INTRODUCTION
Sex education should be about NOT having babies. Why do teenage pregnancies occur? Nobody tells those clean brains (they are nearly new computers and softwares) properly, and we all experiment. Young people need help, as here, not lecturing.
The Chinese had the right idea, to limit their population, but did they explain masturbation to their population? I wish they had, for all our sakes, because we might then have adopted the idea too.
The following several pages are written by an Engineer, a very senior engineer who is now 67 years old. The body is an engineering structure – it has bones and flesh and nerves and a brain, and also fluids, just like engines use oil. The brain is a digital computer, and it learns as it grows older, but the learning is just like a computer software programme – complex sure, but neverthless a computer and its software. The hardware is what we build as we grow up, enlarging our brains by adding more hardware (brain cells) as we go, and the software is what we learn from parents and school and by simply living and enjoying life as we grow older. We learn all of the time throughout life, and this White Paper is all about our bodies and how sexual they are. It is not emotional, but factual.
It is therefore quite basic, and is meant to teach the young person particularly, what sex is all about, for they expolore themselves too easily. There are no pictures, because that is not the point. It is Information, or as that intelligent robot Johnny 5 would say “INPUT INPUT INPUT”!! Engineering Input.
SOME EXPLANATIONS
Sex is not all it is cracked up to be.
For the man it feels OK, until the explosion of sperm called ejaculation, and then the penis aches for perhaps hours afterwards, because of the high blood pressure inside it which makes it rise called an erection. The blood valve opens after ejaculation and the penis relaxes, but the strain on the internal flesh of the penis and especially its head, is what makes it ache. For the woman, the vagina is almost not exciting at all, and in fact the body of the man banging against her pelvis is not pleasant, but she loves you, so ….. Oh well. All of her feeling is in her clitoris, and so gentle stroking is by far the best for her.
And then if they have a baby at all, the result is screams throughout the night and day for years until the child has learnt to look after itself. These screams change from real screams, to over-exuberance, to a determined “I want …..” as they grow older, and thus they exist right up until they are 18 years old!! My children are now over 40 years old, and I love them to bits, but …… My daughter struggles against a hierarchy at work which seems to want her to work 24 hours a day, and my son has just lost his job because the Company he worked for decided to put his job in China – having got him to go to China to tell them how to do it!!! I am concerned for them, and how it affects my sons young family.
My daughter is not married, for she found that men seemed to want to dominate her life – no way! My Mothers Sister similarly – she married only as she approached retirement! And my Mum is now 90 years old, and quite determined that the doctor is not going to run her life with his tablets, thankyou!
So, kids are with you for ever, and you should therefore consider whether you actually do want them at a young age. Maturity helps, for then you will have explored the world as much as you can or want to, and will then have decided what you really want in life, instead of letting an emotional drive to have sex AT THIS INSTANT, take over your life for years and years and years afterwards.
THE MORNING AFTER PILL
The morning after pill basically rejects implantation of the egg in the womb – nature does this every month of course. Fertilisation takes time – the sperm are not an express train, so the morning after pill rejects unfertilised eggs, and it is recommended that it is taken quickly. Have some in your pocket first, because on a bank holiday weekend you may not be able to get any within 24 hours. You may feel a bit sick after taking it, but only about 1 woman in every 60 actually throws up, when you should then take another pill. Pharmacists should help you, but there are some silly religious ones who want to stop you – find another pharmacist, there are good ones about too.
And maybe you might imagine this couple talking to each other? – “Do you want sex tonight? Why? Because it is nice, and I like it, don’t you? Well, I do not want a child. I agree, but condoms are painful. OK, so maybe no penetration, just play with the outside? Yes, that would be OK.”
Certainly, with careful use of fingers on sensitive nerves alone, both sexes can enjoy each other. Just do not be prejudiced because you have been told masturbation is wrong – it is GOOD and not at all wrong.
WHY IS THERE A SEXUAL DEMAND?
The male of our species passes urine down his prostate-penis tube, which triggers the need for sex after a week or two – women do not have the same demand at all, for their sensitive parts do not lie in the urinary tract. And the same when the male needs to go to the loo – the pressure inside the bladder-prostate valve may cause an erection if he has had to wait a long time, and some may misinterpret this as a need for sex – NOT SO.
SOME PRACTICALITIES
The UK Government or Family Planning Association documents never talk about using tissue to catch a male deposit. Nor about how difficult it is for a man to stop, once started. Nor about anything else useful in August 2010.
How does a woman clean that male deposit out of her vagina after intercourse? It cannot just collect at the top of the tube!! Does the slightly smelly deposit dribble leak onto her pants during the whole of the next working day? Of course it does.
When she has intercourse, do her internal organs get moved to one side – a little for the vagina is a collapsed tube the rest of the time. The old side saddle mania, was because MEN thought the vagina was wide open all day!
MASTURBATION IS GOOD – NO PREGNANCY, AND FUN
Many religions have said that masturbation is wrong. It makes you blind some say – absolutely ridiculous!! Rubbish religious propaganda. Tell them that rubbing by hand or finger is no different from rubbing any other way! Religious philosophy has been power mad for too many centuries, demanding we have more and more children – and it is the parents who are religious not the child. Who dictates to children what to believe? Who are virgin young and happy until the evil dominating propaganda starts?
Masturbation is nice and you like it too? Good, but the circumcised male especially finds this difficult, and needs help to avoid the vagina – lubrication and softness essentially necessary. KY Jelly should be enough, but clearly it is not just for use by a woman – the packaging message is missing some advice, and so Johnson & Johnson have been asked to add some extra info.
Even normal males would benefit from using it, for the lubricated head of the penis is then more comfortably stimulated – the penis will still ache afterwards, but this route is so much better for both sexes, that its use should be more widely promoted.
CIRCUMCISION IS WRONG, FOR BOTH SEXES
It is recommended that circumcision is not generally practiced – evolution over millions of years has decided that we are OK as we are (no chimpanzee or orangutan is circumcised), and those males who are cut find it painful for ever afterwards.
For women it is a huge disaster caused by religion again. The whole of their bottom end skin (labia, clitoris all most painfully removed) is destroyed by an uneducated comic “surjeon”, who has no feelings of any sort other than sadism – just imagine the screams in the backyard room, where this awful procedure is carried out. IT HAS TO BE STOPPED, for it is MEN who are DOING IT TO WOMEN. STONING TOO, for it is the MAN who BLAMES the woman for HIS evil!! Male penis castration obviously necessary, to really stop such male arrogance.
Back to the circumcised male (whose surgeons do that? Not the National Health Service Surgeons I hope): It is painful when older to have an erection because the skin is often cut too short at birth, and it will not stretch far enough when the male becomes a teenager and has an erection, and maybe not after then either – because the skin has to be made to stretch and that is difficult, though masturbation may help.
So it is misery for life, and not at all helpful, for the natural urine flow cleans the inside of the skin out time after time anyway – as I say the orangutan has had his skin for tens of millions of years now, and it is only humans who are destroying their own penis, and maybe some human circumcised males want suicide for erection can be quite painful. The only other relief for a circumcised male is to use the lubricated vagina, and so they are tied to a vagina for life (thank goodness KY jelly came along) – thus circumcision is yet another disgusting and old religious philosophy to promote having many children in our already over-crowded world.
You should remember that once circumcised the highly sensitive nerves of the male rub inside his pants every minute of the day.
No wonder he never forgets – it must be murder for some, if not all. The foreskin protects and reduces the demand for sex thereby – just as nature intended!
RELIGIONS THE WORLD OVER
Religious Dogma is why we have pregnancies – they merely want to populate the planet dead, and as individuals we mostly do not want them, for we would like to enjoy life first, and wait.
Why is this idea important?
INTRODUCTION
Sex education should be about NOT having babies. Why do teenage pregnancies occur? Nobody tells those clean brains (they are nearly new computers and softwares) properly, and we all experiment. Young people need help, as here, not lecturing.
The Chinese had the right idea, to limit their population, but did they explain masturbation to their population? I wish they had, for all our sakes, because we might then have adopted the idea too.
The following several pages are written by an Engineer, a very senior engineer who is now 67 years old. The body is an engineering structure – it has bones and flesh and nerves and a brain, and also fluids, just like engines use oil. The brain is a digital computer, and it learns as it grows older, but the learning is just like a computer software programme – complex sure, but neverthless a computer and its software. The hardware is what we build as we grow up, enlarging our brains by adding more hardware (brain cells) as we go, and the software is what we learn from parents and school and by simply living and enjoying life as we grow older. We learn all of the time throughout life, and this White Paper is all about our bodies and how sexual they are. It is not emotional, but factual.
It is therefore quite basic, and is meant to teach the young person particularly, what sex is all about, for they expolore themselves too easily. There are no pictures, because that is not the point. It is Information, or as that intelligent robot Johnny 5 would say “INPUT INPUT INPUT”!! Engineering Input.
SOME EXPLANATIONS
Sex is not all it is cracked up to be.
For the man it feels OK, until the explosion of sperm called ejaculation, and then the penis aches for perhaps hours afterwards, because of the high blood pressure inside it which makes it rise called an erection. The blood valve opens after ejaculation and the penis relaxes, but the strain on the internal flesh of the penis and especially its head, is what makes it ache. For the woman, the vagina is almost not exciting at all, and in fact the body of the man banging against her pelvis is not pleasant, but she loves you, so ….. Oh well. All of her feeling is in her clitoris, and so gentle stroking is by far the best for her.
And then if they have a baby at all, the result is screams throughout the night and day for years until the child has learnt to look after itself. These screams change from real screams, to over-exuberance, to a determined “I want …..” as they grow older, and thus they exist right up until they are 18 years old!! My children are now over 40 years old, and I love them to bits, but …… My daughter struggles against a hierarchy at work which seems to want her to work 24 hours a day, and my son has just lost his job because the Company he worked for decided to put his job in China – having got him to go to China to tell them how to do it!!! I am concerned for them, and how it affects my sons young family.
My daughter is not married, for she found that men seemed to want to dominate her life – no way! My Mothers Sister similarly – she married only as she approached retirement! And my Mum is now 90 years old, and quite determined that the doctor is not going to run her life with his tablets, thankyou!
So, kids are with you for ever, and you should therefore consider whether you actually do want them at a young age. Maturity helps, for then you will have explored the world as much as you can or want to, and will then have decided what you really want in life, instead of letting an emotional drive to have sex AT THIS INSTANT, take over your life for years and years and years afterwards.
THE MORNING AFTER PILL
The morning after pill basically rejects implantation of the egg in the womb – nature does this every month of course. Fertilisation takes time – the sperm are not an express train, so the morning after pill rejects unfertilised eggs, and it is recommended that it is taken quickly. Have some in your pocket first, because on a bank holiday weekend you may not be able to get any within 24 hours. You may feel a bit sick after taking it, but only about 1 woman in every 60 actually throws up, when you should then take another pill. Pharmacists should help you, but there are some silly religious ones who want to stop you – find another pharmacist, there are good ones about too.
And maybe you might imagine this couple talking to each other? – “Do you want sex tonight? Why? Because it is nice, and I like it, don’t you? Well, I do not want a child. I agree, but condoms are painful. OK, so maybe no penetration, just play with the outside? Yes, that would be OK.”
Certainly, with careful use of fingers on sensitive nerves alone, both sexes can enjoy each other. Just do not be prejudiced because you have been told masturbation is wrong – it is GOOD and not at all wrong.
WHY IS THERE A SEXUAL DEMAND?
The male of our species passes urine down his prostate-penis tube, which triggers the need for sex after a week or two – women do not have the same demand at all, for their sensitive parts do not lie in the urinary tract. And the same when the male needs to go to the loo – the pressure inside the bladder-prostate valve may cause an erection if he has had to wait a long time, and some may misinterpret this as a need for sex – NOT SO.
SOME PRACTICALITIES
The UK Government or Family Planning Association documents never talk about using tissue to catch a male deposit. Nor about how difficult it is for a man to stop, once started. Nor about anything else useful in August 2010.
How does a woman clean that male deposit out of her vagina after intercourse? It cannot just collect at the top of the tube!! Does the slightly smelly deposit dribble leak onto her pants during the whole of the next working day? Of course it does.
When she has intercourse, do her internal organs get moved to one side – a little for the vagina is a collapsed tube the rest of the time. The old side saddle mania, was because MEN thought the vagina was wide open all day!
MASTURBATION IS GOOD – NO PREGNANCY, AND FUN
Many religions have said that masturbation is wrong. It makes you blind some say – absolutely ridiculous!! Rubbish religious propaganda. Tell them that rubbing by hand or finger is no different from rubbing any other way! Religious philosophy has been power mad for too many centuries, demanding we have more and more children – and it is the parents who are religious not the child. Who dictates to children what to believe? Who are virgin young and happy until the evil dominating propaganda starts?
Masturbation is nice and you like it too? Good, but the circumcised male especially finds this difficult, and needs help to avoid the vagina – lubrication and softness essentially necessary. KY Jelly should be enough, but clearly it is not just for use by a woman – the packaging message is missing some advice, and so Johnson & Johnson have been asked to add some extra info.
Even normal males would benefit from using it, for the lubricated head of the penis is then more comfortably stimulated – the penis will still ache afterwards, but this route is so much better for both sexes, that its use should be more widely promoted.
CIRCUMCISION IS WRONG, FOR BOTH SEXES
It is recommended that circumcision is not generally practiced – evolution over millions of years has decided that we are OK as we are (no chimpanzee or orangutan is circumcised), and those males who are cut find it painful for ever afterwards.
For women it is a huge disaster caused by religion again. The whole of their bottom end skin (labia, clitoris all most painfully removed) is destroyed by an uneducated comic “surjeon”, who has no feelings of any sort other than sadism – just imagine the screams in the backyard room, where this awful procedure is carried out. IT HAS TO BE STOPPED, for it is MEN who are DOING IT TO WOMEN. STONING TOO, for it is the MAN who BLAMES the woman for HIS evil!! Male penis castration obviously necessary, to really stop such male arrogance.
Back to the circumcised male (whose surgeons do that? Not the National Health Service Surgeons I hope): It is painful when older to have an erection because the skin is often cut too short at birth, and it will not stretch far enough when the male becomes a teenager and has an erection, and maybe not after then either – because the skin has to be made to stretch and that is difficult, though masturbation may help.
So it is misery for life, and not at all helpful, for the natural urine flow cleans the inside of the skin out time after time anyway – as I say the orangutan has had his skin for tens of millions of years now, and it is only humans who are destroying their own penis, and maybe some human circumcised males want suicide for erection can be quite painful. The only other relief for a circumcised male is to use the lubricated vagina, and so they are tied to a vagina for life (thank goodness KY jelly came along) – thus circumcision is yet another disgusting and old religious philosophy to promote having many children in our already over-crowded world.
You should remember that once circumcised the highly sensitive nerves of the male rub inside his pants every minute of the day.
No wonder he never forgets – it must be murder for some, if not all. The foreskin protects and reduces the demand for sex thereby – just as nature intended!
RELIGIONS THE WORLD OVER
Religious Dogma is why we have pregnancies – they merely want to populate the planet dead, and as individuals we mostly do not want them, for we would like to enjoy life first, and wait.
Over recent years we have seen the definition of 'child pornography' stretched beyond all credibility. The 1978 Protection of Children Act made the simple possession of indecent images illegal, where to be indecent the image had to:
1. Depict an actual person younger than the age of consent (then, and still, 16 years of age)
2. Depict them in a sexual context (that is, the material was produced for the purposes of arousal and is thus 'pornographic')
This was a simple and clear definition. You could easily know what was legal and what was not. Any person old enough to consent to sex could be photographed without danger of being caught by the Act. Simple child nudity of the sort that might appear in holiday photos or family photos of very young children was excluded.
The Act did precisely what it set out to do – protected children. By allowing police to arrest individuals for possession of actual child abuse images, it made it possible for them to target those who produced and supported the production of such material.
Since the 1978 Act, we have had a slew of amendments and new legislation that:
1. Created the notion of the pseudo-image. This is an image which is doctored in some way to make it appear to be an indecent image of a child when in fact it wasn't.
2. Criminialised material where the person depicted looks like (or could be interpreted to look like) a child. An image of a 20-something porn star dressed in a schoolgirl outfit and acting young could be considered child pornography depending on the context.
3. Changed the definition of 'child' to include persons over the age of consent but under 18, thus creating a legal anomaly where a person may legally consent to sex but cannot be photographed doing so, and retrospectively criminalising previously legal material including back-copies of newspapers and top-shelf magazines that featured 16 and 17-year old models.
4. Changed the interpretation of 'indecent' to include simple nudity or even 'provocative poses' by fully-clothed subjects, thus making innocent family pictures potential 'child pornography'.
5. Allowed material depicting imaginary characters – computer-generated or cartoon – who were (or might be construed to be) underage to be prosecuted as 'child pornography'.
6. Most recently, attempting to make written material simply describing any of the above equivalent to 'child pornography'.
Even the most cursory consideration of these changes will reveal that the clear intent of these changes to the law is to outlaw any material which pedophiles – or 'potential' pedophiles – might possibly find arousing. If you follow this route to its logical conclusion you ought to make any photograph or description of a child illegal, and lock all children away from public view lest someone become aroused at the sight of them.
This single-minded witch-hunting of the unseen but ever-threatening pedo-under-the-bed does not make children safer. Indeed, most of the changes have been made to permit the prosecution of individuals who have not harmed children at all. Its purpose is clear – it is thoughtcrime legislation, designed to satisy the baying calls of the gutter press and to keep CEOP and similar agencies in business.
It is now effectively impossible to know if a particular image is illegal or not. There is no safe standard. A picture of a fully-clothed adult may be child porn if they happen to be dressed and posed in a particular way. Offences being now largely based on 'context' mean that until it goes before a jury, you cannot be sure you're safe. People are being sent to jail as pedophiles for 'offences' which, only a few years ago, would have been laughable and which most certainly have not involved any actual children coming to harm.
My proposal is simple. Repeal and amend the various acts as necessary to return the definition of child pornography to that of the 1978 Protection of Children Act, and let the police get on with the business of actually protecting children and catching child abusers.
Why is this idea important?
Over recent years we have seen the definition of 'child pornography' stretched beyond all credibility. The 1978 Protection of Children Act made the simple possession of indecent images illegal, where to be indecent the image had to:
1. Depict an actual person younger than the age of consent (then, and still, 16 years of age)
2. Depict them in a sexual context (that is, the material was produced for the purposes of arousal and is thus 'pornographic')
This was a simple and clear definition. You could easily know what was legal and what was not. Any person old enough to consent to sex could be photographed without danger of being caught by the Act. Simple child nudity of the sort that might appear in holiday photos or family photos of very young children was excluded.
The Act did precisely what it set out to do – protected children. By allowing police to arrest individuals for possession of actual child abuse images, it made it possible for them to target those who produced and supported the production of such material.
Since the 1978 Act, we have had a slew of amendments and new legislation that:
1. Created the notion of the pseudo-image. This is an image which is doctored in some way to make it appear to be an indecent image of a child when in fact it wasn't.
2. Criminialised material where the person depicted looks like (or could be interpreted to look like) a child. An image of a 20-something porn star dressed in a schoolgirl outfit and acting young could be considered child pornography depending on the context.
3. Changed the definition of 'child' to include persons over the age of consent but under 18, thus creating a legal anomaly where a person may legally consent to sex but cannot be photographed doing so, and retrospectively criminalising previously legal material including back-copies of newspapers and top-shelf magazines that featured 16 and 17-year old models.
4. Changed the interpretation of 'indecent' to include simple nudity or even 'provocative poses' by fully-clothed subjects, thus making innocent family pictures potential 'child pornography'.
5. Allowed material depicting imaginary characters – computer-generated or cartoon – who were (or might be construed to be) underage to be prosecuted as 'child pornography'.
6. Most recently, attempting to make written material simply describing any of the above equivalent to 'child pornography'.
Even the most cursory consideration of these changes will reveal that the clear intent of these changes to the law is to outlaw any material which pedophiles – or 'potential' pedophiles – might possibly find arousing. If you follow this route to its logical conclusion you ought to make any photograph or description of a child illegal, and lock all children away from public view lest someone become aroused at the sight of them.
This single-minded witch-hunting of the unseen but ever-threatening pedo-under-the-bed does not make children safer. Indeed, most of the changes have been made to permit the prosecution of individuals who have not harmed children at all. Its purpose is clear – it is thoughtcrime legislation, designed to satisy the baying calls of the gutter press and to keep CEOP and similar agencies in business.
It is now effectively impossible to know if a particular image is illegal or not. There is no safe standard. A picture of a fully-clothed adult may be child porn if they happen to be dressed and posed in a particular way. Offences being now largely based on 'context' mean that until it goes before a jury, you cannot be sure you're safe. People are being sent to jail as pedophiles for 'offences' which, only a few years ago, would have been laughable and which most certainly have not involved any actual children coming to harm.
My proposal is simple. Repeal and amend the various acts as necessary to return the definition of child pornography to that of the 1978 Protection of Children Act, and let the police get on with the business of actually protecting children and catching child abusers.
In 1997, what may have appeared to be a reasonable and beneficial idea, towards a better society, has now become a living nightmare for many individuals and families.
Since that time, mission creep, populist political posturing and law-making, along with the vested interests of the media, lobby groups and a stifling regime of policing, has led to fear, disenfranchisement and little hope towards a worthy future for these people and their families.
This, not small, group of UK citizens, some isolated and poverty-stricken for no good reason, has little real support, a limited ability to fight for their Civil and Human Rights and some, quite unacceptably, live in constant fear of attack or harassment.
So, who can these people be? Who is this sizeable, yet, apparently, invisible group? Who could be suffering so much and yet be receiving so little attention? This group of people are the so-called ‘Sex Offenders’ and their families. This group includes me.
This must end.
Why is this idea important?
In 1997, what may have appeared to be a reasonable and beneficial idea, towards a better society, has now become a living nightmare for many individuals and families.
Since that time, mission creep, populist political posturing and law-making, along with the vested interests of the media, lobby groups and a stifling regime of policing, has led to fear, disenfranchisement and little hope towards a worthy future for these people and their families.
This, not small, group of UK citizens, some isolated and poverty-stricken for no good reason, has little real support, a limited ability to fight for their Civil and Human Rights and some, quite unacceptably, live in constant fear of attack or harassment.
So, who can these people be? Who is this sizeable, yet, apparently, invisible group? Who could be suffering so much and yet be receiving so little attention? This group of people are the so-called ‘Sex Offenders’ and their families. This group includes me.
This must end.