Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

internetworkers - Re: [internetworkers] why am I not surprised?

internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Michael <michael AT metalab.unc.edu>
  • To: "Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/" <internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [internetworkers] why am I not surprised?
  • Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:18:18 -0500 (EST)


On Thu, 2 Dec 2004, Chad Ingham wrote:

chances are low of contracting it". Either way, any kid who plays Russian roulette with his health has a character issue which you can't teach away. - Chad

Everything else aside, if the kid is going to play Russian Roulette, shouldn't he at least accurately know his odds?

If my tax dollars are going to pay to teach kids sex ed, shouldn't I as a taxpayer at least get accurate information for my money?

To say that inaccurate information in a sex ed curriculum doesn't matter because kids are going to do it or not do it /anyway/ is, frankly, crazy talk. That's the /whole reason/ to provide accurate information - if some of them are going to do it anyway, the least we can do is try to give them good data. The question of whether or not they SHOULD do it are up to them, their parents, their beliefs, etc.

I'm not even launching into how teaching that half of gay teens have HIV is nothing but the vilest, purest, most shameless homophobia, or how teaching that HIV is spread via sweat is nothing but a tactic of marginalization and hysteria.

--
Michael Williams "Also, there's a monkey in a diaper with michael AT ibiblio.org a machine gun. I don't understand www.ibiblio.org/michael it at all. But it's on your side."
www.robustmcmanlypants.org/blog/ --Mr. Saturday




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page