Freeper Sex Education 101 : How to Speak Dirty and Oppress People

[Bjorn Against]

Hello fellow Republicans, welcome to class. Today we are going to talk about ummmmmm, ummmmmm, ummmm, ahhhhhhh, some really naughty things that will make you burn in hell if you think about them.

Yes, we are going to talk about things that we are not supposed to talk about, but that we are constantly forced to obsess endlessly about because of the evil-doers that are exposing our children to filth.

Us Republicans want to make sure that children don't have filthy thoughts. That is why we need people like Rick Santorum to speak to our children about man on dog action. We need people like John Cornyn to make sure our children never consider marrying a box turtle, because we all know that there would be a huge epidemic of people vocally expressing thoughts of very naughty acts with box turtles if we didn't have John Cornyn there to tell them it was wrong. We need people like James Dobson to warn us about the hot sponge on starfish action that is happening on SpongeBob Squarepants. And we need people like Ann Coulter, to make sure that every man who lays eyes upon her will never want to have sex again.

Yes, we need to talk about the man on dog action and the box turtles, because we can not have people focus on committed loving relationships of people of the same sex. It would be immoral to allow a child who has same sex parents to live their lives without seeing their parents attacked on television by our pundits. It would be immoral to allow someone of the same sex to visit their partner in the hospital when they were lying on their death bed. It would be immoral to apply hate crimes laws to attacks on gays, no in order to be moral we must make sure those who commit violent acts against gays get off without too hard of a penalty. In order to be moral we have to make sure that we are teaching our children that if they live with parents of the same sex they just are not as good as the other kids.

Yes, we need to focus on box turtle sex and attacking the same sex parents of children, but we must make sure we never talk about something else. We must never talk about safe sex. We can talk about Rick Santorum and his man on dog action, but we can not possibly talk to our kids about condoms because that would be totally inappropriate to suggest something that could protect them from God's will.

We don't need to teach them about safe sex we can just teach them about where babies come from.



We will teach them about the stork, we teach them about a how the stork delivers the baby right to the family's door step. We don't need to teach them about anything else, after all if our children get pregnant they will already be protesting outside the abortion clinic so it is not like it is out of their way to get help. As long as they step back outside and protest the next woman who goes inside after them God will forgive them.

That is the beauty of being a Republican, you can engage in all the filthy acts you want just so long as you are able to condemn others who do the same thing. God Bless Amurica.

[zabet]

1. Second semester: required course......

http://www.armchairsubversive.org/

[Bjorn Against]

2. My god that is disturbing

You hear this kind of thing all the time, but that is the first time I have seen so many incidents compiled in a single list.

As you can probably tell by my OP I love to joke about Republican hypocrisy on this stuff, but it really disturbs me to write this. I am trying to laugh sometimes, but I am so pissed off at the same time and I can not write a humorous political piece without getting pissed off by the end of it anymore. I am sure that probably shows a lot during the last few paragraphs of my OP, but I just can not laugh at this stuff without acknowledging how serious it really is.

[Wiccan Warrior]

10. Are classes still open.LOL sarcasm of course... n/t

[noamnety]

3. This part here:

"And we need people like Ann Coulter, to make sure that every man who lays eyes upon her will never want to have sex again."

I think you lapsed from mocking people who oppress others to just kinda doing it yourself. Can women please just be people, good or bad, without always having to be reminded nonstop on DU and elsewhere that they are being rated and valued, all the time, on their fuckability?

This is how your essay reads to me: "This man says/does this. That man says/does that. This woman is ugly; nobody would want to put their penis in her."

[Bjorn Against]

4. Sorry, but I think you need to recognize satire here

I am not endorsing the behavior you are describing, my post was clearly satirical from beginning to end. Clearly it made you uncomfortable and I apologize if I deeply offended you, but at the same time I hope I offend everyone a little bit because people should be offended by what I wrote. If you can't tell in those last few paragraphs, I don't just want people to laugh I want them to get pissed off and condemn the kind of things I am saying. I think it is very clear I don't believe anything I wrote in that post and don't want other people to believe it either.

[noamnety]

6. I did get the satire

That one sentence though, what I'm trying to say is that's not satire exactly of republicans, it's just the same old way that everyone always talks about women, including the people on the left, including the media, etc. There's a difference between that sentence and the rest of the stuff that talks about box turtles and all, you know? It's just a gratuitous "that woman's unfuckable" thrown in the midst of a piece that is a send up of how freepers might teach sex education.

[Bjorn Against]

7. You need to recognize the difference between sex and sexism

Because the truth is that both men and women think about sex, and are turned on by some people and turned off by others. That is not sexism that is human nature.

I happen to consider myself a feminist, but I focus on my beliefs that women deserve equal rights to men. I focus on the political things that I can change, and not the natural things that I can't. We can achieve equality for women in the workplace and we can work to protect women from predators, but we not erase sexual thoughts from the minds of men or women. We are biologically hardwired to think about sex, now that has some good elements and some bad elements but like it or not we can not change human nature.

Please recognize my joke was not a joke against women, it was a joke about Ann Coulter and very real human nature.

[noamnety]

9. I'm suggesting that "jokes" like yours

are part of a culture of constantly judging ALL women first and foremost by their ability to be fucked. Your thoughts about sex are yours, I agree with that. But once you make that public, once you make a point of sharing that thought with others (which is a decision, not a hardwired thing), you're adding to a message, and like it or not, it is a message about all women, just like magazines who show models that are emaciated add to a message that affects all women. Within our culture, the need to constantly put negative and demeaning gender messages in the forefront again and again and again - that relentless message, is in fact sexism.

Our cultural attitudes about women as sexual beings are not a separate thing from equality in the workplace. The reasons we don't have equality in the workplace are cultural. Employers perceive women as being less intellectual, they whitewash their actual accomplishments, they perceive them as being less capable of leadership, they perceive them as being trivial. That's been well researched. All of that contributes to women getting less calls back on resumes where they are equally qualified, it contributes to getting less job offers, it contributes to getting offered less pay.

Reducing women to props for men's sexual gratification is not part of being a feminist, in my world. It's the problem, not the solution.

[Bjorn Against]

11. I don't think that denying our sexuality has done us any good in the past

While we have a long way to go before we can say that women are treated equally in our society, we have made a lot of progress and much of that progress came after people started to talk about sex more openly. Back in the days when discussion of that topic was much more taboo women were treated horribly. I mean can you honestly say that feminist ideals have not made a lot of progress since the sexual revolution of the 1960's? We may still have a long ways to go, but a lot of progress has been made over the last forty years or so.

Talking about sex is something that both men and women do, just watch Sex in the City, a show which is extremely popular among a huge number of women and you will see many things said about men's sex appeal that are far more graphic than anything I would ever publicly say about women. The size of a certain part of the male anatomy is a constant topic of discussion. Am I offended by it? Not one bit, because I know that like men women are also thinking and speaking about sex. It is just part of human nature.

There is of course a line that has to be drawn somewhere, but I believe we need to be careful not to repress sexuality too much because I don't want to go back to the 1950's again and I really don't think you do either.

[noamnety]

13. I don't know why you're talking about the 1950's.

There's a difference between objecting to women (as in your essay, and thousands of other essays) being treated as if they exist only as accessories to men's gratification while men are judged on their ideas and actions, and wanting to "repress sexuality."

Pointing to one show that graphically discusses men in demeaning sexual terms, and claiming you aren't offended by it, is not the same as a woman objecting to the nonstop message that this is all women exist as - the cultural context is so different as to be basically irrelevant to the discussion. It's like me telling a black person I'm not offended by being called a cracker, so why are they offended by the n word? It's not the same, because one group (men) are privileged, and they aren't feeling the affects of being oppressed by the other group because of their gender. Of course you wouldn't be overly offended by that one show, because you haven't spent your entire life getting the message 100 times a day that that's all you are good for, as a man, and you don't watch that show within the context of knowing that most of your friends, or you, or your family members have been sexually harassed in threatening ways, or sexually assaulted by women.

If I only got the message in your essay or in a tv show once in a blue moon, if women primarily were portrayed as working thinking humans, and the sex was a footnote to their existence on the historical and cultural stage, and if message didn't result in pervasive violence against women, and discrimination and poverty, I wouldn't be offended either. It's easy to not be offended by things that haven't affected your life in any meaningful way.

[Bjorn Against]

14. Where did I say anything about women existing only for men's sexual gratification?

You are really being unfair here, I only mentioned one woman and that was Ann Coulter. It was by no means an attack on women, and for you to suggest it is ok for women to talk about sex but not for men seems extremely unrealistic.

Sex is something that is discussed nearly as regularly by women as it is by men, and while it is true that women are more likely to be mistreated because of sexuality that does not mean that talking about sexuality is sexist.

It is not just Sex in the City that talks about men in a sexual manner, look at pretty much the entire romantic comedy genre. Those films are incredibly sexual, and they are made for a primarily female audience.

The reason I went back to the fifties in my last post was because at that time people were not supposed to talk about sex at all, yet sexism was an enormous problem. We are not going to make men's sexual thoughts go away, and history shows us that women have not been treated better when sexuality was treated as taboo.

I applaud all efforts to confront sexism, but going after every little sex joke that is made by men is not going to accomplish what you want it to accomplish.

[noamnety]

15. Let's take the focus away from your essay for a minute

"When the White House Education Fund did a study (8/00) of coverage of Elizabeth Dole’s short-lived Republican presidential bid, it found that female reporters were more likely than their male colleagues to describe Dole’s position or record on the issues. Male journalists were more likely to report male candidates’ issue positions, and to describe Dole’s personal traits."
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1074

Do you see this as a cultural problem?

If O'Reilly covered the democratic debates by talking about Obama's views on the war, Edwards view on poverty, and Clinton's thighs, would you view that as sexist and offensive?

[Bjorn Against]

16. Yes, that is a cultural problem and so is Ann Coulter.

I agree with what you are saying there, but believe me I have spent far more time tearing apart Ann Coulter's positions on the issues than any person should have to. I have made it very clear in the past why I find her so repulsive, and it is not merely because of her looks it is because of the vile and disgusting person she is and the horrible things she says. For me that is the ultimate turn off.

[orleans]

5. is this a sex thread? n/t

[Bjorn Against]

8. I don't consider it one, but it depends on what you consider to be a sex thread

I think it is a political thread because it is about the politics of sexuality and not the acts themselves.

[orleans]

12. (i was just kidding) n/t

[Rocknrule]

17. K & R

You just made my day