Isn't this the exact kind of reasoning anti-sex-ed fanatics use? "Well now that they know about sex they're going to be more likely to try it!"
Having more knowledge about this isn't a bad thing. It seems like they're teaching legal ramifications for non-consensual acts or for going too far, probably with a focus on personal ramifications as well.
8 replies
This is going to backfire as gloriously as DARE did in the US for drugs
90% of the kids in those classes would never have thought to try it otherwise, but now that it's mentioned in school, they'll be thinking about it...
Isn't this the exact kind of reasoning anti-sex-ed fanatics use? "Well now that they know about sex they're going to be more likely to try it!"
Having more knowledge about this isn't a bad thing. It seems like they're teaching legal ramifications for non-consensual acts or for going too far, probably with a focus on personal ramifications as well.
Good way to give a whole generation a choking kink
I mean, unless they want you to and survive.
So, it's okay to strangle or suffocate someone if they aren't having sex? Did they need a new law for this?
You just made this kink more taboo, you fucking idiots.
Ohhh, now I get it. They're saying students are being taught that strangling is illegal, not that it's illegal to teach them about strangling.
My first read on that was they were teaching them how to do the the kind of strangling that's illegal during sex.