Subject:
|
Porn for sex education
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 13 Jul 2001 07:07:06 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
953 times
|
| |
|
|
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> I think pornography is a good tool for parents to demonstrate sex when they're
> too shy to do so in person.
Huh? What parents wouldn't be shy demonstrating sex to their kids in person?
I'm pretty sure there are laws against performing sexual acts in front of
your children anyway. Or maybe you meant demonstrating it as in talking and
showing pictures or something? Sorry if I'm slow on the take.
> It sounds like Scott objects to the commission of certain acts or
> certain production aspects of popular pornography. I certainly agree that
> children shouldn't be subjected to bad porn. But if they can keep their storey
> line together, what's the problem?
Ideally, sex is natural and part of the bond between man and woman (if
someone wants to jump in here and talk about homosexuality, go for it--I'm
no going there). Anyway, ideally "porn" can show the healthy, loving side of
sexuality but today it's mostly just raw, exploitive sex that goes for the
hardcore shock. The trend is multiple partners, lesbianism and extreme sex.
So, good luck trying to find "educational" porn for your kids.
I maintain that porn is for adults. To expose kids to porn at a young age,
before they are able to really understand it, may affect their sexual
identity in negative ways, even with "adult supervision." But it may also
help, so long as the topic IS approached from a sense of love and bonding
between two people. I think it would be a failing to advocate promiscuity or
sex for the sake of self gratification. Masterbation and fantasy is the
better idea. With so many cases of terrible sexually transmitted diseases
(especially AIDS) we are better off without all the promiscuity. To
surrender our better judgement for a good f*ck can be very costly, not to
mention downright sleazy in my opinion.
> Ignorance is the only thing I can think of. I don't consider myself terribly
> worldly, but there isn't anything I can think of about the pornography that I
> have seen that is not done in the 'real' world. It would certainly be
> unreasonable to assume that everyone engages in whatever behavior all the
> time, but I know that everything I've seen is done sometimes by some people.
> And that's fine. It's good for people to do what makes them feel good.
Yes and no. The way I see it, I want a better life for myself, my wife and
my kids. It would be a failing on my part as a parent if my son or daughter
didn't learn about love, loyalty, self respect and cherishing their mate. I
can't imagine being the parent of some of these porn queens in gangbang
flicks with 500 men. Don't care what anyone says, that's just disgusting.
So, yeah, do what feels good with YOUR PARTNER (a mutual thing by the way)
but have some decency and self respect.
> Just like sex in films, if you make conclusions about the real world based on
> movies, you are prone to make them incorrectly. Movies do not show us the
> humdrum aspects of real life. As such, they show us a disproportionate amount
> of glamor topics like sex and violence.
Yeah, it's a business and that's what makes money.
> One could assume from exposure to the
> media that these topics actually occupy a larger part of everyone else's life
> than they really do. That's why we talk about movies in my house. So we can
> get a feel for what was realistic and what wasn't. So we can discuss what
> lessons can be learned.
Yes, the mind of a child is much different so it helps if an adult can put
things in perspective. The lines between fantasy and reality are not as
clear as with an adult. Those monsters in the closet DO disappear when the
lights come on.
I will say that I feel our country has a problem with sexuality, and our
media doesn't help the matter. I think females are affected negatively
because of the media images that suggest they should look, weigh and dress a
certain way. Men are also affected but I think women have it harder. And I
also think we are sexually programming girls with the wrong images or ideas
about sexuality.
At middle school dances I work at the boys and girls may not "dirty dance."
So a lot of the girls end up bumping and grinding with each other (and I
mean some serious stuff that would shock most adults) and this is pretty
much allowed (I was the only staff who was stepping in). So what is the
message being sent? I'm not down on lesbians or anything, but really what is
going on here? Is the right thing to do? Same thing goes for messages about
oral sex. A lot of the girls have the notion that it's really not sex. Now
where did they get that notion? I'm wondering, is this a California thing?
Dan
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Porn for sex education
|
| (...) Some. I'm not really sure what you're asking. Did you want names and addresses? (...) I suspect that even if there are not specific and precise laws about it there are generally vague laws that could (and would) be used to prosecute the (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
189 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
