The Star has a very sensible editorial on this topic:

The intent of the new curriculum was to inform students about their bodies, about what to expect during puberty, and about the dangers of sexually transmitted diseases — surely topics that reasonable people can agree belong in the classroom. It was a refinement of, not a dramatic departure from, the current curriculum.

The changes flowed from lengthy consultations with parent groups, faculties of education, teachers and health experts. They were posted on a government website earlier this year. There was no attempt to keep the new curriculum a secret, but nor did the government go out of its way to publicize and explain the changes.

Into this vacuum strode a coalition of conservative religious groups. In the coalition’s eyes, the government was planning to teach “sex to 6-year-olds “ and provide children with a how-to manual on masturbation and oral sex. Furthermore, the coalition suggested the government had tried to implement the changes on the sly. “This has been really a dirty little secret, but now it’s out in the open,” crowed Charles McVety, spokesperson for the coalition and president of Canada Christian College.....

What really needs a serious rethink is the government’s communications strategy on hot-button issues.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editoria ... about-face

Goldenmane wrote:

“This is part of a militant homosexual agenda to normalize homosexuality in everyone’s mind and thereby promote homosexuality. If we teach our children these things ... guess what? That’s what they’ll practice.”

Really? Really?

Firstly, this shit uses the word "normalize", where most people would take it to mean "create the understanding that homosexuality is just one natural and non-harmful expression of sexuality" and plays upon the alternate definition meaning "impose upon society the notion that everybody's gay". It also takes the angle that this is a perverse and evil thing, because gays are foul wicked creatures (probably in league with Satan).

Secondly, it presupposes that being exposed to the notion of homosexuality is both necessary and sufficient for everybody to become rampant poofters.

This bullshit is entirely retarded, on all levels. People are variously sexually-oriented, there's no reason whatsoever to think that exploring one's sexual identity is inherently a bad thing (even if you have a cock, and play around with the idea of playing around with someone else's cock) and I find it completely fucking ridiculous, as a bloke who doesn't like the cock, that I live in a world where such bigoted moronic shite can be spouted in public without the least trace of embarrassment.

Sexual repression is, generally speaking, not good. As long as mutual consent is involved, what the fuck business is it of anyone but the participants? What is needed is the ability to make an informed decision. Even if, as one commentator recently said, those same-sex-attracted make up only 2% of the population (a figure I'm highly dubious about), that doesn't mean that people shouldn't be told about it. Indeed, it makes it more important that people are informed so they don't wig out and act like fuckheads the first time they come into contact with someone like that.

So, yes, let's normalize this shit, in the best sense. The sense that is opposite to "demonize".

Well, now I am curious, am I a 'rampant poofter', and if not, what do I need to do to become one?

"If we only could get rid of all those pesky jews err blacks, emm illegal aliens umm gays, the world would become such a better place!"

crank, every time is see your avatar i get this song stuck in my head ...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Orp9qCaj8Bw[/youtube]

...though i do enjoy this song

crank wrote:
Well, now I am curious, am I a 'rampant poofter', and if not, what do I need to do to become one?

Well... I COULD tell you but since we have an American audience here too, it would mostly go *beeep* *beeep*....

verbal pocketplay wrote:crank, every time is see your avatar i get this song stuck in my head ...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Orp9qCaj8Bw[/youtube]

...though i do enjoy this song

Great I have a theme song! Thanx.

Dr. Kwaltz wrote:

crank wrote:
Well, now I am curious, am I a 'rampant poofter', and if not, what do I need to do to become one?

Well... I COULD tell you but since we have an American audience here too, it would mostly go *beeep* *beeep*....

Oh come on, do tell! I so want to rampant my ass off.

Militant gay? As far as I know, the only Canadian Pink Pistols chapter is in Vancover, not Ontario.

crank wrote:
Well, now I am curious, am I a 'rampant poofter', and if not, what do I need to do to become one?

I have no idea, really. It was one of those fucking stupid ideas that was unable to be inculcated in me. If I remember correctly, it goes something along the lines of: all gays are, because they're being gay, going against god. It follows, therefore, that they must be doing it all the time.

Now, they're kinda right in a way, in that gays are gay all the time (just as much as 'straights" - that's such a fucking crappy term, but I can't think of another slang term at the moment - are straight all the time), but that has fuck all to do with anything and the fact that somehow they subconsciously equate this with spending your entire day having teh buttsex simply indicates one of two things: serious misunderstanding of the fact that people are just people, regardless of which gender preferences they have; or a significant case of suppressed jealousy...

I'm not being terribly coherent here, I know. blame it on the lack of coffee.

Edit: spelling, and making my point more opaque with every passing moment.

Being a rampant poofter is far too much work. I'm a couchant poofter.

Harmless Eccentric wrote:Being a rampant poofter is far too much work. I'm a couchant poofter.

google google google hmmmmmmm


"represented as lying on its stomach with its hind legs and forelegs pointed forward. "

The word "pretzel" leaps to mind at the mo. Also the word "ouch". Leave out that hind leg thing, though, and I'm all for it.

Goldenmane wrote:

crank wrote:
Well, now I am curious, am I a 'rampant poofter', and if not, what do I need to do to become one?

I have no idea, really. It was one of those fucking stupid ideas that was unable to be inculcated in me. If I remember correctly, it goes something along the lines of: all gays are, because they're being gay, going against god. It follows, therefore, that they must be doing it all the time.

Now, they're kinda right in a way, in that gays are gay all the time (just as much as 'straights" - that's such a fucking crappy term, but I can't think of another slang term at the moment - are straight all the time), but that has fuck all to do with anything and the fact that somehow they subconsciously equate this with spending your entire day having teh buttsex simply indicates one of two things: serious misunderstanding of the fact that people are just people, regardless of which gender preferences they have; or a significant case of suppressed jealousy...

I'm not being terribly coherent here, I know. blame it on the lack of coffee.

Edit: spelling, and making my point more opaque with every passing moment.

Your coherency, or lack thereof, is seldom to be blamed on the lack of anything, no? (must say due to my, now years long, foregoing of any of the distilled spirits , wish I was back being a rampant proof-ter, having a distinct fondness for 151 rum)

Put me in the "jealousy" category in re: entire day. Must work on my rampancy.

crank wrote:
Your coherency, or lack thereof, is seldom to be blamed on the lack of anything, no? (must say due to my, now years long, foregoing of any of the distilled spirits , wish I was back being a rampant proof-ter, having a distinct fondness for 151 rum)

Put me in the "jealousy" category in re: entire day. Must work on my rampancy.

I was perfectly sober when I wrote that. Just not properly awake yet.

I've got to go to work now, but I'll try to get back to this more coherently when I knock off (and have a few glasses of red in me).

Goldenmane wrote:

crank wrote:
Your coherency, or lack thereof, is seldom to be blamed on the lack of anything, no? (must say due to my, now years long, foregoing of any of the distilled spirits , wish I was back being a rampant proof-ter, having a distinct fondness for 151 rum)

Put me in the "jealousy" category in re: entire day. Must work on my rampancy.

I was perfectly sober when I wrote that. Just not properly awake yet.

I've got to go to work now, but I'll try to get back to this more coherently when I knock off (and have a few glasses of red in me).

Hi Goldenmane, I hope I wasn't sounding disparaging or disapproving, you speak often of your love of posting while imbibing, I was gently ribbing while bemoaning my own teetotaler status, and trying to get in a few lame puns as is my wont, or compulsion. Have a few glasses for me please, I am restricted to coffee these days.

crank wrote:

Goldenmane wrote:

crank wrote:
Your coherency, or lack thereof, is seldom to be blamed on the lack of anything, no? (must say due to my, now years long, foregoing of any of the distilled spirits , wish I was back being a rampant proof-ter, having a distinct fondness for 151 rum)

Put me in the "jealousy" category in re: entire day. Must work on my rampancy.

I was perfectly sober when I wrote that. Just not properly awake yet.

I've got to go to work now, but I'll try to get back to this more coherently when I knock off (and have a few glasses of red in me).

Hi Goldenmane, I hope I wasn't sounding disparaging or disapproving, you speak often of your love of posting while imbibing, I was gently ribbing while bemoaning my own teetotaler status, and trying to get in a few lame puns as is my wont, or compulsion. Have a few glasses for me please, I am restricted to coffee these days.

No problem at all, mate. I was more worried that I wasn't making my viewpoint clear. I find myself in what might appear to be a slightly unusual position, that of a pretty thoroughly heterosexual male who is, by virtue of the fact that I'm firmly wedded to reason, a pretty vocal advocate of equal rights. I'm firmly on the side of decrying bullshit, and part of that bullshit is oppression of homosexuals (or, women... the situation is similar for such cases). I'm not homosexual (or a woman), I'm from that famously privileged slice of Western society - the White Anglo-Saxon Heterosexual Protestant Male. I don't see any fucking reason to privilege any of that shit, and don't even qualify as Protestant since I gave up shoving my head up my own arse in favour of mystical fantasy. I'm aware, though, that given my background there are some who might attempt to tar me with the brush of paternalism, so I like to be fairly precise in order to avoid that.

In regards to stuff like gay rights (I'm not a fan of the term, because I think it only exists as a response to bullshit, but I'll use it for the nonce) I obviously have no horse in the race, no dog in the fight. I'm not gay, none of my immediate family are gay (that I know of). I do have a cousin and some friends who are gay, but really what it comes down to for me is that I truly cannot make any anti-gay stance seem remotely to make sense to me. And so I call bullshit on it. It's a non-issue for me, sexuality (unless we look at paedophilia, which I'm still pondering, and only has any relation to this topic because it falls under the heading of sexuality, not because it has anything to do with the actual topic of discussion). I honestly cannot see why the intimate behaviours of other consenting adults should be any of my or anyone else's business. I also cant see any reason why two people who want to make a lasting commitment to each other should be prevented from doing so just because they both happen to have a cock, or both happen to have a vag.

And because none of this makes sense, because all arguments put forth to support such ludicrous ideas are bullshit, I'll fucking well call them bullshit. As loudly and as effectively as I can.

Ah, that's better. Pouring my second glass in your name as i type this.

Goldenmane wrote:

crank wrote:

Goldenmane wrote:

crank wrote:
Your coherency, or lack thereof, is seldom to be blamed on the lack of anything, no? (must say due to my, now years long, foregoing of any of the distilled spirits , wish I was back being a rampant proof-ter, having a distinct fondness for 151 rum)

Put me in the "jealousy" category in re: entire day. Must work on my rampancy.

I was perfectly sober when I wrote that. Just not properly awake yet.

I've got to go to work now, but I'll try to get back to this more coherently when I knock off (and have a few glasses of red in me).

Hi Goldenmane, I hope I wasn't sounding disparaging or disapproving, you speak often of your love of posting while imbibing, I was gently ribbing while bemoaning my own teetotaler status, and trying to get in a few lame puns as is my wont, or compulsion. Have a few glasses for me please, I am restricted to coffee these days.

No problem at all, mate. I was more worried that I wasn't making my viewpoint clear. I find myself in what might appear to be a slightly unusual position, that of a pretty thoroughly heterosexual male who is, by virtue of the fact that I'm firmly wedded to reason, a pretty vocal advocate of equal rights. I'm firmly on the side of decrying bullshit, and part of that bullshit is oppression of homosexuals (or, women... the situation is similar for such cases). I'm not homosexual (or a woman), I'm from that famously privileged slice of Western society - the White Anglo-Saxon Heterosexual Protestant Male. I don't see any fucking reason to privilege any of that shit, and don't even qualify as Protestant since I gave up shoving my head up my own arse in favour of mystical fantasy. I'm aware, though, that given my background there are some who might attempt to tar me with the brush of paternalism, so I like to be fairly precise in order to avoid that.

In regards to stuff like gay rights (I'm not a fan of the term, because I think it only exists as a response to bullshit, but I'll use it for the nonce) I obviously have no horse in the race, no dog in the fight. I'm not gay, none of my immediate family are gay (that I know of). I do have a cousin and some friends who are gay, but really what it comes down to for me is that I truly cannot make any anti-gay stance seem remotely to make sense to me. And so I call bullshit on it. It's a non-issue for me, sexuality (unless we look at paedophilia, which I'm still pondering, and only has any relation to this topic because it falls under the heading of sexuality, not because it has anything to do with the actual topic of discussion). I honestly cannot see why the intimate behaviours of other consenting adults should be any of my or anyone else's business. I also cant see any reason why two people who want to make a lasting commitment to each other should be prevented from doing so just because they both happen to have a cock, or both happen to have a vag.

And because none of this makes sense, because all arguments put forth to support such ludicrous ideas are bullshit, I'll fucking well call them bullshit. As loudly and as effectively as I can.

Ah, that's better. Pouring my second glass in your name as i type this.

I think I basically went through that same thought process in the 7th grade Catholic School , at about 12-13 years old when I realized I wanted to go down on Bruce and not Julie, I never had the idea there was something wrong with my feelings, if it was OK for a girl to want Bruce, then fuck, I could too! There just wasn't any reasonable objection that I could ascertain. I managed to never have the guilt. (Never had the attentions of a Priest either even though an altar boy, oh well).

So cheers, wish all the straights could think as clearly.