Having Killed Science, Kansas Lawmakers Now Go After Sex

[SlowwHand]

Azazel, you're a self-proclaimed Communist.
That says it all.

[Jaakko]

No sex please, we're Americans.

Statement void in California

[chequita guevara]

I told you so!

[Elok]

Well, I'm a virgin so I'm probably not qualified to argue, but I'm inclined to wonder how looking at the genitalia of prepubescents could foster a better understanding of one's own sexuality.
I also can't understand how an act that has been done with evidently great relish since the dawn of the human race requires a PhD to appreciate. I mean, we're talking about an act regularly performed by little white lab mice here. Probably there are some deep cosmic ramifications and such that I'm not aware of, but aren't such things most easily learned by experience? Enough of the mystery religion crap already.
As for requiring formal education to know this stuff, well, I was aware of the specific mechanics of straight sex by third grade, and was told that "it" tasted like tuna fish before I entered middle school. Speaking for myself, I would just as soon have learned such information later. Maybe my "education" was a rare phenomenon, but I still think our society, as a whole, appears to be just teeming with sexual info for inquiring, or not inquiring, minds to pick up. We haven't been given enough information, IMO, to say whether such a class is obscene, but I think it unnecessary, for what my opinion's worth.

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
I told you so!

Yeah! Take it to the streets!
Kansas sucks. Britain sucks. USA sucks.

Viva the thriving populace that is Cuba!

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Elok
Well, I'm a virgin so I'm probably not qualified to argue, but I'm inclined to wonder how looking at the genitalia of prepubescents could foster a better understanding of one's own sexuality.

You don't understand how understanding the development of our sexual organs could help us understand our sexuality? You obviously need the class.

I also can't understand how an act that has been done with evidently great relish since the dawn of the human race requires a PhD to appreciate.

Because despite the amount of sexuality shown in our media, there's very little substance. It's mostly flash and titillation, and very little understanding of how we work. I took the Psychology of sex in college, and it was a packed class. Lot's of people have a lot of ideas about sex, but very few people have actually studied the science of sex, let alone the multiple ways to enjoy sex.

[CerberusIV]

It really comes down to a simple choice, either a degree of openness about sex or a repressive society. Personally I don't live in the same world as the bigots who believe in no sex before marriage, no divorce and all that.

It's not quite the same issue but I came across this story.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2894267.stm

The UK has the highest rate of teenage pregnancy in Western Europe. A lot of that is due to our Victorian era obsession about the morality of sex. Persuading people not to have sex doesn't work so trying to ensure an understanding of what is going on is the only option left. That is where the bigots step in to attack anything and anyone who dares differ from their lifestyle and views.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Azazel
I am 18. You won't believe the kind of crap we "knew" about sex, before we had sex ed.

Thank you, Azazel! I was thinking the same thing, but you beat me to the punch.

[SlowwHand]

Maybe if some of you kept it in your pants, the meathead gene would be curtailed.

[Elok]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Originally posted by Elok
Well, I'm a virgin so I'm probably not qualified to argue, but I'm inclined to wonder how looking at the genitalia of prepubescents could foster a better understanding of one's own sexuality.

You don't understand how understanding the development of our sexual organs could help us understand our sexuality? You obviously need the class.

I also can't understand how an act that has been done with evidently great relish since the dawn of the human race requires a PhD to appreciate.

Because despite the amount of sexuality shown in our media, there's very little substance. It's mostly flash and titillation, and very little understanding of how we work. I took the Psychology of sex in college, and it was a packed class. Lot's of people have a lot of ideas about sex, but very few people have actually studied the science of sex, let alone the multiple ways to enjoy sex.

Oh, for the love of...
A. Quit being such a condescending weenie(no pun/innuendo intended).
B. Unless the people taking the course are themselves prepubescent, they should have plenty of experience themselves with "development." In light of that fact, I maintain that gratuitous, if educational, depictions of naked little girls are in bad taste.
C. Sex is an instinctive urge. We have a strong desire to eat food too, but, while there are cooking classes, I do not NEED to know how my taste buds work to appreciate a good steak. If I grow up eating Big Macs and never knowing how good a Caesar salad can taste, well, that's a pity, but hardly the tragedy some people here are claiming. Granted, sex is a more complicated drive, but the real "enjoyment," as such, comes from a primal urge. Domination urges, etc. may be a psychological reality, but they are also an intensely personal experience. If we have lived our lives up to collge age without coming to know ourselves, is a college course going to fix our ignorance? Do we need professors to tell us how to whack off? If we're that slow in the head, we will find misery in life no matter what we do.
D. If we need to know technique for some reason(though I can't see how an expression of passion is better when performed with scientific precision), there are books on that. There are books listing books on that. There are books telling you how to successfully write a book on that, and get it published. The Kama Sutra is several thousand years old, if it comes to that. Inquiring minds can seek them out, or get a subscription to Maxim/whatever, or listen to the talk at certain inner-city bars, or search the internet, where you can find that kind of site by accident, while looking for a site about puppy dogs...are we suffering such a severe deficit?

[Demerzel]

Originally posted by Elok
D. If we need to know technique for some reason(though I can't see how an expression of passion is better when performed with scientific precision), there are books on that. There are books listing books on that. There are books telling you how to successfully write a book on that, and get it published. The Kama Sutra is several thousand years old, if it comes to that. Inquiring minds can seek them out, or get a subscription to Maxim/whatever, or listen to the talk at certain inner-city bars, or search the internet, where you can find that kind of site by accident, while looking for a site about puppy dogs...are we suffering such a severe deficit?

Considering that this class was voluntary from what I can gather, why should some who complain about it be allowed to ruin it for others?

If sex education can improve the lives of those who experience it then i'm all for it

For those who don't want to see/hear it - don't go! Those who are complaining, remind me of those old grannies who watch programmes aimed at the 18-24 TV market just so they can complain about it to the TV watchdogs.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Elok, I know you feel personally insulted, but take a breath and think about what you're saying. Yes, sex is an instinct, like eating. That's a great analogy. You know why? Because Americans have probably the worst diets in the educated, industrialized world, in no small part because (1) they don't know jack about food, and (2) they mostly learn about food from the media, which seems to suggest that it's okay to exist entirely on a diet of pre-processed meat and cheese produts, followed by an obscenely sweet dessert and washed down with an absurdly caloric soft drink. No wonder we're the fattest nation on earth.

We're also routinely described as a culture approaches sex either puritanically or pornographically, but never, never naturally (one simple example: the lack of legal places for women to sunbathe topless in the US, in stark (forgive the pun) contrast to Europe). Seems like a little sexuality education wouldn't hurt.

Finally, remember that the Kansas course was almost certainly voluntary. What is there to object to?

[Flubber]

Sexuality is a reality and I can't imagine why anyone would have a problem with people wanting to study it in a college. Likewise pornography exists in society and could be the subject of serious study either from a sociology or a filmmaking perspective.

My university also had a packed sexual psychology course ( I happened not to take it) which seemed to be a serious course . It seemed to study sexual beviors in the same way they studied pretty much all other types of behaviors

Sheesh people, grow up . . Only a puritannical dictator would try to quash this at a university level. Its elective I presume so noone need take it if they do not want.

AS for some of the material being in "bad taste" I might agree but thats irrelevant. I would be loathe to censor what a professor needs to teach a class. Can the medical students show the exact same depictions of females at various stages of development?? If this stuff was kiddie porn ( the possession of which is illegal in a lot of places) I would see a problem. If not, whats the problem?? Are we so uptight that the ( non-sexual) depiction of a nude child causes an uproar??

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Elok
I also can't understand how an act that has been done with evidently great relish since the dawn of the human race requires a PhD to appreciate.

Hmmm well people have been breathing and had their heart beat since the beginning of time so I guess there is no sense studying respirology or cardiac function either. We have had behavior forever so psychology is out too I guess . Don't need a PHD to appreciate the act but I doubt the course spends much time on the "act".

Sorry for the sarcasm but just because something has existed for a long time does not mean it is not worthy of study. Perhaps you want to make the case that all psych and soc is crap . . . If so fine , make that case. If not, what I want to know is why sexual behavior, an integral part of human existence, is any less worthy of study than other aspects of human behavior. Even the fact that some people are so uncomfortable with the topic is a sociological phenomenon

[Elok]

For clarification:

I was replying to the posters who implied that not knowing this stuff could have a catastrophic effect on your love life. I'll try to be more specific next time. I can't tell from personal experience, obviously, but everything I know about life on this earth from nineteen years of experience leads me to believe that that is a big fat load of crap. Soc and Psy are not all gibberish, but people have lived on this planet for thousands of years, and all but a few centuries of those milennia have been lived without a deep understanding of the Oedipal complexes and whatnot involved. I do not consider the lives of those people a tragic blunder, nor do I think the glut of info available to modern human beings can make the world perfect. Finally, I would like to add that I am a high-functioning autistic, so please do not even dare to tell me that the true visceral joy of any human experience can be picked up from a textbook. Don't even open your mouth. I'll know it's a lie, even if you don't. (Yeah, I'm all worked up. Sorry.)
My posts were all a sort of side remark to the main point, BTW. I don't believe it should be censored, I just think such courses are unnecessary for More Fulfilling Sexuality or whatever. I think knowledge of human anatomy and the chemicals and such that drive it are useful medical and scientific info. I just don't need to know how it all works to enjoy it, if you catch my drift.