SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Lane3 who wrote (19966)7/31/2001 3:11:52 PM
From: Neocon  Respond to of 82486
 
I have to run out for a short while. I will talk about policy when I return.....



To: Lane3 who wrote (19966)7/31/2001 3:58:18 PM
From: Neocon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 82486
 
First, we are altogether too reticent, as a culture, about transmitting our values to the next generation. Although it is true that moral education is primarily the business of parents, all of our institutions have a role in shaping and transmitting consensual values, or what I call "common decency", especially our schools. For this reason, we could not tolerate a president who was a sexual predator, an oath breaker (he promised to uphold the laws), a perjurer, and so forth. He had to suffer consequences from his actions, including censure. Impeachment is, in fact, censure. An argument can be made against removal. No sound argument existed to let him be or refuse to impeach. Again, for this reason, we must generally expect better of our leaders, making allowances for human foibles, but not sitting still when they exploit staff, or egregiously lie, or in other ways act indecently.

In the specific case, the schools must once again teach that although differences are inevitable and tolerance is good, there is such a thing as common decency, for example, that one should place a high premium on honesty, the fulfillment of promises, consideration of others, and so forth. I do not mean that it is a constant subject of study, but that as things arise, these things clearly guide the behavior of the authorities, and their comments when there is something to say about them.

In this context, promoting a "least common denominator" morality in sex ed, literature, and other courses where sexual/romantic comportment might come up should not be scary. Practical considerations may be brought up too, but the emphasis should be on responsibility, taking one's time to mature, regard for one's partner, not selling oneself short, and so on. It is not a matter of laying down some arbitrary rules and telling people to stick it, it is a matter of sympathizing with their real concerns and worries. Guys are often confused by the aggressiveness of male sexuality, and the way it contradicts a lot of their socialization, for example. They want advice on how to act manly and yet not treat women like game. Women have to deal with their nesting feelings, and the way that male aggression can at once turn them on, and, at the same time, make them feel debased. They want to know how to be attractive without signalling that they need not be respected. These are the issues that should be discussed, not only when discussing issues in sex ed, but when it arises in the context of romantic literature or psych or other classes. Again, the context is the application of common decency to issues of sexuality, with a particularly sensitivity to the explosive nature of sex, and the feelings with which adolescents must deal.........