「 後 生 仔 睇 啲 圖 可 能 有 衝 動 。 」
1. a. If the students have the desire after seeing the graphics, it is likely for them to have this desire also if they see other sex-related graphics, or some real things about sex. But how could the school guaranttee that the students can avoid watching these other sex-related things before the "appropriate time"? Put all students in jail? Or simply like Oedipus (character in Oedipus the King), to pull their eyes out??
b. If the students don't have the desire after seeing the graphics, why the school have to do is useless thing?
c. Anything could make students "可 能 有 衝 動". Therefore, for me, "可 能 有 衝 動" is not a good reason to discriminate the sex-related graphics in particular...
「 唔 係 有 圖 就 叫 性 教 育 。 」
2. a. Of course, 唔 係 有 圖 就 叫 性 教 育, for example, MSN images is not 性 教 育. But under this interpretation, this statement is simply 廢話. For me, it is more 廢 than the statement "阿媽係女人". After all, there are some men who declare themselves as "媽" (奶媽, ...). From this report, it seems that this statement is making use of this 廢話 interpretation. But under this interpretation, where's the proof of the irrelevance of these graphics?
b. In particular, some related graphics is important to sexual education. At least, students should know (at least), the appearance and position of the 性器官 to avoid inconvenience if they need to 做愛. I don't believe in "innate ideas" (I don't believe people have all knowledge they have once they are born), especially about sex. As i remember, there was a piece of news about several people don't know how to 做愛 and have to ask for help from 家計會....
「 我 o地 中 二 開 始 就 會 由 倫 理 科 教 師 向 學 生 講 解 性 知 識 ， 要 佢o地 明 白 性 係 創 造 生 命 ， 唔 係 為 咗 享 樂 。 」
3. a. It seems that the guy saying this didn't have much enjoyment from....
b. If 性 係 創 造 生 命 ， 唔 係 為 咗 享 樂, no 避 孕 手 法 should be used in every 性行為, to maximize the chance for "life creation".
c. Could there are evidence to prove the things taught in 倫 理 lessons are true? Using the term "明 白" presuppose that "性 係 創 造 生 命 ， 唔 係 為 咗 享 樂" is true. But it is inappropriate to make private belief "性 係 創 造 生 命 ， 唔 係 為 咗 享 樂" to be the "universal truth". Many people 做愛 simply for enjoyment. I think enjoyment is an objective that cannot be ignored...
P.S.: 「 我 一 早 同 出 版 商 傾 好 ， 啲 書 會 撕 走 嗰 幾 頁 至 送 嚟 畀 學 生 。 」 -- 有無得計平D??  |
2007/12/15 03:17
|