Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Teaching Good Sex

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 110 posts

Re: Teaching Good Sex

#11

Post by hyperbovine »

mdda wrote: post #10
giardini wrote: post #8

They may not know how to do long division or compute an angular velocity but, by damn, American kids are going to know how to fuck properly! I am pleased my tax dollars are so well spent. "Female ejaculation" - sheez...

Given the choice between 'computing angular velocity' and Sex Ed, your tax dollars would give a life-long benefit to the vast majority of the population if applied to the latter - and the value of people understanding the former is minuscule in comparison. And what is so ridiculous about Female ejaculation?

> the value of people understanding the former is minuscule in comparison.

Do you have any quantitative evidence whatsoever to support such a claim?

Re: Teaching Good Sex

#12

Post by jbm »

saulrh wrote: post #6
veyron wrote: post #5

The real problem here is that many parents have very strong opinions regarding teaching sex in school. obligatory south park reference (nsfw): http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s05e07-proper-...

That's a pretty common problem all throughout education. http://www.cnn.com/2011/09/06/living/teachers-want-to-tell-p...

I really want to sympathize with the teachers, but I do feel for the parents.

--

His mother chimed in and told me that it had been a horrible summer for them because of family issues they'd been through in July. I said I was so sorry, but I couldn't help but point out that the assignments were given in May. She quickly added that she was allowing her child some "fun time" during the summer before getting back to work in July and that it wasn't his fault the work wasn't complete. Can you feel my pain?

--

I don't feel her pain. Summer break isn't a period for extended homework - it's a chance to develop curiosity and self-development. The skills that "No Child Left Behind" leave undeveloped (self-guided learning) can only happen during the summer period.

I was reading fairly advanced books for my age, but I don't recall ever having a strictly enforced "summer reading list". Unless this was an enriched program with the pre-requisite clearly spelled out beforehand, I don't understand the attitude shown by the teacher.

More empathy is needed all around.

Re: Teaching Good Sex

#13

Post by araneae »

Shenglong wrote: post #7

I recently (well, a few years ago) went through sex education in schools. They don't really teach you sex, as much as why you shouldn't have sex. Even when they're teaching contraception, the consistent emphasis on only x% effective really cuts out student interest. It's almost like saying, "yeah we have a method or preventing HIV transmission, but it doesn't really work." While it might seem like a good idea at firs…

Was she having sex with you? She might be disclosing it to her partners, just not every random guys she knows, understandably.

Re: Teaching Good Sex

#14

Post by roryokane »

hyperbovine wrote: post #11
mdda wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the choice between 'computing angular velocity' and Sex Ed, your tax dollars would give a life-long benefit to the vast majority of the population if applied to the latter - and the value of people understanding the former is minuscule in comparison. And what is so ridiculous about Female ejaculation?

> the value of people understanding the former is minuscule in comparison. Do you have any quantitative evidence whatsoever to support such a claim?

I don’t see how it’s possible for mdda or you to have quantitative evidence either way. I doubt that there are any surveys or studies that include questions on all of the following: whether people can compute angular velocity, whether they know how to have sex, whether their life is a success.

I’m guessing mdda arrived at eir conclusion that understanding sex is more important than understanding how to compute angular velocity by reasoning that far more people have sex (as evidenced by children) than get jobs necessitating angular velocity calculations.

I’m not sure how useful understanding the equations for angular velocity in daily life really is, because I don’t know those equations myself. I can say, though, that I feel like I intuitively understand angular velocity well enough and that knowing the equations wouldn’t help my life much. And I would guess (based on personal experience and observation) that people have sex more often than they have to deal with something spinning around quickly.

Re: Teaching Good Sex

#15

Post by danbmil99 »

veyron wrote: post #5

The real problem here is that many parents have very strong opinions regarding teaching sex in school. obligatory south park reference (nsfw): http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s05e07-proper-...

Yep, parental furor is the core issue. Schools can't really teach anything that touches on social 'value' issues, including religion, sex, gender, ethics, morality -- even the strengths & weaknesses of capitalism vs socialism are basically off-limits in K-12. It's a sad state of affairs but unlikely to change given the diversity of opinions and the structure of public education in this country (US).

Re: Teaching Good Sex

#16

Post by joshu »

firebones wrote: post #9

Good lord, I saw this headline on HN and thought it was going to be the ESR classic "Sex Tips for Geeks": http://catb.org/~esr/writings/sextips/

why did you link that? now i have to wash my brain out with soap.

Re: Teaching Good Sex

#17

Post by madcaptenor »

giardini wrote: post #8

They may not know how to do long division or compute an angular velocity but, by damn, American kids are going to know how to fuck properly! I am pleased my tax dollars are so well spent. "Female ejaculation" - sheez...

I went to the school that the article talks about. It's a private school. It's not anybody's tax dollars. (And we did know how to do math.)

Re: Teaching Good Sex

#19

Post by mdda »

roryokane wrote: post #14
hyperbovine wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the value of people understanding the former is minuscule in comparison. Do you have any quantitative evidence whatsoever to support such a claim?

I don’t see how it’s possible for mdda or you to have quantitative evidence either way. I doubt that there are any surveys or studies that include questions on all of the following: whether people can compute angular velocity, whether they know how to have sex, whether their life is a success. I’m guessing mdda arrived at eir conclusion that understanding sex is more important than understanding how to compute angula…

Putting the Sex Ed classes into a broad category of 'improving people's mental health' may give quantifiable estimates of benefit[1]. The monetary benefits of regular education (most directly measurable at the university level [2]) are an order of magnitude less valuable (on a happiness-per-dollar basis).

Normally, I'm not really a fan of the 'soft' subjects (compared to the hard sciences). But giving people at least a minimum level of knowledge about something as basic to life as sex (or understanding depression, for instance) should (IMHO) be a priority.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happiness_economics#cite_ref-13 [2] http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-money/2011/06/06/is-college...

Re: Teaching Good Sex

#20

Post by winter_blue »

For those if you who have never had sex, how does this (seeing this article) make you feel?

Please be honest. - I feel a combination of envy and hatred (but I wish I didn't feel like this.)

Post reply on HN