Endearing anti-gay marriage interview

[Josquius]

I think a sensible approach would be to say in the sex ed class that there is a thing called sexual orientation based on which people may be sexually attracted to the opposite sex, or to their own sex, or to both, and that each is equally valid and not a deviant/dysfunctional sexual behaviour.

If the sexual ed class at the relevant level covers mechanics of the actual sexual act(s), then you could direct those interested in it, to information (presented with a similar degree of detail) concerning homosexual sex - but do not need to cover it in the compulsory curriculum for all.

So essentially, you would be covering the emotional/relationship side of homosexuality in the class for all students, but have anal male-on-male sex and scissoring as extra-curricular topics.

Can't really see that working TBH.
"OK kids. Now run along to Mr Brown to continue your lesson. Though if you want to stay here then I'm going to talk about gay sex next. Jimmy, you're into musical theatre aren't you? This might be your sort of thing".
Even if a kid is gay and knows he is then no way is he going to make it so obvious in front of everyone, that would be a death sentence for his standing. Not to mention that his probally straight teacher likely knows a lot less about it than he does.
I really couldn't imagine my biology teacher speaking about gay sex....you could tell he felt uncomfortable enough speaking matter of factly about mundane straight stuff.


My thinking with why homosexuality in sex education is dodgy is that it brings in too much sex.
Even when just speaking of straight sex it is kept largely matter of fact. Introduce gay sex and you start talking a bit too much about sex for fun. You're opening the door to oral, anal and other business which...is too sexy for school.
Already there is a smidgin of this I suppose. Teaching about safe sex and contraception is important and is touched upon, needs to be talked about more really. But the actual "ins and outs" of the act.....hmm....

[garbon]

My sex ed focused on telling us how unhealty gay sex is.

I suppose anything's dangerous if you do it wrong.

My class focused on how it should always be an exit only/do not enter zone.

[CountDeMoney]

Pfft, weak.

[garbon]

Can't really see that working TBH.
"OK kids. Now run along to Mr Brown to continue your lesson. Though if you want to stay here then I'm going to talk about gay sex next. Jimmy, you're into musical theatre aren't you? This might be your sort of thing".
Even if a kid is gay and knows he is then no way is he going to make it so obvious in front of everyone, that would be a death sentence for his standing. Not to mention that his probally straight teacher likely knows a lot less about it than he does.

Maybe among barbarians. My high school has plenty of out gays by the time my sister showed up there.
I really couldn't imagine my biology teacher speaking about gay sex....you could tell he felt uncomfortable enough speaking matter of factly about mundane straight stuff.

My thinking with why homosexuality in sex education is dodgy is that it brings in too much sex.
Even when just speaking of straight sex it is kept largely matter of fact. Introduce gay sex and you start talking a bit too much about sex for fun. You're opening the door to oral, anal and other business which...is too sexy for school.
Already there is a smidgin of this I suppose. Teaching about safe sex and contraception is important and is touched upon, needs to be talked about more really. But the actual "ins and outs" of the act.....hmm....

I don't think it is any more racy then the drug education that we also had in health class. That said I agree that you don't really need a middle school/high school teacher telling kids sexual techniques.

[garbon]

Pfft, weak.

Agreed though that woman later offed herself too, so make what you will of her instructions.

[merithyn]

I think a sensible approach would be to say in the sex ed class that there is a thing called sexual orientation based on which people may be sexually attracted to the opposite sex, or to their own sex, or to both, and that each is equally valid and not a deviant/dysfunctional sexual behaviour.
If the sexual ed class at the relevant level covers mechanics of the actual sexual act(s), then you could direct those interested in it, to information (presented with a similar degree of detail) concerning homosexual sex - but do not need to cover it in the compulsory curriculum for all.

So essentially, you would be covering the emotional/relationship side of homosexuality in the class for all students, but have anal male-on-male sex and scissoring as extra-curricular topics.

I agree with most of what you say, though I don't believe the bolded part is appropriate.

The point of this is information, not moral judgments in either direction.

[Martinus]

I think a sensible approach would be to say in the sex ed class that there is a thing called sexual orientation based on which people may be sexually attracted to the opposite sex, or to their own sex, or to both, and that each is equally valid and not a deviant/dysfunctional sexual behaviour.

If the sexual ed class at the relevant level covers mechanics of the actual sexual act(s), then you could direct those interested in it, to information (presented with a similar degree of detail) concerning homosexual sex - but do not need to cover it in the compulsory curriculum for all.

So essentially, you would be covering the emotional/relationship side of homosexuality in the class for all students, but have anal male-on-male sex and scissoring as extra-curricular topics.

Can't really see that working TBH.
"OK kids. Now run along to Mr Brown to continue your lesson. Though if you want to stay here then I'm going to talk about gay sex next. Jimmy, you're into musical theatre aren't you? This might be your sort of thing".

You are an idiot. I meant directing them to brochures and the like, not to have an extracurricular lesson on gay sex. And obviously it would not be done at the age when you refer to the students as "kids".

[Martinus]

I think a sensible approach would be to say in the sex ed class that there is a thing called sexual orientation based on which people may be sexually attracted to the opposite sex, or to their own sex, or to both, and that each is equally valid and not a deviant/dysfunctional sexual behaviour.
If the sexual ed class at the relevant level covers mechanics of the actual sexual act(s), then you could direct those interested in it, to information (presented with a similar degree of detail) concerning homosexual sex - but do not need to cover it in the compulsory curriculum for all.

So essentially, you would be covering the emotional/relationship side of homosexuality in the class for all students, but have anal male-on-male sex and scissoring as extra-curricular topics.

I agree with most of what you say, though I don't believe the bolded part is appropriate.

The point of this is information, not moral judgments in either direction.

Wow. Just wow. It is not a moral judgement - it is the current understanding of human sexuality by psychologists (that is what the term "sexual orientation" means as opposed to a "fetish" or "sexual deviancy").

It's always things like these with you uneducated, ignorant breeders. One thinks you are enlightened, and then you surprise us with something out of the left field like this.

[Eddie Teach]

You are an idiot. I meant directing them to brochures and the like, not to have an extracurricular lesson on gay sex.

But what if they can't read? 

[Martinus]

I don't think it is any more racy then the drug education that we also had in health class. That said I agree that you don't really need a middle school/high school teacher telling kids sexual techniques.

Ok maybe I wasn't clear.

I don't mean teaching them techniques as such, but I mean teaching them about dangers such as exposure to certain STDs and the risks involved. And if you do it, you kinda have to at least refer to various forms of sex (vaginal, anal, oral) as these differ from one to another.

To be honest, I never had sex ed classes so I don't know what is being taught to students that are at the sexually active age (say, 15 y.o.) these days. If, for example, they are being taught about the method of vaginal penetration to e.g. not cause harm to the partner, then similar discussion should be provided for anal sex (but as I said, since this is, statistically, less likely to be of interest to the entire class, making brochures and the like available would be sufficient).

[Martinus]

You are an idiot. I meant directing them to brochures and the like, not to have an extracurricular lesson on gay sex.

But what if they can't read? 

Gays are more intelligent and educated so they can clearly read.

[Viking]

You are an idiot. I meant directing them to brochures and the like, not to have an extracurricular lesson on gay sex.

But what if they can't read? 

Gays are more intelligent and educated so they can clearly read.

Is this the point where open expression of hetrophobia leads to somebody being banned and a thread closed.

[Martinus]

You are an idiot. I meant directing them to brochures and the like, not to have an extracurricular lesson on gay sex.

But what if they can't read? 

Gays are more intelligent and educated so they can clearly read.

Is this the point where open expression of hetrophobia leads to somebody being banned and a thread closed.

Why would it be a "phobia"? One clearly is not afraid of one's lessers. 

[Razgovory]

Why would it be a "phobia"? One clearly is not afraid of one's lessers. 

Then I suppose you aren't as high up the food chain as you thought.

[Viking]

You are an idiot. I meant directing them to brochures and the like, not to have an extracurricular lesson on gay sex.

But what if they can't read? 

Gays are more intelligent and educated so they can clearly read.

Is this the point where open expression of hetrophobia leads to somebody being banned and a thread closed.

Why would it be a "phobia"? One clearly is not afraid of one's lessers. 

Seedy!!! He's being raciss again!!!111oneoneone