23
Comments (36)
sorted by:
27
Galean 27 points ago +27 / -0

I remember sex ed. We learned that STDs are a thing, told guys to use a condom and that the pull out method was not efficient. The entire point of sex ed was to avoid getting pregnant and be careful not to get an STD.

14
WeedleTLiar 14 points ago +14 / -0

Now that I think of it, isn't it messed up to tell kids to use a condom? Isn't that just low-key telling them to have promiscuous sex?

I kind of agree that the "abstinance only" thing is BS; they should be saying "get married and commit to one person" in order to prevent STDs.

14
MattTheBlack 14 points ago +14 / -0

"get married and commit to one person" in order to prevent STDs.

That is abstinence and yes they do purposefully encourage teens to have sex

6
WhoIsThatMaskedMan 6 points ago +6 / -0

In an ideal world, the average age of marriage would be approximately 18 and they'd start having children two or three years later, like it was for thousands of years. The problem is, people are being encouraged not to grow up period, and if they absolutely must become adults, they should wait until they're in their 40s to do so.

The entire millennial generation was completely destroyed by hedonism and Peter Pan Syndrome, all brought to you by megacorps who make a lot more money when you spend it all on clothes and restaurants rather than on a house and furniture that you'll be keeping for decades to come.

It seems like in the cities, zoomers are even worse. They genuinely look like Robocop extras, except even the degenerate thugs in old Hollywood movies weren't borderline retarded. Out in the country, on the other hand, gen Z seems to be significantly in better shape than millennials. They're more fit, care less about Current Thing, and don't watch the news. There really are two Americas, and the America that exists in the inner city is essentially hell.

4
ernsithe 4 points ago +5 / -1

Isn't that just low-key telling them to have promiscuous sex?

No. It might be low-key telling them they're expected to be having sex, but that doesn't necessarily mean promiscuously. They work just as well for avoiding pregnancy in monogamous couples.

3
Ender910 3 points ago +3 / -0

That's a very long and very old argument.

Although at this point I think a better question is whether or not the government needs to provide that level of information given how much more widely available it is today thanks to the Internet. And I mean from qualified and reliable sources, not just porn.

I guess one assumption is that dumbass teens won't go out of their way to learn about it on their own. Which isn't entirely inaccurate.

Regardless, this video is just cringey as hell and I can't see any students honestly being remotely receptive to anything in it.

1
realerfunction 1 point ago +1 / -0

some of them are going to do it no matter what, so you might as well tell them to not be totally retarded while they do it.

11
OldBullLee 11 points ago +11 / -0

In the early 1970's it was just a class on human reproductive biology. We got to snigger at anatomical drawings of penises and vaginas.

It's come a long way since then.

7
AlfredicEnglishRules 7 points ago +7 / -0

When I heard about the Disney videos about puberty, I was really hoping it involved Mickey and Mini in a very cheesy video pointing out their body parts.

1
2
LinkR 2 points ago +2 / -0

Holy shit, I was looking all over the fucking place to find where the hell that "Hello Mario" meme came from. This.. was the last place I thought to look. Thank you for this cursed knowledge.

3
Kurwona 3 points ago +3 / -0

Its purpose was always to teach girls to be whores before they're even legal.

18
Nathrandir 18 points ago +18 / -0

Why do they all look like such freaks?

21
WeedleTLiar 21 points ago +21 / -0

Looks like they grabbed all the kids from one of the LGBETC clubs and asked them exclusively.

9
WhoIsThatMaskedMan 9 points ago +9 / -0

Kid 1: Gay
Kid 2: Gay
Kid 3: Lesbian
Kid 4: "Asexual" (AKA gay in denial)
Kid 5: Lesbian

I couldn't watch more than one minute in for the sake of my mental health, but I think you might be onto something.

2
Assassin47 2 points ago +2 / -0

Even in the best case scenario why are we aiming publicly funded education at the teeniest exceptions of minorities? Most people are straight. Yes, gays and asexuals or whatever are going to feel left out. That's natural.

We live in a society that gives undue influence and voice to minorities of any kind.

2
Ender910 2 points ago +2 / -0

Pretty much, yes.

7
AntonioOfVenice 7 points ago +7 / -0

Why do ducks look like ducks?

6
Steampunk_Moustache 6 points ago +6 / -0
  1. Because phrenology is real.

  2. Aposematic fashion sense.

6
WhoIsThatMaskedMan 6 points ago +6 / -0

You're thinking of physiognomy. Phrenology is the study of the shape and size of the skull to assess intelligence. Both are lambasted as pseudo-science despite both having some pretty strong roots in reality.

3
Steampunk_Moustache 3 points ago +3 / -0

You are correct.

11
Assassin47 11 points ago +11 / -0

Ban teacher's unions.

1
PooperSnooperPrime 1 point ago +1 / -0

Only effective if shitty administrators are equally banned.

10
OldBullLee 10 points ago +10 / -0

The dregs of humanity: the half-bright, the lazy, the insane, and the social justice warrior are all drawn to K-12 teaching.

10
AntonioOfVenice 10 points ago +10 / -0

Why are they so obsessed with talking to other people's kids about sex?

13
ryry117 [S] 13 points ago +13 / -0

Because they want to have sex with other people's kids.

6
Soup_Navy_Admiral 6 points ago +6 / -0

Normal people both make more normal people and get sexual pleasure by having sex with adults.

Freaks both make more freaks and get sexual pleasure by fucking with kids.

8
WeedleTLiar 8 points ago +8 / -0

Sooo, what do they want to teach? They were all just bitching about the current curriculum, which I agree does suck, but likely for different reasons from the folx in this video.

5
AntonioOfVenice 5 points ago +5 / -0

They'd rather teach the practice than the theory of sex ed.

6
Steampunk_Moustache 6 points ago +6 / -0

'My sex education was fine but I'm upset because they didn't encourage degeneracy.'

4
LinkR 4 points ago +4 / -0

I had to color in a picture of a cut in half dick and balls to identify all the parts that make it function. It made me physically nauseous. They were more focused on the mechanics behind sex and not so much the warnings of how it could kinda ruin your life. Useful knowledge to know I guess, but we were in fucking middle school, so it went about as well as you might think.... then we watched a woman give birth.... so much fluid..... this was back in... 2000ish