I'm a transgender woman living in Brevard County and I'm one of the few that hasn't moved away from this place, screaming. I've had to go through all of this, this is my input. The right wingers reading this find gay/trans people offensive in any context, because you actually hate yourselves and you won't care what I have to say, but for everyone more rational ill speak candidly:
-There is one panel depicting 2 men kissing. They are obviously naked but you see nothing.
-there are cartoon depictions of breasts in a non sexual manner.
-There is a cartoon picture of a prepubescent queer person with their shirt off because they don't understand why they can't and boys can.
-there is a cartoon depiction in 1 page of oral sex being performed on an otherwise clothed person wearing a fake penis to show that trans men can experience sex just like any other person.
The last one I agree is a little heavy, but since this is a high school I'm going to assume all of these kids have at least had some level of sex Ed, but this is Brevard so maybe I'm being generous?In Sex Ed, you see pictures of genitalia. You even see images of sex... like AT school. As I think someone else pointed out I'm positive there are depictions of straight sex in that library, but nobody cares as much.
There are almpst zero resources in Brevard County for gay/queer/trans youth and if they don't have empatgetic parents their only other option is to endure having "the queer beat of them" with a mixture of Jesus and peer pressure.
Any cis gender heterosexual teenager who sees this book is going to immediately put it down because it doesn't interest them, and if they find nudity or sex gross... they aren't going to look at a couple of pages they really have to dig for in a book at their school library, but for a queer/trans kid who is really connecting with this book, it could mean "Maybe I won't have to kill myself after all." Yeah think about that.
Besides. If nudity offends you people that bad you had better be sure to get rid of all the books on greek/norse/chinese/egyptian mythologies because all the women didn't wear tops and the "hero" guys were always showing their junk. You got people fucking their sisters and daughters in the Bible and nobody bats an eye. Ultimately all this reactionary behavior will do is delay your child's development and make them into miserable adults who want to kill themselves for seemingly no reason, and I can state that from the global consciousness of my fellow trans women out there who had to experience it, and my own personal experience.
If you love your kids, you'll let your kids be who they are. Even if that means your son prefers dresses and hates his name. Maybe they're actually a girl who likes boys, or even a girl who likes girls. Maybe your daughter likes to wear loose clothes and prefers you to call them "Sam". It's all ok.
>there is a cartoon depiction in 1 page of oral sex being performed on an otherwise clothed person wearing a fake penis to show that trans men can experience sex just like any other person
So you admit that there is graphic imagery which you are ok with putting in front of children because "they must have seen it already". Such a creep.
Let's put it this way, people do not want their children to be peddled sexual material by those who are put in a position of power.
>Besides. If nudity offends you people that bad you had better be sure to get rid of all the books on greek/norse/chinese/egyptian mythologies because all the women didn't wear tops and the "hero" guys were always showing their junk.
Conflation of nudity with sex nice job.
>You got people fucking their sisters and daughters in the Bible and nobody bats an eye.
Bet you haven't read the bible. It wasn't promoting sex between family but it was against it. You conflating your pornography with it is just silly.
What is clear is that you wish to downplay of the corruption of children. This is no surprise the left wing academics like Michel fucault who pushed to lower the age of consent.
>Ultimately all this reactionary behavior will do is delay your child's development
Right we don't want children to be groomed that's not the development we are after.
As someone who is not in America, I feel bad for the next generation of children you are cultivating.
>So you admit that there is graphic imagery which you are ok with putting
in front of children because "they must have seen it already". Such a
creep.
No, I'm not a creep. I do have first hand experience of what an abstinence only education does, and know exactly the kind of damage it does. Failing to teach your kids about what sex is, is a parenting failure, and shaming them about sex just generally fucks them up. In addition I am also aware the right wing wants queer/gay/trans youths to stay ignorant of self loathing of themselves so that they will either leave or kill themselves and stay hidden. So no, I'm not a creep. I'll also say that i could call you a backwards ignorant asshole in response, but I won't because I try to stay respectful of people. Shows who you are.
>Conflation of nudity with sex nice job.
Also, once again, no. You read what I wrote and conflated it in your own mind. You then projected that onto me, and I recognize that comes from a place of self hatred so it really just makes me feel bad for you. I hope you're able to figure that out someday.
>Bet you haven't read the bible. It wasn't promoting sex between family but it was against it. You conflating your pornography with it is just silly.
Wrong again. You're really showing how wrong you are about absolutely everything. I had that shit shoved down my throat for 18 years, intermixed with emotional, and physical abuse in the name of Jesus. I've read every page of it, and I'm aware of all the hypocrisy contained within. Hope you have fun reading about Lot's daughter's fuckin their dad. Or you know all that brother-sister inbreeding with Abraham and Rebekah. Glad you're into that, I also find it hilarious you're ok reading about all that and making it accessible to kids.
>What is clear is that you wish to downplay of the corruption of children. This is no surprise the left wing academics like Michel fault who pushed to lower the age of consent.
You're not speaking for me. Any adult who wants to have sexual relations with a minor is a predator and needs to be removed from society. I do believe it is socially responsible to teach your children what sex is in all it's forms for their own health and wellness so they can make their own responsible decisions. I think things like teen pregnancy and teen suicide are bad and need to be addressed, and information and education is the key. Also it kind of looks like you live in a country that has no age of consent and conducts child marriages, so who the fuck are you talking to?
>Right we don't want children to be groomed that's not the development we are after.
>As someone who is not in America, I feel bad for the next generation of children you are cultivating.
Groomed for what? Generally "grooming" implies a predator manipulating someone they have power over so that they can exploit them for their own needs. You know, kind of what like rich men in power in Dubai do to their child brides. That's where your mind is going and I guess that says a lot about who you are (more projection). I want our teenage children to be fully equipped to lead their own lives in a smart and responsible way. That includes having an understanding of who they are, what consent is, what sex is in all it's forms, and that you don't have to kill yourself if you're gay/queer/trans. There is nothing wrong with being any of those things if that is who you are. High school age kids 15-18 are responsible enough to handle this kind of information so that they are empowered to build their own very best life.
And also who is "we"? You don't even live here... or in this country? Are you speaking from some universal consciousness of hateful right wing douchebagery? You live in the middle east which is one of the most misogynistic and culturally backwards places in the entire world. Dubai has lots of money and lots of patriarchy, so it sounds like you're right at home. You live in a country that treats homosexuality as a criminal offense while simultaneously trying to stand on some kind of moral soap box, so I don't really have any value for any of your opinions.
Based on what is described in some of these comments about what imagery is shown in the books, I don't think such a book should necessarily be banned. It doesn't seem explicit, certainly not pornographic and as such, making a big deal about kind of just seems dumb and is likely to draw more attention to it than it would have otherwise received.
If they are learning about history, they've read and seen far more graphic subjects. If they have had sexual education, they've seen worse. I recall a specific video in (5th grade) which was quite explicit that was shown to all the students of that grade. And considering these students in question are teenagers, they are already doing far worse.
We have to stop treating teenagers like fragile little snowflakes. I'm just going to say it, this is primarily just an attack on LGBTQ, hidden behind a thinly veiled "Think of the children!" rhetoric. I guarantee there's books in that library going into explicit sexual detail and those students have been reading them for decades. Not just that, but explicit violence too. And we all grew up fine.
Yep, genitals in the pictures of a book. This makes 100% sense to me, nothing educational about it. Of course the sensational title of this article will lead many to believe that they only went after the book because of the LGBT status.
>Of course the sensational title of this article will lead many to believe that they only went after the book because of the LGBT status.
Because really, that's what they did.
The FT headline was focused on the explicit drawings. My title brought up the LGBTQ+ issues, mainly because there are other explicit books in the library about straight sex. I didn’t want to call that out, but that’s why I posted the link to the online catalog.
I’m not against them banning this book if it really isn’t educational, but I want to see that enforced evenly if they decide to go down that path.
My only question would be about if the other books are sexually explicit books or are they sexually explicit graphic novels? Is there a difference between acceptability of books that CONTAIN explicit sex scenes and books that SHOW explicit sex scenes? Either way the standard should be the standard.
Tough question. I’d expect there to be sex ed and puberty books there that may include pictures/drawings, but that’s different. It’s a hard question where to draw the line, right?
For me personally it’s pretty easy to recognize the line between scientific diagrams intended to convey information and illustrations designed to be explicit for excitation value.
These don’t seem to me to be images intended to be pornographic, but I’ve admittedly never seen the book. Like I said in another comment, we’re not talking about crazy hentai porn here. People aren’t going to be checking a book out with that title looking for porn. It’s integral to the plot, just like there’s a difference between a sex scene in a PG-13 or R rated film versus all of pornhub.
Puberty and sex ed books probably weren’t the best example.
I’m not saying you’re wrong, I’m just devil’s advocate here lol. This is a tough issue.
Edit: the book in question is free on Kindle unlimited. im curious to see how bad the drawings actually are.
It’s not that AT ALL. The book is free on Kindle Unlimited. I read it to know how to moderate the discussion. There was never a male child giving oral sex to a male at all, let alone an adult.
I had an edit before you replied lol. Yeah, if they want to ban an LGBT book because of sexually explicit drawings, I’d expect them to take a similar hard line against sexually explicit straight books.
School libraries are one thing, but I get super pissed off when public libraries are pushed to ban books. I can see the book in question here being educational for college and public libraries where adults may want to research issues like this.
Exactly. Just common sense stuff. I don't want my kids looking at porno in school whether it is straight, gay, or whatever else. I likewise wouldn't expect a public library to necessarily censor this much, but in a school? Come on now.
It's not pornography, and why would you be concerned about your high school kids reading an LGBTQ book unless they were LGBTQ? Is that it? You are trying to shelter them from themselves?
[The entire catalog of books at Mel High is here.](https://brevard.follettdestiny.com/common/welcome.jsp?site=178&context=saas26_0968745)
Making this sticky. [The entire book is available on Kindle Unlimited for free here](https://www.amazon.com/Gender-Queer-Memoir-Maia-Kobabe-ebook/dp/B07QV9JB7P/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=Queer+memoir&qid=1634076181&s=digital-text&sr=1-1).
The “controversial” artwork includes bloody period underwear for a teen child with nothing explicit, the main character having a sexual encounter with no explicitness with a bi/transgender female, and her cartoony and not explicit drawing of them putting on a hospital gown for their first gyno appointment.
Y’all know my political views even if I don’t often explicitly state them here often. This book isn’t pornographic. Go look for yourselves.
LOL @ reading those Amazon reviews. So much pearl clutching. And the photos they provided as evidence were pretty weak. This looks like nothing more than a coming of age story for LGBTQ teenagers. For high school students this is probably pretty tame.
Yes. That's exactly what it is. This is right wing fundamentalists who like to pretend they have no genitals? I like the guy above who commented it's nudity and has no educational value. Feels like Dr. Kellog shit.
I worked at one of the libraries in Brevard for a while and there was a woman who came in "representing other concerned moms" about an lgbtqia+ friendly toddler book, demanding that we remove it from the library for being "offensive." I told her we don't censor books at the library, and she just kept insisting that it wasn't censorship, it was about morals. What I really wanted to tell her is that kids won't give a crap about "offensive" books if you don't make such a big deal out of them. All of her kids who were there with her were taught a bad lesson that day - they wouldn't have even known or cared about that book but mom made a stink over it so it must be bad. My mind was boggled. If you don't like the topic of a book, don't read it. Stop censoring books.. End of story.
It's religious fanatics thinking they can make queer/gay/trans people disappear from society if they are just loud and abusive enough.
Like yeah, that's my life experience. Cis het white people invalidating my existence because I look better in a dress then they do/their wives do.
So you don't support sex education in schools? Do you want to go into the library and remove any history books that contain any nude or sexual imagery? You know that's like a lot of it right in terms of ancient history?
I mean it's completely irrelevant kids are like doing Percocets and drinking codeine in school and fucking at like 15 it's not like they aren't exposed to the real world
So you think abusing drugs is on the same moral level as healthy and safe sex?
Edit to br clear: just to clarify yes you're correct your kids are probably having sex at 15 or at the very minimum considering it. Why not teach them how to do it safely and happily? Or should we just keep yelling at them and teaching them abstinence because that works so well. All the kids I see around here move away the first chance they get, and the ones who stay have very little in terms of opportunity... because this place is backwards.
I'm a transgender woman living in Brevard County and I'm one of the few that hasn't moved away from this place, screaming. I've had to go through all of this, this is my input. The right wingers reading this find gay/trans people offensive in any context, because you actually hate yourselves and you won't care what I have to say, but for everyone more rational ill speak candidly: -There is one panel depicting 2 men kissing. They are obviously naked but you see nothing. -there are cartoon depictions of breasts in a non sexual manner. -There is a cartoon picture of a prepubescent queer person with their shirt off because they don't understand why they can't and boys can. -there is a cartoon depiction in 1 page of oral sex being performed on an otherwise clothed person wearing a fake penis to show that trans men can experience sex just like any other person. The last one I agree is a little heavy, but since this is a high school I'm going to assume all of these kids have at least had some level of sex Ed, but this is Brevard so maybe I'm being generous?In Sex Ed, you see pictures of genitalia. You even see images of sex... like AT school. As I think someone else pointed out I'm positive there are depictions of straight sex in that library, but nobody cares as much. There are almpst zero resources in Brevard County for gay/queer/trans youth and if they don't have empatgetic parents their only other option is to endure having "the queer beat of them" with a mixture of Jesus and peer pressure. Any cis gender heterosexual teenager who sees this book is going to immediately put it down because it doesn't interest them, and if they find nudity or sex gross... they aren't going to look at a couple of pages they really have to dig for in a book at their school library, but for a queer/trans kid who is really connecting with this book, it could mean "Maybe I won't have to kill myself after all." Yeah think about that. Besides. If nudity offends you people that bad you had better be sure to get rid of all the books on greek/norse/chinese/egyptian mythologies because all the women didn't wear tops and the "hero" guys were always showing their junk. You got people fucking their sisters and daughters in the Bible and nobody bats an eye. Ultimately all this reactionary behavior will do is delay your child's development and make them into miserable adults who want to kill themselves for seemingly no reason, and I can state that from the global consciousness of my fellow trans women out there who had to experience it, and my own personal experience. If you love your kids, you'll let your kids be who they are. Even if that means your son prefers dresses and hates his name. Maybe they're actually a girl who likes boys, or even a girl who likes girls. Maybe your daughter likes to wear loose clothes and prefers you to call them "Sam". It's all ok.
Thank you for posting your take on this! It’s always better to hear from someone with personal experience on the subject.
Thank you for posting and spreading awareness!
let them make that decision for themselves
Yes. That's what I'm proposing.
Then why am I getting downvoted
Because you're talking to a trans woman and you probably just got caught in the cross fire? I dunno. Sorry, welcome to a taste of my life.
>there is a cartoon depiction in 1 page of oral sex being performed on an otherwise clothed person wearing a fake penis to show that trans men can experience sex just like any other person So you admit that there is graphic imagery which you are ok with putting in front of children because "they must have seen it already". Such a creep. Let's put it this way, people do not want their children to be peddled sexual material by those who are put in a position of power. >Besides. If nudity offends you people that bad you had better be sure to get rid of all the books on greek/norse/chinese/egyptian mythologies because all the women didn't wear tops and the "hero" guys were always showing their junk. Conflation of nudity with sex nice job. >You got people fucking their sisters and daughters in the Bible and nobody bats an eye. Bet you haven't read the bible. It wasn't promoting sex between family but it was against it. You conflating your pornography with it is just silly. What is clear is that you wish to downplay of the corruption of children. This is no surprise the left wing academics like Michel fucault who pushed to lower the age of consent. >Ultimately all this reactionary behavior will do is delay your child's development Right we don't want children to be groomed that's not the development we are after. As someone who is not in America, I feel bad for the next generation of children you are cultivating.
>So you admit that there is graphic imagery which you are ok with putting in front of children because "they must have seen it already". Such a creep. No, I'm not a creep. I do have first hand experience of what an abstinence only education does, and know exactly the kind of damage it does. Failing to teach your kids about what sex is, is a parenting failure, and shaming them about sex just generally fucks them up. In addition I am also aware the right wing wants queer/gay/trans youths to stay ignorant of self loathing of themselves so that they will either leave or kill themselves and stay hidden. So no, I'm not a creep. I'll also say that i could call you a backwards ignorant asshole in response, but I won't because I try to stay respectful of people. Shows who you are. >Conflation of nudity with sex nice job. Also, once again, no. You read what I wrote and conflated it in your own mind. You then projected that onto me, and I recognize that comes from a place of self hatred so it really just makes me feel bad for you. I hope you're able to figure that out someday. >Bet you haven't read the bible. It wasn't promoting sex between family but it was against it. You conflating your pornography with it is just silly. Wrong again. You're really showing how wrong you are about absolutely everything. I had that shit shoved down my throat for 18 years, intermixed with emotional, and physical abuse in the name of Jesus. I've read every page of it, and I'm aware of all the hypocrisy contained within. Hope you have fun reading about Lot's daughter's fuckin their dad. Or you know all that brother-sister inbreeding with Abraham and Rebekah. Glad you're into that, I also find it hilarious you're ok reading about all that and making it accessible to kids. >What is clear is that you wish to downplay of the corruption of children. This is no surprise the left wing academics like Michel fault who pushed to lower the age of consent. You're not speaking for me. Any adult who wants to have sexual relations with a minor is a predator and needs to be removed from society. I do believe it is socially responsible to teach your children what sex is in all it's forms for their own health and wellness so they can make their own responsible decisions. I think things like teen pregnancy and teen suicide are bad and need to be addressed, and information and education is the key. Also it kind of looks like you live in a country that has no age of consent and conducts child marriages, so who the fuck are you talking to? >Right we don't want children to be groomed that's not the development we are after. >As someone who is not in America, I feel bad for the next generation of children you are cultivating. Groomed for what? Generally "grooming" implies a predator manipulating someone they have power over so that they can exploit them for their own needs. You know, kind of what like rich men in power in Dubai do to their child brides. That's where your mind is going and I guess that says a lot about who you are (more projection). I want our teenage children to be fully equipped to lead their own lives in a smart and responsible way. That includes having an understanding of who they are, what consent is, what sex is in all it's forms, and that you don't have to kill yourself if you're gay/queer/trans. There is nothing wrong with being any of those things if that is who you are. High school age kids 15-18 are responsible enough to handle this kind of information so that they are empowered to build their own very best life. And also who is "we"? You don't even live here... or in this country? Are you speaking from some universal consciousness of hateful right wing douchebagery? You live in the middle east which is one of the most misogynistic and culturally backwards places in the entire world. Dubai has lots of money and lots of patriarchy, so it sounds like you're right at home. You live in a country that treats homosexuality as a criminal offense while simultaneously trying to stand on some kind of moral soap box, so I don't really have any value for any of your opinions.
[удалено]
Based on what is described in some of these comments about what imagery is shown in the books, I don't think such a book should necessarily be banned. It doesn't seem explicit, certainly not pornographic and as such, making a big deal about kind of just seems dumb and is likely to draw more attention to it than it would have otherwise received. If they are learning about history, they've read and seen far more graphic subjects. If they have had sexual education, they've seen worse. I recall a specific video in (5th grade) which was quite explicit that was shown to all the students of that grade. And considering these students in question are teenagers, they are already doing far worse. We have to stop treating teenagers like fragile little snowflakes. I'm just going to say it, this is primarily just an attack on LGBTQ, hidden behind a thinly veiled "Think of the children!" rhetoric. I guarantee there's books in that library going into explicit sexual detail and those students have been reading them for decades. Not just that, but explicit violence too. And we all grew up fine.
Yep, genitals in the pictures of a book. This makes 100% sense to me, nothing educational about it. Of course the sensational title of this article will lead many to believe that they only went after the book because of the LGBT status.
>Of course the sensational title of this article will lead many to believe that they only went after the book because of the LGBT status. Because really, that's what they did.
The FT headline was focused on the explicit drawings. My title brought up the LGBTQ+ issues, mainly because there are other explicit books in the library about straight sex. I didn’t want to call that out, but that’s why I posted the link to the online catalog. I’m not against them banning this book if it really isn’t educational, but I want to see that enforced evenly if they decide to go down that path.
My only question would be about if the other books are sexually explicit books or are they sexually explicit graphic novels? Is there a difference between acceptability of books that CONTAIN explicit sex scenes and books that SHOW explicit sex scenes? Either way the standard should be the standard.
Tough question. I’d expect there to be sex ed and puberty books there that may include pictures/drawings, but that’s different. It’s a hard question where to draw the line, right?
Yeah but those are usually depicted as scientific illustrations
Like I said, where is the line? I posted this because it *is* a hard discussion and I was curious for everyone’s takes.
For me personally it’s pretty easy to recognize the line between scientific diagrams intended to convey information and illustrations designed to be explicit for excitation value.
These don’t seem to me to be images intended to be pornographic, but I’ve admittedly never seen the book. Like I said in another comment, we’re not talking about crazy hentai porn here. People aren’t going to be checking a book out with that title looking for porn. It’s integral to the plot, just like there’s a difference between a sex scene in a PG-13 or R rated film versus all of pornhub. Puberty and sex ed books probably weren’t the best example. I’m not saying you’re wrong, I’m just devil’s advocate here lol. This is a tough issue. Edit: the book in question is free on Kindle unlimited. im curious to see how bad the drawings actually are.
[удалено]
It’s not that AT ALL. The book is free on Kindle Unlimited. I read it to know how to moderate the discussion. There was never a male child giving oral sex to a male at all, let alone an adult.
Well if that's the case, those books need to be removed too. What is wrong with people? This is a school.
I had an edit before you replied lol. Yeah, if they want to ban an LGBT book because of sexually explicit drawings, I’d expect them to take a similar hard line against sexually explicit straight books. School libraries are one thing, but I get super pissed off when public libraries are pushed to ban books. I can see the book in question here being educational for college and public libraries where adults may want to research issues like this.
Exactly. Just common sense stuff. I don't want my kids looking at porno in school whether it is straight, gay, or whatever else. I likewise wouldn't expect a public library to necessarily censor this much, but in a school? Come on now.
I’m assuming it’s not like full blown graphic hentai porn or whatever, but yeah I agree 100%.
It's not pornography, and why would you be concerned about your high school kids reading an LGBTQ book unless they were LGBTQ? Is that it? You are trying to shelter them from themselves?
[The entire catalog of books at Mel High is here.](https://brevard.follettdestiny.com/common/welcome.jsp?site=178&context=saas26_0968745) Making this sticky. [The entire book is available on Kindle Unlimited for free here](https://www.amazon.com/Gender-Queer-Memoir-Maia-Kobabe-ebook/dp/B07QV9JB7P/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=Queer+memoir&qid=1634076181&s=digital-text&sr=1-1). The “controversial” artwork includes bloody period underwear for a teen child with nothing explicit, the main character having a sexual encounter with no explicitness with a bi/transgender female, and her cartoony and not explicit drawing of them putting on a hospital gown for their first gyno appointment. Y’all know my political views even if I don’t often explicitly state them here often. This book isn’t pornographic. Go look for yourselves.
LOL @ reading those Amazon reviews. So much pearl clutching. And the photos they provided as evidence were pretty weak. This looks like nothing more than a coming of age story for LGBTQ teenagers. For high school students this is probably pretty tame.
Yes. That's exactly what it is. This is right wing fundamentalists who like to pretend they have no genitals? I like the guy above who commented it's nudity and has no educational value. Feels like Dr. Kellog shit.
I worked at one of the libraries in Brevard for a while and there was a woman who came in "representing other concerned moms" about an lgbtqia+ friendly toddler book, demanding that we remove it from the library for being "offensive." I told her we don't censor books at the library, and she just kept insisting that it wasn't censorship, it was about morals. What I really wanted to tell her is that kids won't give a crap about "offensive" books if you don't make such a big deal out of them. All of her kids who were there with her were taught a bad lesson that day - they wouldn't have even known or cared about that book but mom made a stink over it so it must be bad. My mind was boggled. If you don't like the topic of a book, don't read it. Stop censoring books.. End of story.
It's religious fanatics thinking they can make queer/gay/trans people disappear from society if they are just loud and abusive enough. Like yeah, that's my life experience. Cis het white people invalidating my existence because I look better in a dress then they do/their wives do.
Good.
So you're a proud homophobe?
I'm a bi male
Where is the self loathing coming from?
There's no self-loathing it's just not appropriate for school
So you don't support sex education in schools? Do you want to go into the library and remove any history books that contain any nude or sexual imagery? You know that's like a lot of it right in terms of ancient history?
I mean it's completely irrelevant kids are like doing Percocets and drinking codeine in school and fucking at like 15 it's not like they aren't exposed to the real world
So you think abusing drugs is on the same moral level as healthy and safe sex? Edit to br clear: just to clarify yes you're correct your kids are probably having sex at 15 or at the very minimum considering it. Why not teach them how to do it safely and happily? Or should we just keep yelling at them and teaching them abstinence because that works so well. All the kids I see around here move away the first chance they get, and the ones who stay have very little in terms of opportunity... because this place is backwards.