Who's to say that the "example" was aimed only at women? Men also should value themselves enough to be choosy about who they decide to sleep with...I get so confused by women who basically are saying that they should sleep around and it should be fine, because what bad could happen.... Besides all kinds of STDs, some incurable, and unwanted pregnancies, which you obviously think is no problem either..
They already value themselves enough. Sleeping around is one thing..stds is another. if they valued themselves they’d make sure SHE IS CLEAN. Not base her cleanliness or worth off of how many people she had slept with. Get tested.
I don't understand how the metaphor is sexist. And I don't understand how believing that makes you a moron. He's making a totally valid point. The student, on the other hand, provided no real arguments or reasons, he just insulted the guy because he disagreed with him. In my book, that doesn't make you a hero.
Telling anyone that having sex lessens them or takes away from them is hurtful, derogatory, and completely antiquated. To tell this to women is to have some idea that a man's penis is so powerful that a very encounter with it can somehow fundamentally change who you are, that it can "strip your petals" or take away your beauty, which is a sexist and terrible message to send. Not to mention ridiculous.
°
Abstinence only teaches shame and the idea that sex is harmful rather then focusing on ideas of consent, safe sex, prevention of pregnancy, and ways and reasons to empower yourself to wait or engage that are honest and shame free. No idealistic metaphors of "flowers wilting" or "tarnished virtue," but honest and comprehensive facts and lessons.
Only a fool takes offense where offense is not intended. To be offended and feel derogated by a point that is intended to inspire and encourage and empower you is simply stupid. If you don't agree with it, fine. That doesn't mean it's not a valid point that doesn't deserve your attention and consideration.
My feeling remains that what this student did was not remotely heroic. It was weak and cowardly. And I'm kinda disgusted that we're applauding that kind of behavior.
I still don't see how it's sexist though... the metaphor applies to men just as well as it applies to women. The only reason it was viewed as sexist was because the student wanted it to be, because it certainly wasn't delivered with any reference to gender whatsoever.
If you believe a metaphor that shows the degradation and tearing down both physically and mentally by sexual activity was meant to "inspire and encourage" then we are too far apart here. Ripping petals from a flower, literally deflowering a rose and telling students this is what happens to them during sex is inaccurate, malicious, and untrue. It doesn't deserve their attention or their time.
°
Here are some other practices being used by abstinence only education, rather than teaching comprehensive sex ed, with consent, prevention, and true empowerment. We're not going to agree here Mike: http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2007/04/02/abstinence-only-craziness/
I'm still not seeing the problem. And still, I don't believe you're even trying to understand the point that's being made. Maybe it's just because you feel like you're being personally attacked or something, but the only thing you've done to defend your point is throw nasty words at the people who disagree with you. I hope you understand why I don't find that very persuasive. You've got to move past your basic psychological defenses and instead use the parts of your brain dedicated to real thinking.
The arguments are not designed to make people who have been sexually active to feel worthless. The activity is about the choices the students in the future. I will agree that they should be sensitive to the fact that some of the students have probably already had sexual experiences, and I can understand how such students can feel guilt because of the activity. But it's not meant to shame people for events of the past, it's meant to encourage better decisions in the future.
And even if you disagree, at least understand that these people couldn't have better intentions behind what they're teaching. They're only trying to help. And for that, you're tearing them apart. That's not very impressive.
Several of the points described in that blog are backed by basic psychology or other science. Most of the others (and the one posted above) are more opinion-based, but are still valid and logically sound. Like you, I also disagree with any activity that portrays people as deserving to be thrown in the trash, but most of them don't do that.
But hey, if you've already decided that you aren't willing to give me any quarter whatsoever, there's no point trying to force your mind open.
Let me just finish with this: One of the given problems with using metaphors at all is that they can be more easily misunderstood. By their nature, a metaphor places much of the responsibility of understanding on the listener, which clashes with our Western culture, but is also the reason metaphors can be so effective. But metaphors can fail when the listener attaches the wrong meaning and intent to the metaphor. I believe that's what is happening here -- there's a significant gap between the message the teacher is trying to convey and the message you guys are taking away. I don't like these metaphors for that reason (that they are weak enough to be easily misunderstood). But I stand by my belief that the intended message is totally valid and commendable.
I agree completely and commend you for "sticking to your guns". To say things like the teacher implied that a student who had sex should be "thrown away in the trash" is utterly ridiculous and indicative of the mindset of that person.
°
Abstinence only teaches shame and the idea that sex is harmful rather then focusing on ideas of consent, safe sex, prevention of pregnancy, and ways and reasons to empower yourself to wait or engage that are honest and shame free. No idealistic metaphors of "flowers wilting" or "tarnished virtue," but honest and comprehensive facts and lessons.
My feeling remains that what this student did was not remotely heroic. It was weak and cowardly. And I'm kinda disgusted that we're applauding that kind of behavior.
I still don't see how it's sexist though... the metaphor applies to men just as well as it applies to women. The only reason it was viewed as sexist was because the student wanted it to be, because it certainly wasn't delivered with any reference to gender whatsoever.
°
Here are some other practices being used by abstinence only education, rather than teaching comprehensive sex ed, with consent, prevention, and true empowerment. We're not going to agree here Mike: http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2007/04/02/abstinence-only-craziness/
The arguments are not designed to make people who have been sexually active to feel worthless. The activity is about the choices the students in the future. I will agree that they should be sensitive to the fact that some of the students have probably already had sexual experiences, and I can understand how such students can feel guilt because of the activity. But it's not meant to shame people for events of the past, it's meant to encourage better decisions in the future.
Several of the points described in that blog are backed by basic psychology or other science. Most of the others (and the one posted above) are more opinion-based, but are still valid and logically sound. Like you, I also disagree with any activity that portrays people as deserving to be thrown in the trash, but most of them don't do that.
But hey, if you've already decided that you aren't willing to give me any quarter whatsoever, there's no point trying to force your mind open.