3 ms·

That's a complete misrepresentation of the article's argument. It presents the rise of those practices as problematic when they are performed under duress, when

That's a complete misrepresentation of the article's argument. It presents the rise of those practices as problematic when they are performed under duress, when the act is painful, or when there is a lack of reciprocity in sexual relationships. All of those things are problematic, and the author draws a link between those problems and the prevalence of porn-as-sex-ed. I don't think there's anything wrong with porn, but I do think there's a problem with this: > Yet according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, fewer than half of high schools and only a fifth of middle schools teach all 16 components the agency recommends as essential to sex education. Only 23 states mandate sex ed at all; 13 require it to be medically accurate. That says to me that the problem isn't porn, it's a ridiculous refusal to educate kids about sex, which leaves them to scrape together that education from porn, internet sources, and peer knowledge, which is a recipe for disaster.

john_peiffer 11y ago
> under duress If we were talking rape then that would be very serious. But I think what the article is talking about is more a kind of social pressure - would you agree? So boys are saying they prefer girls who do anal. If girls don't like that, they don't have to date those boys. If all the boys say they prefer girls who do anal, then girls don't have to date anyone. Are you saying it's morally wrong for boys to have sexual preferences? And are you saying it's wrong for girls to choose to indulge those preferences? I can't see any other end-point from the path your argument takes. What this article is saying is that boys are wrong for preferring anal, and that girls in relationships are wrong for indulging their boyfriends' sexual preferences. > when the act is painful If people choose to engage in sex acts that are painful that's none of your business. Just because you may not want to do something sexual that's also painful doesn't mean other people don't. > or when there is a lack of reciprocity in sexual relationships So what? Who says sexual relationships have to be reciprocated? I enjoy going down on my wife, but she doesn't really enjoy going down on me. Are we doing it wrong? Should I report to state mandated sex-ed to be re-educated on what my wife and I life and dislike?

john_peiffer 11y ago

> under duress If we were talking rape then that would be very serious. But I think what the article is talking about is more a kind of social pressure - would you agree? So boys are saying they prefer girls who do anal. If girls don't like that, they don't have to date those boys. If all the boys say they prefer girls who do anal, then girls don't have to date anyone. Are you saying it's morally wrong for boys to have sexual preferences? And are you saying it's wrong for girls to choose to indulge those preferences? I can't see any other end-point from the path your argument takes. What this article is saying is that boys are wrong for preferring anal, and that girls in relationships are wrong for indulging their boyfriends' sexual preferences. > when the act is painful If people choose to engage in sex acts that are painful that's none of your business. Just because you may not want to do something sexual that's also painful doesn't mean other people don't. > or when there is a lack of reciprocity in sexual relationships So what? Who says sexual relationships have to be reciprocated? I enjoy going down on my wife, but she doesn't really enjoy going down on me. Are we doing it wrong? Should I report to state mandated sex-ed to be re-educated on what my wife and I life and dislike?