The NationStates Feminism Thread IV: Fight Like A Girl!

[Stellar Colonies]

Because it isnt your right to tell people what to do with themselves, and they'll just do it behind the scenes. This is such a bad idea.

The point from my perspective, isn't to actually eliminate all instances of premarital sex. Rather it is social control to reign in the behaviors of men and women to be a bit more constrained if not confined to better contexts than is the case now, and perhaps to reduce if not eliminate STDs to the most extent possible.

Taking action designed to try and eliminate it instead of regulate it will only result in cases of STDs/STIs skyrocketing. You would have to fundamentally alter Western cultures in order to achieve anything even remotely close to that, and even if that were possible (which I seriously doubt), the people skirting the rules would still result in conditions getting worse.

I just know that the more sexually conservative a nation is, the more impressed by it I am. It is such a good idea in my view precisely because sex and relationships are taken far more seriously and with better more formal protocol in such places. None of the MGTOW, PUA, Red Pill, etc. foolishness in those places. Not so far as I can see.

It would be good for sex a nd relationships to be taken more seriously...but this would cause equivalently large problems to our current situation. The best option is to regulate it in a way that improves the safety of those involved...although the current culture of casual sex could stand some stripping down and reforming.

It is instead the family/clan units laying down the law and spelling out how it is which is: We follow the Shariah or Leviticus laws: no ifs, ands, or buts. Nothing gonna happen unless the marriage happens, and no marriage gonna happen unless the man/woman has jumped through all the hoops and really is accepted for such a union. People gotta choose who they want to be with, but the family also gotta be able to put the man/woman through the ringer figuratively speaking (if that applies), to test their value/dedication in determining if they're really worthy enough or if the union will be good or bad objectively speaking.

...and they could be sexually incompatible, which they wouldn't know until after the union.

[Northern Socialist Council Republics]

The effectiveness of abstinence-only sex education really does speak for itself.

And what it says, of course, is that one can't demand that young adults not have sex and expect them to actually listen. It'll never work and people should stop trying.

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

The effectiveness of abstinence-only sex education really does speak for itself.

And what it says, of course, is that one can't demand that young adults not have sex and expect them to actually listen. It'll never work and people should stop trying.

abstinence-only sex ed also leads to an increase in all the things the people behind it aim to prevent (teen pregnancy, stds, abortion, etc.)

[Stellar Colonies]

The effectiveness of abstinence-only sex education really does speak for itself.

And what it says, of course, is that one can't demand that young adults not have sex and expect them to actually listen. It'll never work and people should stop trying.

Yeah, most will do it anyway.

Some won't, but many if not most will.

The effectiveness of abstinence-only sex education really does speak for itself.

And what it says, of course, is that one can't demand that young adults not have sex and expect them to actually listen. It'll never work and people should stop trying.

abstinence-only sex ed also leads to an increase in all the things the people behind it aim to prevent (teen pregnancy, stds, abortion, etc.)

Yea.

[Kowani]

The Cabinet of Iran approves a bill to bolster protections for women against violence

[Borderlands of Rojava]

The effectiveness of abstinence-only sex education really does speak for itself.

And what it says, of course, is that one can't demand that young adults not have sex and expect them to actually listen. It'll never work and people should stop trying.

I wonder when my old school district will come out of the year 1959. Probably never, but we gotta end abstinence only education. It's a threat to the safety of teens. Tell the religious folks that public school is a secular space and your religious values have no place in it and aren't welcome.

[Suriyanakhon]

The effectiveness of abstinence-only sex education really does speak for itself.

And what it says, of course, is that one can't demand that young adults not have sex and expect them to actually listen. It'll never work and people should stop trying.

I wonder when my old school district will come out of the year 1959. Probably never, but we gotta end abstinence only education. It's a threat to the safety of teens. Tell the religious folks that public school is a secular space and your religious values have no place in it and aren't welcome.

I don't know why you think that's going to convince people.

[Suomalainem]

BRO WTF STOP IGNORING ME

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

BRO WTF STOP IGNORING ME

wrong thread???

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

I wonder when my old school district will come out of the year 1959. Probably never, but we gotta end abstinence-only education. It's a threat to the safety of teens. Tell the religious folks that public school is a secular space and your religious values have no place in it and aren't welcome.

I don't know why you think that's going to convince people.

a better way to say it is that religious values shouldn't be enforced in public schools, seeing as how they are government institutions and separation of church and state is a thing

[Suriyanakhon]

I don't know why you think that's going to convince people.

a better way to say it is that religious values shouldn't be enforced in public schools, seeing as how they are government institutions and separation of church and state is a thing

If someone believes that Almighty God or whatever else they worship has given them a commandment that they have to fulfill, telling them that secularism is more important isn't going to convince them.

[Northern Socialist Council Republics]

If someone believes that Almighty God or whatever else they worship has given them a commandment that they have to fulfill, telling them that secularism is more important isn't going to convince them.

The only viable long-term solution is the dissolution of conservative religious faiths, really. Two fundamentally different approaches to the nature of ethics and of reality cannot meaningfully coexist in peace.

Secularists can struggle to get God out of our schools, legislatures, hospitals, and courtrooms, but whatever progress is made will always be under threat of reversion as long as people continue to be superstitious.

[Adamede]

If someone believes that Almighty God or whatever else they worship has given them a commandment that they have to fulfill, telling them that secularism is more important isn't going to convince them.

The only viable long-term solution is the dissolution of conservative religious faiths, really. Two fundamentally different approaches to the nature of ethics and of reality cannot meaningfully coexist in peace.

Secularists can struggle to get God out of our schools, legislatures, hospitals, and courtrooms, but whatever progress is made will always be under threat of reversion as long as people continue to be superstitious.

Good luck with that.

[Northern Socialist Council Republics]

Good luck with that.

Yeah... the scope of the necessary task is truly breathtaking and the means available, utterly ineffective.

Saying that something needs to be done is way easier than finding out how it is to be done.

[Stellar Colonies]

Conservative religious beliefs don't necessarily need to be dissolved (that's violating their religious rights), but human rights (free belief, bodily autonomy, etc.) should take precedence by default.

[The Blaatschapen]

a better way to say it is that religious values shouldn't be enforced in public schools, seeing as how they are government institutions and separation of church and state is a thing

If someone believes that Almighty God or whatever else they worship has given them a commandment that they have to fulfill, telling them that secularism is more important isn't going to convince them.

They can go to a private school.

Or you know, get the government to agree to fund religious schools in exchange for universal suffrage. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacification_of_1917

[Northern Socialist Council Republics]

Conservative religious beliefs don't necessarily need to be dissolved (that's violating their religious rights), but human rights (free belief, bodily autonomy, etc.) should take precedence by default.

Religious people will never truly accept that. No secular principle is safe from attack as long as religious people, who by definition serve higher religious principles, exist.

---

They can go to a private school.

Or you know, get the government to agree to fund religious schools in exchange for universal suffrage. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacification_of_1917

That compromise was very much a compromise, not some kind of brilliant synergetic solution, and from everything I hear about it that decision is haunting the Dutch school system a hundred years on.

[Suriyanakhon]

If someone believes that Almighty God or whatever else they worship has given them a commandment that they have to fulfill, telling them that secularism is more important isn't going to convince them.

The only viable long-term solution is the dissolution of conservative religious faiths, really. Two fundamentally different approaches to the nature of ethics and of reality cannot meaningfully coexist in peace.

Secularists can struggle to get God out of our schools, legislatures, hospitals, and courtrooms, but whatever progress is made will always be under threat of reversion as long as people continue to be superstitious.

Good luck, we've beaten the Hindus, the Chinese, the missionaries, and the socialists, I think we can take you too.

[Crilland]

If someone believes that Almighty God or whatever else they worship has given them a commandment that they have to fulfill, telling them that secularism is more important isn't going to convince them.

The only viable long-term solution is the dissolution of conservative religious faiths, really. Two fundamentally different approaches to the nature of ethics and of reality cannot meaningfully coexist in peace.

Secularists can struggle to get God out of our schools, legislatures, hospitals, and courtrooms, but whatever progress is made will always be under threat of reversion as long as people continue to be superstitious.

if youre anti-secular we need secularism because you dont want god to be your only study in school and youll be blinded by some religous malarkey about god or some other stuff

[Bienenhalde]

abstinence-only sex ed also leads to an increase in all the things the people behind it aim to prevent (teen pregnancy, stds, abortion, etc.)

If teenagers get STDs from not being abstinent, then they have nobody to blame but themselves.

[Adamede]

abstinence-only sex ed also leads to an increase in all the things the people behind it aim to prevent (teen pregnancy, stds, abortion, etc.)

If teenagers get STDs from not being abstinent, then they have nobody to blame but themselves.

Or we could have sex Ed teach them how to have safe sex.

[Bienenhalde]

If teenagers get STDs from not being abstinent, then they have nobody to blame but themselves.

Or we can’t have sex Ed teach them how to have safe sex.

Well, trying to prevent unwanted pregnancies is reasonable, but we shouldn't be encouraging them to be sexually active.

[Northern Socialist Council Republics]

Well, trying to prevent unwanted pregnancies is reasonable, but we shouldn't be encouraging them to be sexually active.

So it is more important to you that teens feel that their sexual activity is not going to be socially accepted, than it is that teens do not end up having to be a single parent or go through abortion.

I must confess that this set of priorities fails to move me much. Why is it a bad thing if the educational system and society as a whole considers it normal for teenagers to be sexually active?

[Bienenhalde]

Well, trying to prevent unwanted pregnancies is reasonable, but we shouldn't be encouraging them to be sexually active.

So it is more important to you that teens feel that their sexual activity is not going to be socially accepted, than it is that teens do not end up having to be a single parent or go through abortion.

Well, I would rather than teens used contraceptives or condoms to prevent unwanted pregnancies. But if they get STDs, they are necessarily hurting anyone but themselves, so I don't know why that should concern me.

[Adamede]

Or we can’t have sex Ed teach them how to have safe sex.

Well, trying to prevent unwanted pregnancies is reasonable, but we shouldn't be encouraging them to be sexually active.

There’s no need to encourage that, humans naturally are.