays the onset of shared sexual behaviors, they can BE up in arms until they get over it.

 

[Jarhyn]

Nobody here is promoting a penile inversion vaginoplasty except for for themselves, and definitely not for kids.

Maybe you think it looks gross, but I wonder why a certain someone was looking it up...

Sadly, the price tag is high, for me.

Put it in my "someday when I have a giant pile of money" list I guess?

And holy shit, "female castration"?!?

That's a pretty hyperbolic way to discuss getting your tubes tied, and fuck you if you think people shouldn't do that or want that for themselves if that's what they want.

Unless you mean female circumcision.

It's totally the sort of mistake I could understand if someone who is most certainly not 13.

Granted again we have to be specific about what defines a "female" for such purposes.

Certainly any unelected procedure on kids that removes an erogenous zone and renders it nonfunctional is pretty fucked up.