Censorship, or sheer stupidity?

ssnead

Just Browsing
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Posts
68
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
151
DC_Deep - I don't understand - I would have assumed that you would appreciate my efforts. Why should children be subordinated to their parents' tender sensibilities?
 

DC_DEEP

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Posts
8,714
Media
0
Likes
97
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
DC_Deep - I don't understand - I would have assumed that you would appreciate my efforts. Why should children be subordinated to their parents' tender sensibilities?
Children in the classroom should be educated, not indoctrinated. In your post, it almost seemed as if you were using the children to rile their conservative parents as much as possible without breaking the law.

I'm an advocate of open, honest, age-appropriate information for children. I'm opposed to parents who prefer to have ignorant parents, but I'm also opposed to activists using the children to get at the parents. I wouldn't stand up in front of a math class and say "penis penis penis!!!" to get a reaction; nor would I teach a biology class and refer to the reproductive organs as "private parts." Keep it plain, keep it simple, keep it honest.

If the need arose, I would certainly encourage a parent to speak with me, privately; and I would express to the parent why it is age-appropriate to teach children the correct nomenclature for body parts as the children develop a need to refer to those body parts. If that happened, there would be less shame and secrecy when they ask more complicated questions.
 

Shelby

Experimental Member
Joined
May 17, 2004
Posts
2,129
Media
0
Likes
15
Points
258
Location
in the internet

dong20

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Posts
6,058
Media
0
Likes
28
Points
183
Location
The grey country
Sexuality
No Response
I'm not sure I understand that...

I'm saying I think ssnead is jerking your chain. To me he/she does not seem credible. While those may be his/her personal views (which I doubt) I think it's unlikely he/she would have been employed (at all or for long) teaching young children. Such a flimsy get out of jail free card as an ACLU lawyers business card sound's a bit fishy to me.

I may be wrong, who knows but if not then it's probably a good thing he/she is no longer a teacher.
 

DC_DEEP

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Posts
8,714
Media
0
Likes
97
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
I'm saying I think ssnead is jerking your chain. To me he/she does not seem credible. While those may be his/her personal views (which I doubt) I think it's unlikely he/she would have been employed (at all or for long) teaching young children. Such a flimsy get out of jail free card as an ACLU lawyers business card sound's a bit fishy to me.

I may be wrong, who knows but if not then it's probably a good thing he/she is no longer a teacher.
I thought that's what you meant, and I addressed that possibility. But he responded to me, making me think he actually may have been serious. He couldn't believe I found his comments abhorrant.
 

dong20

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Posts
6,058
Media
0
Likes
28
Points
183
Location
The grey country
Sexuality
No Response
I thought that's what you meant, and I addressed that possibility. But he responded to me, making me think he actually may have been serious. He couldn't believe I found his comments abhorrant.

Possibly, but before I posted I scanned his other 'posts'. Some of his tone reminds me a tad of Solong. But when he said

DC_Deep - I don't understand - I would have assumed that you would appreciate my efforts. ....

Made me suspect either he had either studied your posts past and present and concluded based on this that you would agree with him, or, he's a poster also known as someone else with whom you have disagreed or interacted with previously.

No evidence for this, it's just a hunch and not at all important.
 

submit452

Admired Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2007
Posts
2,362
Media
16
Likes
970
Points
258
Location
Louisville (Kentucky, United States)
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
Censorship and Fascism. Thanks to Bush and the Education Dept. and the FCC, you can't say Vagina in public and Truman Capote (even though he's long dead) can't say (in old Tv footage) Orgasm on Entertainment Tonite. Word don't hurt people, paranoia and backward Religious conservatism hurt society as a whole. It would be best to do away with the puritanism in the schools and the censorship in the media than to prosecute an unnessary war that will harm us for at least 150 years and has killed over 3000 soldiers and ever more civilians.
 

DC_DEEP

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Posts
8,714
Media
0
Likes
97
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
Possibly, but before I posted I scanned his other 'posts'. Some of his tone reminds me a tad of Solong. But when he said



Made me suspect either he had either studied your posts past and present and concluded based on this that you would agree with him, or, he's a poster also known as someone else with whom you have disagreed or interacted with previously.

No evidence for this, it's just a hunch and not at all important.
The funny thing is that, based on perhaps my stand on one issue, he thought I was an "anything goes" kind of guy. Many of my detractors make that mistake. So many apply labels to me that have no basis in fact; they just do so because I disagree with them on one issue (usually the personal rights of adults) or agree with them on another issue (usually personal rights of adults.) They accuse me of being some kind of crazy liberal democrat, but they carefully ignore the posts where I take the party-line democrats to task. I just don't accept corruption in politicians, and I don't accept parents who willfully teach their children ignorance.
 

scanjock8

Cherished Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Posts
448
Media
6
Likes
346
Points
283
Age
34
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Given the circumstances, I think the administration excercised an appropriate level of censorship in order to maintain the environment for which they are responsible. School officials must consider the maturity level of students and potential disruptions to school environment in all sorts of situations--it's their job, not their moral agenda. The word vagina is correctly used in health and science classrooms. But spoken on stage I wouldn't be surprised to hear a few snickers or hoots coming from a high school audience, which hardly does the work justice. An AP English class would be a better forum. And yes, depending on the community, some parents might object to the subject matter--that's an unfortunate reality public educators have to consider whether they agree or not.
 

ssnead

Just Browsing
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Posts
68
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
151
All of the debate over my intentions notwithstanding, I'll say a hearty "Thank You!" to submit452 for advancing the voice of reason here. I'll endorse his words and take them a step further -> not only would it be a fine idea to do away with the puritanism in the schools, it would be a better idea to do away with parental rights altogether. We have a wonderful system set up to take little minds and sculpt in accordance with the dictates of the intelligentsia - the people who have addressed themselves seriously to the problems that face society. How are we to make progress if we have to continuously pay lip service to "parental rights," when it is precisely those rights that force us two steps back for every step forward? Just because people have breeded doesn't give them the right to determine the course their offspring's education will take; society has a greater claim to that determination than they do. We are better society for The Vagina Monologues being performed in front of children of ALL ages, no matter how little - because after all, it's only biology and reality. The children are harmed if we acquiesce to a handful of parents who object to their little ones hearing that play, or an excerpt therefrom.

And to scanjock8 - well, that's all very reasonable of you, but it's precisely that sort of milquetoast approach that emboldens parents and implicitly endorses their mistaken belief that they should have anything at all to say about their childrens' welfare, education or upbringing. Maturity level? You've got cause and effect confused. Little ones will mature a great deal faster if we lay the totality of reality bare before them as soon as possible. It's time to take a stand, instead of seeking middle ground.
 

Sklar

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2006
Posts
1,647
Media
25
Likes
3,618
Points
368
Location
Everett, Washington, US
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
it would be a better idea to do away with parental rights altogether. We have a wonderful system set up to take little minds and sculpt in accordance with the dictates of the intelligentsia - the people who have addressed themselves seriously to the problems that face society. How are we to make progress if we have to continuously pay lip service to "parental rights," when it is precisely those rights that force us two steps back for every step forward? Just because people have breeded doesn't give them the right to determine the course their offspring's education will take; society has a greater claim to that determination than they do.


So let people breed and then take away the infants to be raised by the state because the state (society) knows what's best for your kids than their parents do?

Sorry, I'd have to disagree with that 100%. As a Jewish man, I would not want my kid raised by someone who is an anti semite, because part of society believes that Jews are the source of all evil. As a gay man, I would not want my kids to be raised by someone who thinks that a gay man is the source of all evil. As a conservative, I CERTAINLY would not want my kids to be raised by someone who does not believe in parental rights and thinks society should pay for everything for everyone. As someone who is faithful to my religon, I would not want my kids raised by an atheist.

Who makes up the "dictates of the intelligentsia - the people who have addressed themselves seriously to the problems that face society." Because I know people, both on the far left and far right (I am presuming America here, so forgive me if I am wrong on that) who would vehemetly disagree with what the other has to offer.

What is the criteria for this "dictates of the intelligentsia?" How does one apply to it? How does one qualify for it? College educated? Masters degree? PhD? Has to earn a certain amount of money a year? Can only be from families that have never divorced? Can only be from people that have served in a public office?

If I had kids, I would find it 100% insulting that somene else would have the balls to think that not only they could raise my kids better than I could myself but actually try to take them away from me just because they think they are better than I am because it's best for society.

SSNEAD, this next part is not to be taken as an attack on you but I am curious: if you have children and, if you do, did you place them in foster care because, as a parent, you would be taking two steps back whereas in foster care they would be raised more progressively? If you don't have children, do you plan on having them and then giving them to the state to raise as soon as they are born?
 

madame_zora

Sexy Member
Joined
May 5, 2004
Posts
9,608
Media
0
Likes
52
Points
258
Location
Ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Just to be an ass, I'll point out that the immoral majority didn't mind our kids hearing about blowjobs and semen stains on blue dresses...but please don't say "vagina" in front of our delicate kids!

Parents could have easily exercised their parental rights by deciding whether or not to bring younger kids to the performance. "Vagina" should be an acceptable word for advanced high school students to use, and parents to hear.
I'm getting sick of the pussification of America.
 

Sklar

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2006
Posts
1,647
Media
25
Likes
3,618
Points
368
Location
Everett, Washington, US
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Just to be an ass, I'll point out that the immoral majority didn't mind our kids hearing about blowjobs and semen stains on blue dresses...but please don't say "vagina" in front of our delicate kids!

Not meaning to get into a war of words with you, madame_zora :cool: , I don't think it was the immoral majority behind this. Just one principle who wasn't seeing straight.
 

madame_zora

Sexy Member
Joined
May 5, 2004
Posts
9,608
Media
0
Likes
52
Points
258
Location
Ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Not meaning to get into a war of words with you, madame_zora :cool: , I don't think it was the immoral majority behind this. Just one principle who wasn't seeing straight.


Please, fight with me- I'm so out of practise now that Big Dirge is courting me!

No, I understand that. I was just referring to the general air of repressiveness that seems to pervade our society, except when it's convenient not to repress.

"Not seeing straight", that was a knee-slapper.
 

kalipygian

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2005
Posts
1,948
Media
31
Likes
139
Points
193
Age
68
Location
alaska
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
How about the 'Euphemism Monologues', or the 'Circumlocution Monologues', or perhaps the 'Foramen non Nominandum Monologues' (orifice which is not named).:biggrin1:

I think the 'Vagina Monologues' are excellent, moving people to get over an absurd and anachronistic taboo. (though it is propopoperly prounounced 'wah-gee-nah', hard g, accent on the penultimate:tongue:)
 

ssnead

Just Browsing
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Posts
68
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
151
I think madame_zora's got it totally correct, here. The students were informed of the parameters the school deemed appropriate for the evening in question, taking into consideration all the potential audience members, including much younger kids. In reliance upon this commitment by the students, the administration didn't offer warnings to parents so they could opt out, assuming they wouldn't be necessary (again, given the commitment).

At this point, however, the students realized what they, as young members of the aforementioned intelligentsia, were obligated to do. Faced with a ridiculously stupid administration and parents too provincial to have their opinions, beliefs and preferences respected, they decided to abandon their agreement/commitment and do what they wanted anyway, knowing full well it was better for everyone - including the youngsters - to hear the unedited excerpt. And further, that if the parents were given the opportunity to opt out, some would take it, thereby depriving the young ones of a wonderful opportunity and instructive evening. That anyone would call their actions into question at this late date is laughable. The problem was always with the administration for being so repressive and pussified in the first place, as madame_zora pointed out.

And yes, Sklar - the state can do a better job of raising your kids. You, as a single person, are susceptible to all manner of imperfections, as are all human beings. But collectively, we can obliterate the same. No more repressiveness and pussification. The only remaining hurdle of any significance is this old-fashioned idea that parents should be the principal authority in the raising of their offspring. As Hillary said, it takes a village - and ideally one that doesn't recognize illusory, and damaging, "parental rights."