Another fine article by Eliza Mondegreen. She highlights a theme I’ve mentioned for many months now: The Pornification of Western Culture and its sad effect on our young people. Especially our girls. Leading them to seek refuge from their embodied selves.
Some of what’s going on is older than dirt: there’s a tremendous and ineradicable inequality between women and men when it comes to the burdens of human sexuality and reproduction. That’s hard to accept, particularly for girls. It really is unfair. And we’re stuck with it, at least as long as we’re human.
As if that weren’t enough to freak out the girls (and more than a few boys), just add porn. Young people today are being sold an image of heterosexuality that is porn-addled to the core, all revolving around the idea that heterosexual contact is inherently exploitative and often degrading and violent.
Many of these kids find porn before they ever experience intimacy themselves. No wonder so many run from the real thing or seek refuge in idiosyncratic identities that they hope will exempt them from dynamics they want no part in. If the options presented to you are oppressor or oppressed.
And for God’s sake, parents, let’s do what we can to keep these girls and boys from viewing degrading online porn. If young girls see that crap they might desire to opt out of “being a woman.” Especially after being “properly” trained in Gender Identity theory from Kindergarten! [See this post for details.]
Smartphones, the Internet, & Social Media are part of the problem too. Take control of the devices you pay for! And ask other parents in your circle to do the same. This matters.
“Sexual Revolution Buttons” by Jlbrandtis licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0.
Here is the description of a fine BBC Radio interview with feminist Louise Perry.
Helen Lewis returns with a new series of encounters with innovative thinkers. In this episode, she meets Louise Perry, author of The Case Against the Sexual Revolution.
The liberalisations of the 1960s brought significant new freedom to women's lives. But Perry argues that this has now combined with the more recent impact of online pornography, which is both ubiquitous and frequently violent. The result, she suggests, has been toxic, particularly for young women.
In a forthright exchange, Perry sets out why she thinks an over-emphasis on the virtues of freedom has stymied feminist thinking on this. And why, from the advice given by women's magazines, through the legal responsibilities of online platforms, to the expectations society places on young men - there now needs to be radical change.
You may not agree with everything you hear, but this 30 minute interview frames our current ANTI-BODY crisis exceptionally well.
All over the country in the last 9 months, parents and politicians are calling on School Boards to remove objectionable material from their schools. For example, Gov Greg Abbott of Texas sent a letter to the state’s school board association saying public schools shouldn’t distribute “pornographic or obscene material.”
School Districts all around the country are removing objectionable material from their school libraries. Some call this “book banning.”
You are not banning a book by restricting the distribution of the book to minors. Is Playboy, or Penthouse, or Hustler, etc., being BANNED because you have to be 18 to purchase/view those publications?
No.
Two books in particular are being taken off school library shelves. Gender Queer, A Memoir by Maia Kebabe & Lawn Boy by Jonathan Evison.
Kobabe and Evison noted during recent interviews an irony of their books being targeted: Neither set out to write a story for young people. But they gained a following among students with the help of the American Library Association, which has given each book an Alex Award for works "written for adults that have special appeal to young adults, ages 12 through 18." - USA Today
OK put on your parent’s “hat” and ask yourself, is this appropriate material for ages 12-18? We’ll just look at the first one. Kebabe was born female. But identifies as Non-Binary.
Yes, I know, 12-18 year olds access material far more graphic than this on their Smartphones.
Still, to have an institution of learning, our public school libraries, institutions put in place by our tax dollars, to have them supporting the distribution of material like this gives that material our tacit approval.
Some parents may approve. But the majority will not. And the rights of those parents deserve to be respected.
One parent at a Chicago School Board meeting said: “It’s not your right to decide if our minor children should have access to pornography.”
You could argue about the “pornography” bit, but most would agree this is inappropriate material for TWELVE YEAR OLDS!
When one school board member in Spotsylvania County Virginia suggested “those books” should be tossed in a fire, NPR finished their article about this with the words: “Book Burning was a practice perpetuated in Nazi Germany in order to oppress authors and ideas that were in opposition to Nazi ideology.”
Things are heating up.
Almost everyone would be opposed to book burning. That’s not what this is about. Book banning, either. Again…
You are not banning a book by restricting the distribution of the book to minors. Is Playboy, or Penthouse, or Hustler, etc., being BANNED because you have to be 18 to view those publications? No.
Parents. Get to know what is going on in your schools. And exercise your civic rights on behalf of your children.
It’s time to bring School Choice back into our political discussions.
Many today call for public education reform so that the money “follows the student” instead of going to designated school districts, some of which are failing academically, as well as failing to live up to the historic in loco parentis1in place of the parent expectation. These reformers insist the 1964 Civil Right’s Act anti-discrimination guidelines will still be followed, guidelines which specifically reference “race, color, religion, national origin” and “sex” discrimination. Nobody wants to “turn back the clock” on those advances. Practical matters like transportation issues can be worked out. These reformers say, let the parents pick the schools on a rational geographic basis. If your local school is “preaching” a gender ideology that you as a parent disagree with, then you should have the flexibility to send your child elsewhere. Just like in Sweden, where the money follows the child. You are not locked into a particular school simply because of where you live. We need to allow parents creative choice solutions to a very real and for them disturbing trend in education.
I would personally support something like the Swedish education model without disregarding the religious “free exercise” clause in our Constitution. A clause which supports freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. Otherwise, we would veer off into anti-religious bigotry. A very real concern these days.
Here is an interesting link about the Swedish Culture and Economy. We have been told that Swedish society is based on a socialist model. Well, that was then. 30 years ago. This is now. At around 33:43 into the video, they start talking about how the Swedes do public education. But you might want to watch the whole thing.
***
Some think this too extreme, which given the current state of public education in America, I don’t know why you wouldn’t want to experiment with different solutions.
I know many public school educators. I have great respect for most of them. But, I’ve personally witnessed more than a few inadequate teachers, administrators and failing schools. So if you think American parents will accept this new understanding of in loco parentis2In Place of the Parent and simply roll with gender ideology, you might be mistaken. After the remote learning experience of the last 2 years & the unwillingness of schools to reopen, many parents are deciding to pull the plug on the current local school option, if at all possible.
Obviously for most parents this is not feasible. But if the money followed the student they just might vote with their feet. And I wouldn’t blame them.
