whims

It’s the Birmingham school sex education row!


Discussion (27)¬

  1. Krokus says:

    Yeah, because when-things-were-different-written book is better than kids knowing anything about gay people or even sexuality at all.
    Same here, in Poland. We don’t really have proper sex education. When the capitol city mayor signed a declaration to make sex education a bit LGBT-friendly, governing party officials flared up and called this step “a sexualisation of our children”.
    Gods hate same-sex parenting and don’t mind child marriages or raping your slaves. How educational.

  2. European says:

    How about “we don’t do slavery any more”? But then, that wouldn’t work A) because slaves are mentioned affirmatively in the Book and B) what would you call the Filipina maids they like to use and, if they resist, decapitate on the Arabian Peninsula? Not to mention C) the Islamic State who seem to have discarded most of their Yezidi and other sex slaves… I don’t know

  3. Another delicious punchline, Author.
    I have read that the first question an experienced pedophile will ask of a prospect is “Do you know what it’s called?” If the child doesn’t know, that means that there is no adult in the child’s life who talks to them about their body in a realistic, adult manner. That means the child will be curious, and also safe. This was certainly true in my case. I knew better than to talk to my parents about what was going on.
    Couple this charming observation with the Catholic determination to keep children “innocent” and ignorant of all matters sexual and you really have to wonder whether there isn’t some ulterior motive at work.
    My father’s favourite euphemism for the penis was “your weapon” (Shades of “Full Metal Jacket” https://youtu.be/4kU0XCVey_U) until I called him on it as an adult. He’d never thought about his words I guess. Amazing how fucked up my culture is about sex, and I lay a lot of the blame at the feet of patriarchy and religion.

  4. M27Holts says:

    The age at which children are taught the subleties of sex as opposed to biological mechanics is quite a difficult problem facing the educational Authorities. All children should be allowed to explore their developing sexuality through play. I was quite young when I discovered that girls had a fascinating way of urinating. But surely that is normal primate infant behaviour?

  5. two cents' worth says:

    A point in favor of the Unitarian Universalist Association and the United Church of Christ: they have a very good sex ed. program (Our Whole Lives) that takes a holistic approach to the subject (https://www.uua.org/re/owl ). The sex ed. I got was mostly focused on two things: the biology of reproduction, and STDs (no, STIs weren’t included) :-/ . Fortunately, I had a library card with access to the adult section, so I was able to do some supplemental reading, but it would’ve been much better if I could’ve taken an OWL class when I was 12.

  6. two cents' worth says:

    DH, thanks for the info. on the 1st question an experienced pedophile will ask of a prospect. I will pass this info. along to my friends who have (or work with) children.

  7. HackneyMartian says:

    To be fair, if I remember rightly, the Koran says you shouldn’t rape your married slaves. This was perhaps a step forward .. um .. at the time ? Or maybe not. Part of the muslim myth seems to be that Mo’s followers were more civilised than / an ethical advance on / their contemporaries in Medina and Mecca.
    (Like the barmaid, I found the book hard going & can’t claim to have read it all.)

  8. BobUnco says:

    Actually I understand that sex slavery is still permitted under Islamic law. Consider the Yazidi women bought and sold as sex slaves by ISIS. There is iirc a female Islamic scholar who has confirmed that it is still Islamic law that a woman taken as a POW can be used as a sex slave. I guess Mo could be a ‘that was then and this is now Islamic progressive’ or just a ‘change the grounds when it suits’ theist.

  9. Troubleshooter says:

    “Islam is a rock – unchanging through the centuries.” Just like anything else that is DEAD.

  10. Herman says:

    HackneyMartian says:
    ” the Koran says you shouldn’t rape your married slaves”

    Not really: because by being captured the marriages are annulled!!!
    Convenient isn’t it?

  11. Herman says:

    “It’s NOT rape in Islam because ‘captured’ women become ‘your property’”

    https://barenakedislam.com/2019/03/11/its-not-rape-in-islam-because-captured-women-become-your-property/

  12. M27Holts says:

    Islam cannot have a reformation simply because its adherents are forced ro believe that the koran is the final and absolute truth as told to the ignorant savage who was power mad and saw a good way of controlling the even more ignorant populace of the seventh century. Thus no argument can trump the word of god. GAME OVER…

  13. Someone says:

    I wonder just how constrictive Scientology will become in a few decades, assuming it reaches its centennial, when it comes to teaching children about their natural bodies.
    It would be depressing if they were allowed to fully evolve into the new Islam, seeing as how they have quite a bit in common; a religion based upon the ramblings of a sociopathic con artist that tears apart families, oppresses its followers, tethers them to the “faith” for life under threat of ruin and violence, practices abuse behind the guise of its teachings and gets away with murder on a daily basis.
    Obviously that last part is more literal with Islam, but people have committed suicide thanks to Scientology, so their hands aren’t bloodless.

  14. M27Holts says:

    Try comparing L. Ron Hubbard with mo and you will have the lefty lot shouting “Islamaphobia” faster than they would shout “nazi” to Dawkins…

  15. Jim Baerg says:

    M27Holts Re: Islamic Reformation
    The Ex-Muslims doing the podcast Secular Jihadists for a Muslim Enlightenment, often state that they regard an Islamic Reformation as pointless. They try to make as many Muslims into ex-muslims as possible.
    http://secularjihadists.libsyn.com/

  16. Someone says:

    As much as I do not care for religion, I do find it repugnant when people are massacred for no fucking reason other than some asshole wants to show how extreme they are.
    Case in point, the shooting in New Zealand. Any mass shooting should be condemned, and this is only going to fuel the fire on both sides of extremism. But still, like any terrorist who plans and enacts an attack, these neo-Nazi cunts should do the world a favor by putting their first bullets in their heads.

    Not that matters now, but I wanted to edit my earlier comment to read “historically” rather than “obviously” but my internet crapped out. On any other day I suppose I’d let it go but today…you get the idea.

  17. M27Holts says:

    This was another example of “performance terrorism” because the shooter was cammed up for a web glorification of the violence. I think such actions are going to become common place as people seek their five minutes of fame. The choice of victims would suggest right wing agitators wishing to provoke a cultural war. It is violence that will be reciprocated by followers of a warlord!

  18. Jimmy says:

    “Furious Muslim parents reportedly withdrew 600 children from Parkfield Community School today after claiming they were being ‘brainwashed’ over gay lifestyles.”

    *Spoing*

    Oh for god’s sake, I just bought that thing!

  19. Laripu says:

    I’m feeling pessimistic at the moment:

    https://www.nbcnews.com/card/one-quarter-registered-voters-almost-half-republicans-believe-god-wanted-n971706

    Author, can you do something with that?
    Seems like not all believers would agree with that bit of political theology.

    Also, which of cartoon J or cartoon M would win an arm wrestling match in the pub?

  20. M27Holts says:

    The founding fathers would be very disturbed as the USA populace slide into theocracy….Mo obviously, since Jebus is just an old wives tale and even if he did exist as a flesh and blood sapiens he would be six centuries older than mo…

  21. Son of Glenner says:

    Laripu: Very depressing news, although not altogether surprising. And in the most powerful and influential country on the planet! Well said, M27Holts, re the founding fathers.

    But we in the UK can hardly criticise USA religiosity when our national anthem is a plea to a non-existent deity to preserve a monarch, who is chosen by the accident of birth, consecrated by a state church, and pledged to defend “the faith”. (Not to mention a rather uninspiring tune as usually played.)

  22. M27Holts says:

    Aye..Rule Brittania is a far more stirring tune….

  23. Someone says:

    So I just saw this headline:
    “ISIS calls for retaliation over Christchurch massacre”

    *Fucking spoing!*

    For those who want to read:
    https://www.smh.com.au/world/oceania/isis-calls-for-retaliation-over-christchurch-massacre-20190319-p515gc.html

  24. Donn says:

    Of course it seems absurd to someone who doesn’t even believe in the existence of gods, to say a god wanted some wacko to be president of the US. But consider, what would we make of the converse? God voted for someone else, but got snookered by the electoral college system? Supposed to be omnipotent, you know. If it happened, either God more-or-less wanted it to happen, or he/she/it isn’t omnipotent. That can be taken as a sign of approval, like 1 out of 1 Gods recommend Trump (and are presumed to have backed it up with their omnipotent powers, otherwise how could that have happened?) Or it can be a test for us. God doesn’t burden us with more than we can take, you know, or not always anyway.

  25. clive_p says:

    I like that
    “1 out of 1 Gods recommend Trump ”
    For those that believe in the trinity, it must be “3 out of 1 Gods recommend Trump”.

  26. two cents' worth says:

    Donn, you forgot to mention that another possibility is that God didn’t vote for anyone, or care who won. Having created human beings with free will, he is now sitting back (with or without popcorn at hand) and watching the show. If that’s the case, it can be argued that God is not omnibenevolent.

    I think it was Roger Heinlein who said that it was impossible for God to be omniscient and omnipotent and omnibenevolent. Like the project management triangle (short time to completion, low cost, and wide scope), you can have 2, but not all 3.

  27. Donn says:

    Free will is another conundrum. How could a truly omnipotent being create something with an unknown outcome? Not to say that isn’t on the table, but it sure isn’t an obvious conclusion. That angle is why it’s “God more-or-less wanted it to happen” – we’re not competent to really conceive what it means for God to want something, but we’re theologically encouraged to believe that what he gets is what he wanted. Personally I think that angle of reasoning leads to a conclusion where God is operationally non-existent – that is, there may be things outside our realm of comprehension, but nothing of any consequence.

Comment¬

NOTE: This comments section is provided as a friendly place for readers of J&M to talk, to exchange jokes and ideas, to engage in profound philosophical discussion, and to ridicule the sincerely held beliefs of millions. As such, comments of a racist, sexist or homophobic nature will not be tolerated.

If you are posting for the first time, or you change your username and/or email, your comment will be held in moderation until approval. When your first comment is approved, subsequent comments will be published automatically.