A new middle school sex education curriculum in Orange County, Florida, obtained by Popular Information, eliminates previous lessons on the reproductive system, contraception, and consent.
Removing the anatomy portion of sex ed is absurd, but we’ll just file it under the same “everything I don’t like is porn” reasoning they’ve been using. And at least I can understand how someone can think that teaching about birth control only encourages sex.
But what the actual fuck can anyone say to defend removing any discussion about consent‽ I honestly can’t understand it. There’s literally no reason not to cover it unless you object to the idea that rape and molestation are bad.
What’s next, teaching kids that strangers in vans have the best candy? That adults will often reward those who give special favors? The importance of keeping uncomfortable experiences a secret?
All of these things will protect kids from the radical left. Now remember, conservatives project to confess, and read what you wrote again.
But what the actual fuck can anyone say to defend removing any discussion about consent‽
Because women are property. They belong to their father until they are married and then they belong to their husbands. Men and boys have no reason to give consent.
They don’t believe women and children (and immigrants, and people with the wrong skin colour, and insufficiently wealthy people, and people who have different opinions than theirs, and people who work for them, and anyone but themselves, really) have the right or even ability to consent (or rather not consent) to anything (or any other right, really; just lots and lots of duties), simple as that, and will see any lack of consent (or anything else they perceive as an undeserved privilege, like claiming human rights) as a form of disrespect and even theft (in their worldview there’s only so much rights, happiness, wellbeing and whatnot to go around, so if anyone else has any they’re clearly stealing them from those who actually deserve them).
I once was driving through a radio dead spot in AZ and the only broadcast I could find was some hyper-religious preacher complaining about things. I still remember the line “Today’s youth think that if something is consensual it can’t be bad.”
I mean, the viewpoint these folks operate from is that there’s no need to discuss consent because you should never consent prior to marriage (aka abstinence before marriage is always saying no, so there’s no need to discuss any other answer) and that marriage is always implied consent at all times (so there remains nothing to discuss because now it’s always yes) - the whole idea of talking about consent is built on the implication that there isn’t a preordained, socially determined answer but instead that it’s a question that needs to be discussed.
Removing the anatomy portion of sex ed is absurd, but we’ll just file it under the same “everything I don’t like is porn” reasoning they’ve been using. And at least I can understand how someone can think that teaching about birth control only encourages sex.
But what the actual fuck can anyone say to defend removing any discussion about consent‽ I honestly can’t understand it. There’s literally no reason not to cover it unless you object to the idea that rape and molestation are bad.
What’s next, teaching kids that strangers in vans have the best candy? That adults will often reward those who give special favors? The importance of keeping uncomfortable experiences a secret?
All of these things will protect kids from the radical left. Now remember, conservatives project to confess, and read what you wrote again.
Because women are property. They belong to their father until they are married and then they belong to their husbands. Men and boys have no reason to give consent.
They don’t believe women and children (and immigrants, and people with the wrong skin colour, and insufficiently wealthy people, and people who have different opinions than theirs, and people who work for them, and anyone but themselves, really) have the right or even ability to consent (or rather not consent) to anything (or any other right, really; just lots and lots of duties), simple as that, and will see any lack of consent (or anything else they perceive as an undeserved privilege, like claiming human rights) as a form of disrespect and even theft (in their worldview there’s only so much rights, happiness, wellbeing and whatnot to go around, so if anyone else has any they’re clearly stealing them from those who actually deserve them).
I once was driving through a radio dead spot in AZ and the only broadcast I could find was some hyper-religious preacher complaining about things. I still remember the line “Today’s youth think that if something is consensual it can’t be bad.”
I remember thinking, yep, that about sums it up.
RUSH LIMBAUGH: You know what the magic word, the only thing that matters in American sexual mores today is? One thing. You can do anything, the left will promote and understand and tolerate anything, as long as there is one element. Do you know what it is? Consent. If there is consent on both or all three or all four, however many are involved in the sex act, it’s perfectly fine. Whatever it is. But if the left ever senses and smells that there’s no consent in part of the equation then here come the rape police. But consent is the magic key to the left.
That contributed to my radicalization
They really want to fuck them kids, don’t they?
Consent is too woke for Florida
if the left ever senses and smells that there’s no consent in part of the equation then here come the rape police
Ew. Yes, this is exactly what I meant.
They want Gilead
The idea is probably that there is nothing to consent to if you are supposed to practice abstinence.
I mean, the viewpoint these folks operate from is that there’s no need to discuss consent because you should never consent prior to marriage (aka abstinence before marriage is always saying no, so there’s no need to discuss any other answer) and that marriage is always implied consent at all times (so there remains nothing to discuss because now it’s always yes) - the whole idea of talking about consent is built on the implication that there isn’t a preordained, socially determined answer but instead that it’s a question that needs to be discussed.