From: philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara)
Subject: Re: Sexuality
Date: 01 Jan 93 18:59:41 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation
Distribution: usa

In article <1992Dec31.214245.11967@anasazi.com> briand@anasazi.com (Brian Douglass) writes:
>In article <1992Dec31.062907.6352@microsoft.com> philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec30.233732.20913@anasazi.com> briand@anasazi.com (Brian Douglass) writes:
>>>
>>>Why would homosexuality or hetrosexuality have to be taught?  That is if
>>>the class focused solely on the biology of human reproduction, the means of
>>>suppressing such reproduction, and the types and symptoms of diseases
>>>transmitted through such reproduction,
>>
>>    Disease can be transmitted through non-reproductive sexual contact.
>>Are you suggesting that those diseases, the types of contact that
>>can potentially spread them, and the methods of preventing that
>>spread should be excluded from the curriculum?
>
>The class should deal with all STDs, and their means of transmission and
>symptoms.  Sorry if I didn't make it clear.

     If it's reasonably inclusive, then I think we're in agreement.
Sounds pretty good to me.
     The Sex Ed class I had when I was in high school was notably
deficient in the area of non-vaginal sex.  I was assuming that you
were advocating something similar, which it apeears that you aren't.


>>> moral questions regarding sexuality
>>>can be dealt with in a psychology class.
>>
>>    I don't think anyone is asking for the moral aspects be
>>examined in the sex ed course.  All anyone is asking for is
>>equal time.
>
>Equal time for what?  The class focused on the biology of reproduction, and
>diseases control.  Very public health kind of stuff.

     Equal time for sexual practices that certain heterosexuals find
icky.  Oral sex can still spread disease - students should know that.


>  The moral questions
>are things like when do you have sex with someone?  Why?  What do religions
>say on the subject?  And things of that nature where generally there are
>two sides to the coin.  These are the kind of questions dealt with in the
>psychology course.  So, I don't see what you're asking for in regards to
>equal time.

     I think our basic assumptions on what would go into the curriculum
were not the same here.  If you're saying what I think you are,
I think we pretty much agree.


>>>At the public high school I went to, Sex-ed was a 6 month course taught by
>>>a biology teacher.  The class was taught in a very clinical manner
>>>resticted to information of only biological content (reproduction,
>>>pregnancy prevention, disease control) and it was required.
>>
>>     How useful was that class to gay students?
>
>Very useful, I would guess, since we had no publically avowed 16 year old
>homosexuals.  Disease control is useful regardless of orientation, STDs
>doesn't discriminate.  The class didn't talk about oral copulation, sodomy
>(that has such a religious connotation, is there a better euphimism, anal
>sex isn't much better.), as it purpose was to prevent pregnancies and diseases,
>not on how to.

     OK, this is where you lose me.  Oral copulation and anal sex
can both spread diseases.  The students should be aware that these
types of sex exist, and how to prevent disease transmission in those
cases as well as vanilla vaginal sex.  This is useful for students
regardless of their sexual orientation.


>  So, for what it was intended, I think it did its job.

     Sounds like it fell short, to me.  Sounds very much like
my own sex ed class, in fact.


>I still think this is the best way to provide sex-education, and
>enlightenment, tolerance, and all that other nifty social enginneering
>to kids.  At the right age, and of their own valition.

     I like the idea of the separation of the moral and biological
aspects of sex - I just want that biological portion to be more
inclusive.  It could save lives.

					-Phil
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil Lafornara         				1 Microsoft Way         
philipla@microsoft.com				Redmond, WA 98052-6399 
Note:  Microsoft doesn't even _know_ that these are my opinions. So there.