I can't decide if I'm wildly amused or disproportionately outraged by
this case. Because, when a decision starts off with an ominous:
Not much good takes place at slumber parties for high school kids, and this case proves the point. [Ed note: dun dun DUN!]
you expect some CRAZY SHIT, right?
(
prepare to be disappointed and slighty embarrassed for a whole lot of people )
Comments 17
(The comment has been removed)
I feel like it's the sexting bullshit from a few years back, where everyone felt all obligated to trip all over themselves qualifying and saying OF COURSE THIS IS TERRIBLE as so not to look like they are, HORROR OF HORRORS, encouraging any sort of teen sexuality. (And on some level, I don't blame the probably middle-aged-male judge for bending over backwards to be like, REALLY, THIS IS SO NOT MY THING, I SWEAR TO GOD.) But cumulatively, it ramps up that cycle of stigma and shame and JUST SAY NO-ing. Which has just been SO good to us thus far.
So we were subversive about our sexuality. Which made me the queer feminist I am today!
WOOO! RAINBOW LOLLIPOPS = THE GAY AGENDA
TELL NO ONE
Reply
>>"
Reply
Reply
Not much good takes place at slumber parties for high school kids, and this case proves the point. [Ed note: dun dun DUN!]
ROFLMAO.
I am more than a little disturbed and saddened by the extent to which girls are taught that their sexuality is something to be viewed by others, not experienced by themselves.
Ugh, grossgrossgrossgrossgross.
Because if it's funny, it's less scary, and if sex gets less scary for young women, it becomes that much harder to uphold all the punishment and shaming.
This is so well-said.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment