Swedish Sexual education

[Grallon]

2.  What I am advocating is a golden mean approach to sex ed.  As I said earlier, teaching students the basics of sex (hetero and gay), the importance of safe sex and being OK with one's sexuality are important things.  However, there is a point of excess beyond which it isn't necessary to teach in the classroom. Your attempt to label this attitude with the word "prude" is just stupid.

The attitude I was refering to by calling it as a by-product of anglo-saxon prudishness wasn't your stance on sex-ed, which is fairly reasonable, but rather the reflex of labelling adolescents from 14 upward to early 20s as 'kids' - which they obviously aren't.   That is a cultural construct I find ludicrous. 




G.

[Eddie Teach]

We call anyone significantly younger than ourselves a kid, doesn't really have anything to do with prudishness. The terms boys & girls get used for contemporaries even.

[Valmy]

The attitude I was refering to by calling it as a by-product of anglo-saxon prudishness wasn't your stance on sex-ed, which is fairly reasonable, but rather the reflex of labelling adolescents from 14 upward to early 20s as 'kids' - which they obviously aren't.   That is a cultural construct I find ludicrous. 

Heck depending on the context people could refer to you as a kid well into your 40s if not later depending on the age of the speaker.  I am rather baffled what that has to do with our Anglo-Saxon prudishness.  It is just slang for a younger person.  If you want to get technical you can call them adolescents or young adults or whatever but we usually are not that formal.  Is using slang a way of saying you hate sex and using formal very technical language a way of showing how sexually liberated you are in the latin cultures?

[Grallon]

...It is just slang for a younger person.  If you want to get technical you can call them adolescents or young adults or whatever but we usually are not that formal.  Is using slang a way of saying you hate sex and using formal very technical language a way of showing how sexually liberated you are in the latin cultures?

Valmy why do you insist on being dense when you aren't?


Words have weight, they're loaded - never neutral.  Even all those terms like 'dwarf' or 'blind' or nigger' - re-branded over 30 years of political correctness in order to empty them of any possible offensive content - aren't neutral.  They carry the weight of the ideology that transformed them; one of  hypocrisy, obfuscation and sophistry.  An ideology which, coincidently, is the product of a culture where litigation has a central and ever growing place.

So in this context using the word kid to describe a 17yo, even as a colloquialism, brushes aside all distinctions between a 5yo and a 17yo since both are, you know, 'kids';  that is both share one thing: they are still dependant upon guardians under the law.  Thus it reduces a complex reality to its most common/basic denominator.




G. 

[dps]

...It is just slang for a younger person.  If you want to get technical you can call them adolescents or young adults or whatever but we usually are not that formal.  Is using slang a way of saying you hate sex and using formal very technical language a way of showing how sexually liberated you are in the latin cultures?

Valmy why do you insist on being dense when you aren't?


Words have weight, they're loaded - never neutral.  Even all those terms like 'dwarf' or 'blind' or nigger' - re-branded over 30 years of political correctness in order to empty them of any possible offensive content - aren't neutral.  They carry the weight of the ideology that transformed them; one of  hypocrisy, obfuscation and sophistry.  An ideology which, coincidently, is the product of a culture where litigation has a central and ever growing place.

So in this context using the word kid to describe a 17yo, even as a colloquialism, brushes aside all distinctions between a 5yo and a 17yo since both are, you know, 'kids';  that is both share one thing: they are still dependant upon guardians under the law.  Thus it reduces a complex reality to its most common/basic denominator.




G. 

This kind of sillines is what you get when you parse every word of any statement looking for something to get upset about or to start an argument over semantics.  Congrats--you've just combined the worst trait exhibited by Marty with the worst trait exhibited by grumbler.

[Grallon]

This kind of sillines is what you get when you parse every word of any statement looking for something to get upset about or to start an argument over semantics.  Congrats--you've just combined the worst trait exhibited by Marty with the worst trait exhibited by grumbler.

Its called sociolinguistics you moron.




G.

[Valmy]

So in this context using the word kid to describe a 17yo, even as a colloquialism, brushes aside all distinctions between a 5yo and a 17yo since both are, you know, 'kids';  that is both share one thing: they are still dependant upon guardians under the law.  Thus it reduces a complex reality to its most common/basic denominator.

Well I do not think so Grallon.  In fact I think it is because our culture celebrates youth as a positive so we often go around calling ourselves 'boys' and 'girls' and 'kids' and we mean it quite positively.  In a sense I think we call 17 year olds that because at some level we all sorta wish we were 17 again...or at least culturally we romantisize that age alot.

I do not think it is out of some desire to simplify anything or demean anything...quite the opposite IMO.

[Martinus]

I think this is more complex than that, grallon. After all don't we call hot guys "boys" (and we have "Show Girls" and the like for the heteros)? That  being said, I remember some people on Languish (was it Berkut or grumbler? Can't tell for sure tbh) who said Ozymandias from the Watchmen was a pedophile because he had a folder called "Boys" on his computer in the movie (even though this is the word we use to denote sexually attractive guys of the legal age).

I guess we are schizophrenic.

Or we have a different standard for gay and heteros (not surprising, considering responses in this very thread).

I also know I just had a glass of pink Pinot Grigio and can't think straight. 

[Eddie Teach]

I also know I just had a glass of pink Pinot Grigio and can't think straight. 

Does that mean you could if you were drinking whiskey or vodka?

[Martinus]

I also know I just had a glass of pink Pinot Grigio and can't think straight. 

Does that mean you could if you were drinking whiskey or vodka?

Not really. I just get drunk so easily.

[Eddie Teach]

Wasn't there someone arguing that the "Boys" folder didn't necessarily mean Ozymandias was a homo?

[Martinus]

Wasn't there someone arguing that the "Boys" folder didn't necessarily mean Ozymandias was a homo?

Don't think so. I remember people arguing it meant he liked little boys, i.e. was a peado - thus maybe your impression. I thought it was rather ridiculous.

[Berkut]

WTF are you babbling about?

[MadImmortalMan]

I also know I just had a glass of pink Pinot Grigio and can't think straight. 

Does that mean you could if you were drinking whiskey or vodka?

No I think it suggests whiskey or vodka would knock him flat very easily. 

[Ideologue]

The debate was then taken up in the media with outcries that studies of "sexual techniques" are not suitable for 14-year-old students who are under the legal age of consent.

Meh, it's not legal for 14 year olds to drive, ordinarily, either, but nothing prevents one from gaining a basic grounding in automobile physics and operation.