Teen Vogue under fire after promoting sodomy among teens

[annabenedetti]

But knowing is necessary for doing.

No it's not.

BTW, did you see my post to you from last night? I'm interested in your response.

Also I noticed you seem to agree with sod conflating something that's legal with something that's not. In case you didn't realize that's what he was doing.

 

[glassjester]

No it's not.

...how?

BTW, did you see my post to you from last night? I'm interested in your response.

I did not. I will check back now.

Also I noticed you seem to agree with sod conflating something that's legal with something that's not. In case you didn't realize that's what he was doing.

He wasn't conflating the legal status of the two actions. He was showing a flaw in Kiwi's logic. It (Kiwi's post) was a pretty weak defense, wasn't it?

"Many heterosexuals like it, therefore it belongs in a kids magazine."

Come on.

There are plenty of sexual fetishes and perversions that people engage in. That doesn't mean we should be telling kids how to do it, and that it will be "awesome."

 

[glassjester]

They have. Pretty explicit stuff at times. Right or wrong, it didn't seem to be an issue worth debating here until it involved something other than 'regular' sex.

Like I said, I never knew it. But we, as a society, shouldn't be promoting sex for children. Do you agree?

I'm curious. You keep referring to the readers as children - were you around when there were TOLers here stating they saw nothing wrong with young teen girls being married? (We were reminded by some that Mary was only 13 although we don't know that for sure.)

I've been on here for about 11 years - on and off, though. So no, I don't remember that.

If it's "children" reading Teen Vogue, as you say, then I would imagine you'd come out strongly against a young (younger than 18) girl getting married?

Sure, I think so. Though there may be cultural considerations, with that. I wouldn't consider a 17-year-old getting married to be intrinsically wrong, the way that fornication or sodomy is.

 

[annabenedetti]

Like I said, I never knew it.

It's been that way since I was a teen and young adult. Nothing is new here as a general principle. Where's the outrage been before this? Outrage enough to burn magazines?

But we, as a society, shouldn't be promoting sex for children. Do you agree?

Of course I agree. And while I don't think too many children are reading Teen Vogue in particular, entirely too many kids have ready internet access to far worse. Why aren't parents burning computers and smart phones?

I've been on here for about 11 years - on and off, though. So no, I don't remember that.

It was in the Phil "you've got to marry these girls at 15, 16" Robertson threads.

Sure, I think so. Though there may be cultural considerations, with that. I wouldn't consider a 17-year-old getting married to be intrinsically wrong, the way that fornication or sodomy is.

I wasn't asking about wrongness, just thinking about society and culture, and the willingness of some parents to marry off their very young daughters as a safeguard to future 'problems.'

 

[annabenedetti]

...how?

How do you think girls got pregnant before sex ed, Teen Vogue and the internet?

He wasn't conflating the legal status of the two actions.

Yes he was.

"Many heterosexuals like it, therefore it belongs in a kids magazine."

Come on.

There are plenty of sexual fetishes and perversions that people engage in. That doesn't mean we should be telling kids how to do it, and that it will be "awesome."

Don't buy the magazine, and don't allow your kids access to the internet without supervision. This begins and ends with the parents.

Just don't be surprised when they're teens and young adults (the target audience of Teen Vogue) that they know more than Teen Vogue can tell them. That's where we're at in the age of technology.

 

[glassjester]

It's been that way since I was a teen and young adult. Nothing is new here as a general principle. Where's the outrage been before this? Outrage enough to burn magazines?

Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because there should have been outrage earlier, doesn't mean there shouldn't be now.

Of course I agree. And while I don't think too many children are reading Teen Vogue in particular, entirely too many kids have ready internet access to far worse. Why aren't parents burning computers and smart phones?

They should be. Personally, I do often express outrage over this very issue - with coworkers, or friends, or family. It doesn't come up on TOL very often, though.

It was in the Phil "you've got to marry these girls at 15, 16" Robertson threads.

I wasn't asking about wrongness, just thinking about society and culture, and the willingness of some parents to marry off their very young daughters as a safeguard to future 'problems.'

I can't say that I am for parents "marrying off" their daughters at any age.


As for the actual article - it was basically an advertisement for sodomy. No response to this yet...

Nihilo is right - magazine articles like that undoubtedly put the idea into some kids' minds, that maybe wouldn't have otherwise sought out such activity. Come on - it flat out told kids that anal sex is awesome. And it made a point of claiming that it's especially "awesome" for boys on the receiving end. The article is despicable. It even ends with a call to action!

It wasn't exactly an impassive informational piece.
The article was clearly more a tool of recruitment than education.

 

[ok doser]

They should be. Personally, I do often express outrage over this very issue - with coworkers, or friends, or family. It doesn't come up on TOL very often, though.

Anna's being disingenuous - i bring this very point up, often

So do others

I can't say that I am for parents "marrying off" their daughters at any age.

Ideally, a pair of Christian parents are in the best position to determine their child's readiness for marriage

 

[annabenedetti]

Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because there should have been outrage earlier, doesn't mean there shouldn't be now.

My observation throughout this is that the outrage comes now because the article gets too close to homosexuality for those who are outraged. Otherwise, it's the latest in a long line of many years of articles about sex.

As for the actual article - it was basically an advertisement for sodomy. No response to this yet...

I answered and said that knowing is not necessary for doing. I don't think you responded to that, or maybe I missed it.

And knowing doesn't necessarily lead to doing.

As for the rest, it's basically a repetition of what's being said here over and over. I get it. It's a graphic article. Don't let your kids read it. Don't be surprised if your teens already know about it.

But it follows many, many graphic articles about orgasms, sex positions, oral sex... all ultimately designed (in general, for most of these years) to teach teens and young women how to make their boyfriends happy. So where have the outraged parents been for all of these years?

 

[annabenedetti]

I can't say that I am for parents "marrying off" their daughters at any age.

As you can see, some people are.

 

[glassjester]

Anna's being disingenuous - i bring this very point up, often

So do others

I haven't really seen it much here. But as I said earlier, I'm somewhat of an on-and-off TOL'er.

Ideally, a pair of Christian parents are in the best position to determine their child's readiness for marriage

Ideally, an adult woman raised by Christian parents is in the best position to determine when and whom she ought to marry, herself.

 

[ClimateSanity]

It's more than that - the wall of the pertinent parts of the anatomy aren't robust enough to take the pressure and stretching that the appropriate female structure does

Want proof?

Eat an eight pound block of cheese and wait two days

Now compare your experience with that of a woman giving birth

Ouch

 

[annabenedetti]

Ideally, an adult woman raised by Christian parents is in the best position to determine when and whom she ought to marry, herself.

:up:

 

[glassjester]

My observation throughout this is that the outrage comes now because the article gets too close to homosexuality for those who are outraged. Otherwise, it's the latest in a long line of many years of articles about sex.


I answered and said that knowing is not necessary for doing. I don't think you responded to that, or maybe I missed it.

Right, you mentioned girls getting pregnant. I'm going to take a wild guess, here, and say they must have known a thing or two about sex for that to happen.

And knowing doesn't necessarily lead to doing.

Sure, but it can.

You don't think any kid's opinion was affected by this article?

As for the rest, it's basically a repetition of what's being said here over and over. I get it. It's a graphic article. Don't let your kids read it. Don't be surprised if your teens already know about it.

But it follows many, many graphic articles about orgasms, sex positions, oral sex... all ultimately designed (in general, for most of these years) to teach teens and young women how to make their boyfriends happy. So where have the outraged parents been for all of these years?

Yeah - I agree with you about that. Parents should have been upset, publicly, earlier. People shouldn't be buying that garbage for their kids at all.

But maybe it took an especially egregious article to alert people to just how sickening and depraved this particular publication is. Hopefully the attention it's garnered from this, has made at least some parents more vigilant.

 

[glassjester]

Ouch

I'm lactose intolerant.

So... double ouch.

 

[annabenedetti]

Right, you mentioned girls getting pregnant. I'm going to take a wild guess, here, and say they must have known a thing or two about sex for that to happen.

My point is that they didn't have access to Teen Vogue. And yet somehow they still got pregnant.

Sure, but it can.

But that's not what you said:

But knowing is necessary for doing.

But maybe it took an especially egregious article to alert people to just how sickening and depraved this particular publication is. Hopefully the attention it's garnered from this, has made at least some parents more vigilant.

Any parent who still needs to be alerted to what's available out there must live in a bubble.

The parents who watch will continue to watch. The parents who have a more open approach will continue to have a more open approach. And the parents who see value in both those approaches will continue to see value in both approaches. There's nothing new under the sun.

 

[glassjester]

But that's not what you said:

Yes. Knowing is necessary for doing. You think kids are accidentally having sex?

Any parent who still needs to be alerted to what's available out there must live in a bubble.

I bet many of them do. Publicly drawing ire toward this kind of thing might help bust them out of that bubble.

The parents who watch will continue to watch. The parents who have a more open approach will continue to have a more open approach. And the parents who see value in both those approaches will continue to see value in both approaches. There's nothing new under the sun.

Ok... no one changes. No one's opinions or actions are influenced by media. Sure.

 

[annabenedetti]

Yes. Knowing is necessary for doing. You think kids are accidentally having sex?

You're missing my point entirely. I'm not going to try a third time.

Ok... no one changes. No one's opinions or actions are influenced by media. Sure.

But that's not what I said, is it?

Enjoy the rest of the conversation with someone else. :e4e:

 

[kmoney]

can you think of a better publication with a similar large demographic distrbution?

If you really want to get a large customer base then maybe Google or Facebook should have a "how to" on anal.

then don't read Teen VOgue

I don't. :thumb:

Is presenting information encouraging readers to do it?

If Newsweek publishes an article about a mass shooting are they encouraging their readers to go on a killing spree?

Not the same thing.

 

[ok doser]

He wasn't conflating the legal status of the two actions. He was showing a flaw in Kiwi's logic.

unfortunately, it's a tactic that is ineffective when used on people for whom logic is an unfamiliar concept

Yes he was.

like anna

 

[ok doser]

Ideally, an adult woman raised by Christian parents is in the best position to determine when and whom she ought to marry, herself.

i disagree

i believe that ideally, a pair of Christian parents will always be better judges of their child's readiness for marriage, regardless of the age of the child, regardless of the gender of the child


they will always be wiser and more experienced than their child


until dementia hits, of course