Dec 8th Veritas Video

[Divinity]

I'm sure you expected people to just agree with your source, simply because that's what you're used to on more conservative message boards. But Project Veritas is basically the boy who cried wolf at this point. And we've yet to see a wolf. Time and again they'll cry wolf, though. Laughing their asses off at the bumpkins like you who believe it.

"BUT THERES VIDEO!"

Deceptive editing is the modus opperandi of Project Veritas. It'd be like telling people "Lucy is really going to hold the football this time, Charlie Brown. We promise!" No, she's not. It's what Lucy does. Expecting anything different from her would be ignoring history.

[Dio]

Even with video edit, the comments themselves are no spliced. The edits are just different comments. What kind of "innocent conversation" includes the details of the introduction of sex toys to minors? The logical "convesation" is that of a broader style of pedagogy and the dean detail a specific example.

Oh, ye of little imagination. 

Do you know why any half-way decent lawyer is going to advise you to never EVER talk to cops?  Because they're very good at getting you to say something that they can use against you.  Doesn't have to be something true and doesn't have to be something you would usually say.  I don't doubt for a second that it's equally easy for "reporters" to manipulate people in an equally easy method.  Especially for public school teachers who, unfortunately, are notoriously low paid for the amount of education their profession requires; I can very easily see a teacher, struggling with a car payment and a mortgage and other bills, saying whatever you want for $1000 or so.

The person in the video is a dean of a private school, not a public school teacher.  If a teacher is so qualified to teach, they should certainly be able to articulate the why behind what they're teaching.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Oh, ye of little imagination. 

Do you know why any half-way decent lawyer is going to advise you to never EVER talk to cops?  Because they're very good at getting you to say something that they can use against you.  Doesn't have to be something true and doesn't have to be something you would usually say.  I don't doubt for a second that it's equally easy for "reporters" to manipulate people in an equally easy method.  Especially for public school teachers who, unfortunately, are notoriously low paid for the amount of education their profession requires; I can very easily see a teacher, struggling with a car payment and a mortgage and other bills, saying whatever you want for $1000 or so.

The person in the video is a dean of a private school, not a public school teacher.  If a teacher is so qualified to teach, they should certainly be able to articulate the why behind what they're teaching.

Still waiting for you to articulate why this issue bothers you.

Boru

[Dio]

One thing that I keep hearing from the right about sex education is that it’s a subject that should be left to the family. That if any adult is  talking to their children about sex, it’s only because they have bad intent. I suspect that for many right-wing Christians (I’m not sure if Dio is one of those or not), it seems like the ideal would be that they only get sex ed shortly before their wedding night

As it says "Religious Views: Agnostic". I have no issue with actual sex education.

And apart from being fucked up if you think about the implications for more than a few seconds, it’s absurdly unrealistic to expect this in an era where anyone can just type a few keywords into sites like Imagefap or Pornhub and find out that there’s a stupefying variety to sex. And the videos or photo sets they might find might elide certain details that make the practices depicted safe.

So are you saying Pornhub can be just as educational as teaching about sex toys?

If we take what was said in the video at face value (and we’ve established that Project Veritas is one of those sources where, if they say the sky is blue, you get a second opinion), the fact that they mention using spit vs. proper lube suggests that they’re focusing less on grooming or recruiting and more on how to do it safely if your interest has been piqued about that sort of thing.

It's not simply a matter of eudcation. As Pat Califia put in 1994:

You can't liberate children and adolescents without disrupting the entire hierarchy of adult power and coercion and challenging the hegemony of antisex fundamentalist religious values.

Drag Queen Story Hour similarly is not merely about reading stories:

Instead, drag is firmly rooted in play as a site of queer pleasure, resistance, and self-fashioning. It aims towards play without predetermined purpose.

It's specifically pedagogical in nature. It's also not just mere education as the students had no previous knowledge about sex toys. It's an introduction. Given the state of the Internet, as you have alluded to, a minor interested in sex toys could easily find information about sex toys on the internet. There is no need for a school to introduce sex toys to minors. Both of these are specifically intended to expose minors to drag and sex toys. It's a form of reproduction due to the obvious limitations.


But the rather frustrating thing about this mindset (and I know this from being raised into a particularly conservative branch of Protestantism) is that when it turns out that their firmly held views aren’t workable, their reactions don’t seem to be to adapt to the world around them. Their reactions seem to be A) Do the same thing they’ve been doing, but harder, and B) get rid of as many potential safety nets as possible for those who stray from their preferred track.

If you’re not up to your redneck slang, “white lightning” is moonshine; alcohol that’s brewed illegally, often by people who barely know what they’re doing, and usually done in an environment of less-than ideal cleanliness, with all the problems that come from drinking professionally made booze, only worse, because, if made properly, it’s just a few notches above being totally undrinkable, and if not, is legitimately poisonous. And, evidently, according to this anthem if the 60s counter-counter-culture, this is vastly preferable to these self-proclaimed squares to the comparatively safe Marijuana.[/hide]

Adults are free to drink bathtub gin should they choose knowing that there are no guarantees of safety.

[Dio]

The person in the video is a dean of a private school, not a public school teacher.  If a teacher is so qualified to teach, they should certainly be able to articulate the why behind what they're teaching.

Still waiting for you to articulate why this issue bothers you.

Boru

For one, it's not a school's place to introduce sex toys to minors. Second, any minor already interested in sex toys could find information on the internet. Third, it's not actually about sex education but rather queer pedagogy.

[The Architect Of Fate]

So he simply returns a spews a bunch of empty bravado...

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Still waiting for you to articulate why this issue bothers you.

Boru

For one, it's not a school's place to introduce sex toys to minors. Second, any minor already interested in sex toys could find information on the internet. Third, it's not actually about sex education but rather queer pedagogy.

1. WHY isn’t it a school’s place?

2. Any kid interested in Julius Caesar can find information on the internet. Should schools stop teaching history? And - before you ask - no, I’m not equating teaching history with the care and feeding of dildos.

3. I don’t see how educating kids about sex toys can be anything other than sex education. I mean, it’s right there in the names.

Boru

[Rev. Rye]

One thing that I keep hearing from the right about sex education is that it’s a subject that should be left to the family. That if any adult is  talking to their children about sex, it’s only because they have bad intent. I suspect that for many right-wing Christians (I’m not sure if Dio is one of those or not), it seems like the ideal would be that they only get sex ed shortly before their wedding night

As it says "Religious Views: Agnostic". I have no issue with actual sex education.

And apart from being fucked up if you think about the implications for more than a few seconds, it’s absurdly unrealistic to expect this in an era where anyone can just type a few keywords into sites like Imagefap or Pornhub and find out that there’s a stupefying variety to sex. And the videos or photo sets they might find might elide certain details that make the practices depicted safe.

So are you saying Pornhub can be just as educational as teaching about sex toys?

Theoretically. But videos like those tend to elide crucial information that helps make using it safer. And, as I said, I strongly suspect that a lot of the students there were already aware of such sex toys.

[arewethereyet]

Still waiting for you to articulate why this issue bothers you.

Boru

For one, it's not a school's place to introduce sex toys to minors. Second, any minor already interested in sex toys could find information on the internet. Third, it's not actually about sex education but rather queer pedagogy.

You don't want schools to teach kids to be gay?  

Got it.  Now we know where you stand.

Sit the fuck down.

[The Grand Nudger]

I'm not sure our friend understands how teh gay works.....? I can never help but wonder whether there's some personal and private fear..for these types, that the only thing standing between them and a penis (or dressing in drag) is being taught about it. Just..seeing one, even.

Maybe we could get some clarity on that. Do you believe, Dio, that you could be taught to be gay?