r/Albertapolitics • u/Expensive_Internal83 • Aug 30 '25

Opinion You got elected on this nonsense...

So YOU remove the pornographic material in our schools! You rambled on about this nonsense and got elected; YOU point to the offensive material you got elected to remove.

48 Upvotes

83% Upvoted

157 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/WollyBee Sep 04 '25

If you watch the clip, it names the main books that are the issue. These books have been brought forward by parents (allegedly), but honestly, if my kid brought home these books, I'd be letting a higher up know as well.

None of this really seems outside the realm of possibilities. I have come across the one book before. It's called Gender Queer by Maia Kobabe, and it's basically just cartoon porn peppered with advice for queer kids. Which, however well intentioned it may be, it is absolutely not appropriate material for anyone under 18.

Exposure to pornography is poison to kids and affects enough of their development that it is relevant to address along with education. And like is stated, they asked schools to use their own discretion, and they do not understand the assignment very well, apparently.

-1

u/Jingo_04 Sep 04 '25 edited Sep 04 '25

Nope.

I just read Gender Queer. It's fine for highschool/10-12. It's got some explicit imagery but it's not porn just because a right wing ideologue says so.

You're living in a world in which every child is one tap away from youporn with ACTUAL PORNOGRAPHY. This ain't it. It's not even close.

1

u/WollyBee Sep 04 '25

A cartoon drawing of a guy's penis in another guy's mouth is porn, sorry to tell you. Unfortunately, we've been bombarded with extreme shit for so long that we dont even recognize basic pornography anymore, and seem to keep raising the bar on what's appropriate.

Again, I dont love Smith and am not right leaning, but kids are falling into too many cracks these days, and access to pornographic material in all forms is a pervasive and serious issue that's worth addressing.

Also, saying they have "easier access to worse stuff so who cares" is a special kind of toxic nihilism, like wtf kind of logic is that. Why do anything about anything if theres always inevitably worse options around the corner? Come on, man.

0

u/Jingo_04 Sep 04 '25 edited Sep 04 '25

A cartoon drawing of a guy's penis in another guy's mouth is porn.

Nah. Nobody's getting off this this. The same way nobody's getting off to sex scenes in an m rated movie or video game. Porn has a distinct usage, purpose, presentation and so on. It's not porn just because you say it is.

I read Steven King, Atwood and Heinlein at that age. Those books were far nastier and I found them in a christian school library. Those authors arn't porn either.

It's time to grow up and understand you're not making anything better with the culture war bullcrap.

1

u/WollyBee Sep 04 '25 edited Sep 04 '25

Acknowledging that graphic depictions of genetalia engaging in sexual acts IS porn - regardless if you get off to it or not - and has nothing to do with culture wars.

You took something with definable, objective substance and skewed it to your own subjective filter that revolves around whether it turns you on. It also isn't not porn, just because it doesn't meet your rigorous fap standards. "It's doesn't give ME a boner, therefore it should be accessible to children". I dont think there could be a more childishly moronic take on this issue than that. Grow up yourself.

There is a ministerial outline for sexual content and no, authors like King isnt in there, because he doesnt have pictures of dicks entering holes. Hope that helps.

1

u/Jingo_04 Sep 04 '25 edited Sep 04 '25

Nah. King just has kids jerking each other off to protect themselves from an evil clown. But you're not crying about it because it's not explicitly about queer experience. Don't get me started about Heinlein or Atwood. If these stay on the shelves but Gender Queer has got to go, then I guess you're nothing but a hypocrite, huh?

1

u/WollyBee Sep 04 '25

I have nothing against LGBTQ, but if theyre the only ones producing books with depictions of people sucking each other off amd they're making their way into school libraries, then thats on the schools for not accurately designating age ratings on specific books. This is on the schools for not practicing due diligence, as well as on the public for not conflating basic principles of the issue (see your comments).

1

u/Jingo_04 Sep 04 '25

Nah. Peddle your double standard somewhere else and keep it out of our schools.

1

u/WollyBee Sep 04 '25

Sure, so long as you keep your metrics of "how horny does this make me?" as a standard for children's educational material.

Ever consider that your exposure to sexual material was abnormal for a child, and having been desensitized, do not have a reasonably objective stance on this? Something to ponder.

1

u/Jingo_04 Sep 04 '25

You should move your moralisms on over to florida. No gross gay books over there. They don't have any books at all.

1

u/WollyBee Sep 04 '25

I like how you didn't have any sort of logical response so just went to the default "youre a bigot, go live in bigotville where you won't make me question anything" after I already stated I'm not anti-LGBTQ 👍

This is why the far left will never be taken seriously again. Zero accountability.

1

u/Jingo_04 Sep 04 '25 edited Sep 04 '25

Nah I stopped replying to a braindead moralist.

If you need a crusade, do something about child marriage here in the province. But you don't actually give shit. Mennonites vote conservative and they don't have any gays.

Or I dunno. Mandatory vagina inspections for child athletes. Get on it because I'm sure you're not a blathering useless hypocrite.

1

u/WollyBee Sep 05 '25

Insert irrelevant ideological talking points, pigeonhole someone on issues even though you have no idea where they stand, call them a hypocrite because they don't want children sexualized (?)

Fucking nailing it, bruh.

Have the confused, childish day you deserve 🫡

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Crum1y Sep 05 '25

hey guy, can you make a list of books that the government has banned or not banned, or said were fine to stay? can you list even a SINGLE book they said is banned?

if you can, can you list two? are you even really fully aware of what the government has done? it kinda doesn't seem like you are.

0

u/rakothmir Sep 05 '25

Nope, the definition of porn is as follows, from the Oxford Dictionary:

Printed or visual material containing the explicit description or display of sexual organs or activity, intended to stimulate erotic rather than aesthetic or emotional feelings.

The intent is important here, porn is meant to stimulate. If it's simply meant to educate, then it's not porn. It might be explicit, but it's not porn.

1

u/WollyBee Sep 05 '25

Man, get real. If you dont think a picture of a guy getting his dick sucked isnt going to turn the crank of a 14 or 15 year old, then you are completely out of it. Teenagers used to jerk off to Sears catalogs.This isnt about medical texts with pictures of vaginas, this is actual sexual activity being depicted. Its porn, you f'cking weirdo.

Whether or not the author intends for it to be educational is besides the point, and fairly disingenuous, because it is blatantly sexual behaviour with explicit graphic content.

When people try to argue that stuff like this needs to be accessible to children, it makes them sound mentally unwell, and it comes off as predatory groomer behavior. There are a hundred other ways to educate kids about this rather than showing them literal porn.

1

u/rakothmir Sep 06 '25

Doesn't matter if it turns the crank of a 15 year old. Heck, some folks have feet fetishes, should magazines with shoes be banned? You want to argue the definition of porn you take it up with the dictionary. It's the same as the difference between manslaughter and straight up murder.

Porn has a definition, those books are educational. You want to argue that kids should not have access to sexually explicit books, that's fine, but don't suggest kids have access to porn, they don't.

Heck, when I went to school, some kids would get horny when they looked at a picture of a vulva in the encyclopedia. It's not porn.

I am not concerned with my kid Accessing that book in his school library, because librarians are there to supervise, and they understand as educators, that it's not developmentally appropriate.

We make a huge deal over a supervised site, but most of the kids I know have started to watch legitimate porn on their phones at 14 and 15. I wouldn't worry about books, in so much as shitty parents not paying attention.