Of Sex Ed and Dickheads... (updated)

On Monday the Ontario government released its comprehensive Health and Physical Education curriculum for grades 1 through 12, which includes a component on human sexuality.

Some people got sidetracked. This woman opined that her own children are too clever or savvy for the topics addressed. Though Soupcoff is a parent and a non-practicing lawyer, she lacks pedagogical training as well as an understanding of cognitive development-appropriate teaching methods. She also forgets there ARE adults who flail, fail and suffer from a dearth of basic life skills and knowledge.

Nadine Thornhill read it ALL. And she shared her observations, too.

Our friend Rick at Queer Thoughts also blogged about the new curriculum.

Premier Wynne was subjected to implicit homophobic baiting in the legislature; this is how she responded:

Bravo Kathleen, you go grrrl! we say.

On Tuesday a protest against the curriculum was held at Queen's Park, attended by upset parents, religious extremists and an assortment of right-wing nut-job misogynists, homophobes and bigots. 1800 people were expected.  Less than 200 showed up, though the exact number was disputed.  My co-blogger wondered if hundreds of school kids would get bused in, as the Catholics do for the annual March for Lies. They were not.

Speakers demanded that media not portray them as fringe religious zealots, and blamed the media for putting pressure on the government to update the curriculum (last version was 1998, way before mobile devices were available to children).  

Sadly, this is how some protesters expressed their concerns:

and:

Oh, remember (ex)Trustee Sam?  His pathetic, delusional rantings have become testerical.

He appears oblivious to documented facts about pedophilia; namely that 68% of cases of child sexual abuse are perpetrated by family members.  The curriculum will provide kids with information about being respected and heard - a big part of consent - and what to do if adults transgress their personal boundaries.  Now why would that make Sam anxious?

Here is Nadine Thornhill again, this time providing parents with ways for broaching the issue of consent with their children. Her website is an amazing resource for parents who want to address the topics covered by the Ontario curriculum with their children, in advance of its September 2015 implementation.


And not unconnected to our provincial brouhaha, this happened in the Excited States:

Whoa! Does someone lacks basic knowledge of human physiology?  Did Republican politician Vito Barbieri attend creationist abstinence anti-sex ed summer camp? Which led someone to wonder:

As it turns out, Barbieri was only using tactical trickery, adding to the treasure trove of dumb metaphors and analogies (whoops! I said anal) that anti-abortion crusaders deploy: parrots in cages, kidneys, balloons and many many others, as catalogued here by fern hill.

"I was being rhetorical, because I was trying to make the point that equalizing a colonoscopy to this particular procedure was apples and oranges," he said. "So I was asking a rhetorical question that was designed to make her say that they weren't the same thing, and she did so. It was the response I wanted."

oookay.

THIS by the way, is a very, very good analogy.  These two sketch the epidemiological effect of anti-sex Ed parents and their children on other families. This one is another take on the harmful consequences of anti-sex Ed, like anti-vaccination believers. 


The last word on Sex Ed (Ed suggestive of Edwardian) belongs to Sir Francis:

UPDATE: Harper Cons are pushing all the hot-button issues for their fundraising and 2015 elections campaigning efforts. A CPC MP has added her bigoted 2¢ from the same anti-sex-education choir songs that *trustee* Sam and provincial RWNJ Cons are shrieeeking. Cheryl Gallant parroted its bizarre obfuscations in the House of Commons. 

This is how the Reformatories show their contempt for Parliament: by using it as their sewage dump for the lies and delusional speaking points cranked out by the Politburo/PMO. 

Gallant is no newcomer to anti-choice controversy; 11 years ago at the annual March for Lies she said this.  Dean Del Mastro has also jumped on the anti-sex-ed bandwagon but news coverage for his grandiose gesture - signing Levant's petition - is curiously devoid of content, unlike the volumes posted about his criminal trial.

The last word of this update belongs to Ariel Troster and her inspired take on *concerned parents* privilege:

"[..]whether I like it or not, being a parent lends me some sort of credibility and authority to speak on issues that are relevant to children. And it gives me an opportunity to disrupt the bigots who use ridiculous “think of the children” logic to deny people’s human rights and promote discrimination.

The notion that children need to be protected from queer and trans people is an old trope. In the 1970s, Anita Bryant based an entire “Save Our Children” campaign on the idea that gay people could be hiding in schools and corrupting innocent kids. She played on the false association between homosexuality and pedophilia and built a national campaign against gay rights in the U.S. based on it. While this seems like a total anachronism to many of us today, this same vein of manipulation is still alive and well."

Turnabout: WE Have Conscience Issues Too

This is good.

An Edmonton teenager and her mother have successfully filed a complaint with the Alberta Human Rights Commission, alleging the Edmonton Public School District’s use of a Christian fundamentalist abstinence education program infringed upon their rights as non-Christians.

And it should start a trend.

@fernhilldammit @Auragasmic @01CindyLee @blueskies366 "...infringed upon their rights as non-Christians." WHY HAVEN'T MORE PEOPLE SAID THIS?

— MsBlack (@InternetPerson6) July 10, 2014

A similar objection to sex-ed taught by religious nutbars, who, by the way, run fake abortion clinics in the schools' neighbourhoods, was based on the lies and distortions typically offered in such courses.

Why bother with facts and science and tolerance? Let's just cut to the chase and use their tactics against them.

In other words, you have fucking conscience issues, nutbars? So do we.

Take your Christian Sharia crap and stuff it.

UPDATE: CBC interview at 7:00 mark here.

UPPITY-DATE: Victory! Edmonton School Board will look for other providers. Squeaky wheel wins!

UPPITY-DATE 3: Power and Politics panel (50:43 mark) destroys any semblance of justification for religion in publicly funded schools.

Enterprising US bidness!

Manufacturing industries, once the foundation of the US economy, have shipped all their jobs offshore but not all is lost since this type of business ingenuity still flounders flourishes south of the 49th parallel.

[...] here's the most upsetting new service we've heard about in a long time: a company offers to search your wife or girlfriend's panties for semen, then DNA-test it to see if she's cheating on you. Oh, and you can also use this service on your daughter. [...]

The real piece de resistance of creepiness, though, is Infidelity DNA Testing's suggestion that you use its semen detection service to find out if "your daughter is having sex." Because having your child's panties analyzed is definitely a better option than talking to her about sex.

From here.

I can only shudder and imagine how some of the stage mothers pimping their daughters at girls' beauty pageants will use this service for leverage, to identify and blackmail pedophile judges.

Dancing with the Duds

When Andy Warhol said this, did he anticipate it would apply to critics as well as performers?

In the gun-toting US this guy gave in to an action that many viewers could only imagine.

[A] 66-year-old Wisconsin man was arrested after he allegedly became so angry watching Bristol Palin on "Dancing with the Stars" that he fired off his shotgun at his television, leading to a 15-hour standoff with state police. According to the criminal complaint, [...] "Steven was upset that a political figure's daughter was dancing on this particular show when Steven did not think she was a good dancer."

Some might opine that Bristol is not particularly skilled at promoting abstinence either. And also.



This awkwardly choreographed message may succeed in promoting abstinence, thanks to the clumsy dialogue, zero chemistry and fake charm of its two chromed-to-the-gills 'stars'.

One antidote against this cloying PSA might be "porn-in-a-cup".

And now for something completely different ...

In the hoohaw leading up to the G-8/G-20 spectacle and photo opp for Stevie Spiteful, we missed a delicious little tempest in a teapot about $arah, Bristol and a US political satirist.


This is what set off the fury of Palin's groupies - a blogpost and a cartoon for Florida's Sun-Sentinel.

Back during the 2008 presidential campaign, when Sarah Palin and her family were introduced to America in all their homespun glory, I couldn’t help but imagine what the Republican spin machine would have done had Joe Biden’s daughter been the one to get pregnant out of wedlock as a teenager.

Because it was Sarah Palin’s daughter, however, the pregnancy became a celebration of life and an affirmation, somehow, of the emblematic American family. Hypocrisy is a commodity that has never been in short supply in American politics. The latest, most titillating case is that of U.S. Congressman Mark Souder of Indiana, a fierce protector of traditional family values (with all the usual anti-gay riffs), who just resigned from office.

Not only did he have sex with a staffer, but he even sat for a video interview with her touting the virtues of abstinence.

Well. The usual mob of fundamentalist religious rightwing zealots went ballistic, deliberately obfuscating the point of Lowe's observations (Bristol Palin marketing herself as a 30K per-appearance motivational speaker? that's a nifty mash-up of political opportunism and greed) while spinning it as an attack upon the sacred $arah and her holy progeny. This is typical:

Every parent viewing Lowe's cartoon should be outraged at his salacious, left-handed effort to demean Bristol Palin and to encourage America's daughters to embrace immoral practices.

As we've often observed when writing about Bible Spice and her traveling freak show, we just couldn't make this sh*t up.

From a Fundy to the Fundies: Abstinence FAIL

The alternative? Early marriage.

The piece starts off remarkably clear-eyed.

Virginity pledges. Chastity balls. Courtship. Side hugs. Guarding your heart. Evangelical discourse on sex is more conservative than I've ever seen it. Parents and pastors and youth group leaders told us not to do it before we got married. Why? Because the Bible says so. Yet that simple message didn't go very far in shaping our sexual decision-making.

So they kicked it up a notch and staked a battle over virginity, with pledges of abstinence and accountability structures to maintain the power of the imperative to not do what many of us felt like doing. Some of us failed, but we could become "born again virgins." Virginity mattered. But sex can be had in other ways, and many of us got creative.

Then they told us that oral sex was still sex. It could spread disease, and it would make you feel bad. "Sex will be so much better if you wait until your wedding night," they urged. If we could hold out, they said, it would be worth it. The sheer glory of consummation would knock our socks off.

Such is the prevailing discourse of abstinence culture in contemporary American evangelicalism. It might sound like I devalue abstinence. I don't. The problem is that not all abstainers end up happy or go on to the great sex lives they were promised. Nor do all indulgers become miserable or marital train wrecks. More simply, however, I have found that few evangelicals accomplish what their pastors and parents wanted them to.

Indeed, over 90 percent of American adults experience sexual intercourse before marrying. The percentage of evangelicals who do so is not much lower. In a nationally representative study of young adults, just under 80 percent of unmarried, church- going, conservative Protestants who are currently dating someone are having sex of some sort. I'm certainly not suggesting that they cannot abstain. I'm suggesting that in the domain of sex, most of them don't and won't.

What to do? Intensify the abstinence message even more? No. It won't work. The message must change, because our preoccupation with sex has unwittingly turned our attention away from the damage that Americans—including evangelicals—are doing to the institution of marriage by discouraging it and delaying it.

More reasonableness:

Evangelicals tend to marry slightly earlier than other Americans, but not by much. Many of them plan to marry in their mid-20s.Yet waiting for sex until then feels far too long to most of them. And I am suggesting that when people wait until their mid-to-late 20s to marry, it is unreasonable to expect them to refrain from sex. It's battling our Creator's reproductive designs. The data don't lie. Our sexual behavior patterns—the kind I documented in 2007 in Forbidden Fruit—give us away. Very few wait long for sex. Meanwhile, women's fertility is more or less fixed, yet Americans are increasingly ignoring it during their 20s, only to beg and pray to reclaim it in their 30s and 40s.

Oh-oh. A problem. Teh menz.

Unfortunately, American evangelicals have another demographic concern: The ratio of devoutly Christian young women to men is far from even. Among evangelical churchgoers, there are about three single women for every two single men. This is the elephant in the corner of almost every congregation—a shortage of young Christian men.

But not OLD Christian men. Hey, those Bountiful sorta-Mormon folk have that one figgered -- polygamy!

I sorta stopped paying attention there. The thing is seven pages long.

But it was kinda interesting to read an evangelical who didn't COMPLETELY retreat from that notoriously lefty-biased realm of facty stuff.

Even if his recommendation is stooopid.

Bristol Speaks!

And she's smarter than her mother.

The Alaska governor's 18-year-old daughter expressed some startlingly unconservative views to her mom's good friend at Fox News, Greta Van Susteren, on her show Monday night.

She told Van Susteren that teaching sexual abstinence to teenagers is "not realistic at all."

Bristol Palin said, "I hope people learn from my story. It's so much easier if you're married, have a house and career. It's not a situation you want to strive for."

She speaks in complete, intelligible sentences, too!

Maybe that Palin12 campaign should be amended to Palin44.

R.E.A.L. Abstinence™ … Now with photos and YouTube.

When Birth Pangs was conceived, gestated and born, we humble bloggers assumed that most of our posts would be parody: witty, silly and fun social satire. Unfortunately, there are current events and news that cannot be addressed with levity. Nonetheless we still manage to poke and prod at issues that are relevant to our concerns; sometimes with the grave attention they merit, but more often than not, with the irreverence they deserve.

Recently Heather Mallick, a talented writer, columnist and observer of social and political trends was savaged by rightwing goons, most of them from the US, because of an amusing piece she wrote about Sarah Palin in her CBC rubrique. Sadly to say, the CBC ombudsman and the publisher hung her out to dry, placating the goons instead of respecting freedom of thought.

Thus, in Heather’s honour, I fluffed up this old bit: R.E.A.L. Abstinence™, with photos and YouTube. And it’s dedicated to the multitudes of sexually inadequate Republican males.

The problem with Abstinence programs currently in vogue in the US and some parts of Canada is that they just don’t go far enough. As every religious zealot proclaims in their own defense, boys will boys, men will be men; it’s simply NOT THEIR FAULT they can’t seem to keep their ‘primitive animal’ urges under control and their willies inside their pants.

This manifests itself in the doctrine of strict Catholicism, Orthodox Judaism and Islam and their clumsy attempts to protect men from temptation and sin (aka women). As evident in thousands of years of self-justification from men accused of rape, sexual assault and incest, they say they just can’t stop themselves. And one of the unfortunate side-effects of unleashed male sexuality is female pregnancy. Not to mention the profligate spilling of man-seed. Won’t somebody please think of all the wasted semen?

Thus the time has come for the male chastity belt. In the past, such a device would have been constructed of metal. The discovery of Kevlar has provided today’s sexually abstinent and chaste folks with the perfect material to produce a design that snugly cradles the area known at “the basket” and strictly prevents undue stimulation or tampering. Of course, there is the required opening that safely allows the evacuation of urine without any mess.
Who controls the key to this device, you may well ask? So far, it would seem reasonable for a priest, rabbi or imam to become the sacred and trusted keyholders of their brethren’s genital muzzles, but it has yet to be determined who will guard the keys to the guardians’ own chastity belts.

Remember. Every sperm is sacred, every male-seed carries the potential of greatness. God, Yahveh or Allah .. each of Them is offended when sperm is not used for the purpose of procreation. Every sperm is sacred.

The R.E.A.L. Abstinence™ chastity belts are available in several sizes. The acronym stands for: Responsible, Empowered And Limp. R.E.A.L. abstinent™ men are not girly men. They are virile men who choose to give up unnecessary erections to protect women from unwanted pregnancies. They choose not to waste their sperm willy nilly. There is something noble and dignified about men who practice R.E.A.L. abstinence™.

Toll-free number: 1-800-YOUNUCH. Operators are ready to take your calls. Please have your measurements and credit cards at hand.

First posted at Birth Pangs.

INSTEAD OF …

Fetus-fetishizers expend a lot of time, energy and money on one target: criminalizing abortion.
Here’s a modest proposal that would direct such resources elsewhere, with more positive results. If they let go of the fear, hatred and religious dogma that contaminate every action they take and every word they say - they could transform the sword of compulsory pregnancy held over women’s bellies into useful and concrete services.

INSTEAD OF standing outside clinics for the purpose of intimidating women and medical staff, those shouting, threatening men could work at refurbishing and maintaining daycare and playground equipment for children willingly brought into this world.

INSTEAD OF paying for the printing of repulsive pseudo-scientific propaganda, money would be better invested in the cost of school books and supplies.

INSTEAD OF purchasing ultrasound equipment for “pregnancy crisis” in non-medical clinics, the funding would support prenatal and postnatal centres that provide free health care to infants and children, and the assistance their mothers require.

INSTEAD OF glorifying adoption as the perfect solution to any and all unwanted and unplanned pregnancies, counseling could be available for children who suffer from post-adoption trauma and for their adoptive and biological families as well.

INSTEAD OF lobbying government legislators to criminalize abortion and to control women’s bodies, the focus should be on advocating social and economic conditions that make life worth living for everyone.

INSTEAD OF pushing abstinence as the only answer to preventing pregnancy, information and contraception should be free and accessible to women and men who are sexually active.

Though fetus-fetishizers are rabid about the rights of those they call the “pre-born”, they don’t really give a damn for the rights and personal safety of pregnant girls and women or their health care providers. Doctors and clinic staff have been injured and killed by anti-abortion fanatics. Once women who’ve been deceived or coerced by fetus-fetishizers give birth, they’re no longer a concern. After they’ve carried the exalted product of fertilization by a sacred sperm to its term, they’re no longer of interest to abortion criminalizers.

INSTEAD OF the shaming and the blaming that turns the crank of the fetus-fetishizers …
the respect and the responsibility that choice offers.That’s the BIG difference between compulsory pregnancy and pro-choice.

The Incarnating Game

(voice-over) Heeeere’s Gabriel Angel, the host of this popular R.E.A.L.ity television show!!!

Gabriel: Today’s heavenly bachelor is God, and he is looking for a virgin who wants to get pregnant and give birth to his son. Let’s meet our three virgins right now.

(voice-over) Virgin #1 is the daughter of a movie producer who’s kept her in a secure fortress under lock and key on a remote island to preserve her innocence and of course, her virginity. Virgin #2 recently left the cloistered order of the Sisters of Perpetual Misery because she was the last nun left in the convent and it was more work to run the building than she could handle at the age of 93. Virgin #3 is a virtuoso pianist, an Olympian gold medalist in judo, a video game designer, an award-winning Cordon Bleu chef and, in her spare time, she knits hats for orphaned baby bald eaglets.

Gabriel: Now God, go ahead and ask these little ladies questions that will help you decide which virgin to pick to help you with your plan.
GOD: Virgin #1, Is your father Jewish?
Virgin #1: Duh, is the Pope Catholic? My dad’s name is like, Reuben. That’s totally not gentile.
GOD: Virgin #3, What does your father think of your work with the orphans?
Virgin #3: He says they’re cute when they’re babies but to dump them if they grow up to be doves. He says that predaTory birds are more like our own kind.
GOD: Virgin #2, Who’s your Daddy?
Virgin #2: You are, Dear God (her quaking voice rising to a crescendo) as you are also my blessed bridegroom since I took my vows 80 years ago.
GOD: Is it that long ago? Gosh, time sure flies when you’re having fun.
Gabriel Angel: While God is preparing another round of questions for the virgins, we’ll go to a commercial break for this fine product.
Gabriel Angel: We’re back and God has some more questions for the virgins.
GOD: Virgin #3, your voice seems very familiar. Do you have a part-time job staffing the phone line at 1-900-PATMYBUM while working on your PhD in Anthropology, on “The Post-Economic Puzzle of Polish Pole-Dancers in the Pre-Soviet Collapse of the Zloty”?
Virgin #3: God, that’s amazing. How did you know that?
GOD: (modestly) Well, I am God. I see you when you’re sleeping. I know when you’re awake. I know if you’ve been bad or good ….
Virgin #3: oh. Oh! uh-oh.
GOD: Virgin #2, I don’t actually have any more questions for you because you have been sharing all your thoughts with me for the last eight decades and, Theresa, I have to tell you: the mystery is gone. And as you know, religious belief is all about the mystery. So, moving on to Virgin #1, do you think that your dad would get me a role in one of his television shows, being that the critics say that his sitcoms are “godless pieces of garbage” and “wallowing in the third circle of Hell”?
Virgin #1: Like, God, my dad would be SO bummed if somebody in the business begat his grandson. But it would be totally awesome if you gave him the franchise rights after the Holy Birth.
GOD: Done deal. Forty-nine percent of the net retail sales, after taxes. Oh and another thing, he has to convert to Christianity.
Virgin #1: Christianity …. what’s that?
GOD: Ooops, I’m getting a little ahead of myself here. Never mind, you’ll find out in thirty years from now.
Soaring harp music, a chorus of angels singing as the camera turns to and zooms in on ….
Gabriel Angel: Another match made in Heaven …. Thanks for watching folks. And remember to tune in again, this time next week for the best hook-up show on television, The Incarnating Game. We’ll have Rosemary, a bachelorette burning with unholy desire for a son spawned by a Prince of Darkness.

For the faint-hearted who feel that this spoof of the vintage TV show, ‘The Dating Game’ is sacrilegious, tasteless or irreverent, please consider this: Anyone can play God. The anti-choice criminalizers and fetus-fetishizers do it all the time. Why should they have a monopoly on putting words in God’s mouth?
Originally posted at Birth Pangs.