Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it,
follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given
their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
[Abstinence] Sex and the Lack There Of
Posts
I hate to rapid-fire post but Savage was wrong on that point. You don't have to ejaculate inside a woman to get her pregnant. A few sperm just have to get into the va jay jay and make the journey to the egg.
Oh of course, married vaginal intercourse acutally cures homosexuality, gives you a raise at work and reduces Global Warming. The effects are doubled if it's in the missionary position.
2) My sex-ed was pretty cool. It taught abstinence, but the teacher said (which I believe was against curriculum) "I know that me standing up here won't stop you all from having sex. When you do, go to the nurse - she'll give you some condoms for free. What I'm getting at is, if you're going to do it, please be safe about it - nobody needs an STD or a pregnancy at the ripe old age of 15."
3) Hi5 saint2e! I was a virgin until 24 and got married. That night was... interesting to say the least.
Man I don't know what part of town you live in, but I have mexicans breaking into my pad all the time looking to trade some head for some rocks.
But, um, yeah. If your birth control method is limited to not sticking a penis into your vagina, you've failed any reasonable standard of sex education.
Honestly I'm really surprised more doctors don't push IUDs for young women. Cheaper (I believe) than the pill and less hassle.
IUDs did have (and still do) have some pretty horrific complications. Plus, the pill is clean and easy, and exposes the doctor to zero risk (IUD insertion carries a risk of bacterial infection, which can lead to sterility and the doctor getting sued for $$$$)
It is a surgical procedure for billing purposes. It takes about 5 min and involves no anesthetic. Paraguard actually went back and did a study and got approval for teenagers and nullips (women who haven't had children) so it isn't even off-label anymore. There are FPs and gyns around the country that will insert IUDs for nullips even in practices where most of them won't, the receptionist should know if any of the doctors in the practice will insert IUDs for nulilps. PP, for one, will if there are any in your area but they don't accept a lot of insurance plans. The other place that is pretty reliable is a resident clinic. They are younger and more likely to have learned that inserting in nullips is perfectly fine as opposed to older docs that had years of indoctrination about how dangerous it is to insert an IUD for a nullip.
I go to a university that includes a medical school and I had to laugh when a girl in my class complained about not being able to find a doctor to insert an IUD b/c every single doctor in the OB-gyn department at our school will insert for nullips. (no the student health center doesn't... but the student health insurance covers IUDs and visits to the doctors at the medical school that is part of our university).
Hey, that's awesome, the way you just managed to rhetorically dump all responsibility for sexual assault on young, inexperienced women.
Oh, wait, no it isn't and you're a dreadful person for saying that.
Also, IUD's don't have anywhere near the problems people think they do, and are even safer now than they used to be. They're actually the primary contraceptive choice among female OB-GYN's, and you'd think they'd have a clue or two.
This current 4parents.gov commercial is really infuriating to me. "Don't talk about the parts, just talk about your feelings."
What good is that going to do?
...all false.
Pills can have horrific side effects for women and doctors get sued far more often over women having strokes b/c of the pill than b/c of bacterial infection with a modern IUD. The only risk of infection with an IUD is if you already have chlamydia or gonorrhea and don't get treated within the first two weeks after insertion. Which is why all IUD insertion kits include STD testing kits.
Dacron shield was a specific brand of IUD in the 70s that had really high rates of infertility but it was shaped differently and larger than modern IUDs. Modern IUDs are more effective and have lower rates of side effects than hormonal bc.
Complication of hormonal bc: stroke, high blood pressure, mood swings, depression, pulmonary embolism, venous thrombosis,
Complications of IUDs: irregular periods, uterine perforation (only occurs in the doctors office while they are inserting and therefore is generally treated immediately with no long lasting damage), PID - only if the patient already has and STD and the doctor doesn't test and treat, expulsion (easily treated by putting a new one in and both companies will give each woman a free replacement)
In general the article, and I tend to agree, indicated that Abstinence only, and actual Sex-Ed only both fail.
Most of us here would would think that graphic indicates where abstinence only education is taught, but that's not the case. The following link identifies which states are refusing Title V abstinence funding (sorry, I can't link just the map for you visual folks).
That said... it was suggested that a blended approach which teaches both Sex-Ed and Abstinence, in conjunction with greater than 4 hours per month of sex ed (I think it was 4 hours mandated, can't recall exactly) was the best solution as states with the lowest pregnancy rates tend to use that technique. However, the article failed to indicate that, looking at the above map, and actually examining mean economic development of the states that the poorer states have by far a higher birth rate.
From the Economist...
The HDI combines normalized measures of life expectancy, literacy, educational attainment, and GDP per capita. It is claimed as a standard means of measuring human development—a concept that, according to the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), refers to the process of widening the options of persons, giving them greater opportunities for education, health care, income, employment, etc. The basic use of HDI is to measure a country's development.
Now, there are some correlations as I mentioned but it's not mutually exclusive. Lower birth rates are not isolated to upper echelon HDI states so there is clearly more to it.
That said, of all the countries in the world, guess which has (had 2008) the lowest birth rate for teens 15-19? Yep, that hub of debauchery and social ambiguity... the Netherlands at 3.8/1000... whereas the US averages somewhere around 42.5/1000 (map above is 2006 figures... that number is actually climbing)
Some food for thought, and no, my wife isn't pregnant - false positive it seems... time to go back to the drawing table :winky:
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
Although I suppose on the other hand the main issue is that no one is out there marketing reversible vasectomies where they don't absolve all responsibility for it. Although apparently there's some new wireless thing.
Why?
Your gf is more likely to have a stroke from you suggesting she go on the pill than have something bad happen from an IUD.
Actually I may suggest it next time the issue comes up since she's had sensitive breasts from the current one she's on, although previously with a different brand this apparently wasn't a problem.
I am curious on how those statistics pan out though - are they all things considered equal, or does it aggravate existing conditions?
Its also the case that the pill is frequently used as a scapegoat for symptoms like weight gain and headaches, solely because "everybody knows" it makes you fat and crazy. In reality, most people just eat too much, exercise too little, and don't usually have a convenient scapegoat for all the little annoying things our bodies do to us.
I'm not so sure this is true.
Case in point is Maine - between 1991 and 2006 the teen pregnancy rate was reduced almost by half. This happened because the state stepped up sex education efforts in schools.
In general women under 19 (and especially young women in high school) aren't looking to get pregnant because they have no other options. They get pregnant because they don't know what they should know about pregnancy prevention.
Just because you're poor or you live in a rural area doesn't mean you want to become a baby factory at 17.
On a personal note, I decided to wait until marriage while an atheist and kept that belief after I converted to Christianity. There are perfectly logical reasons to wait, but it's a personal choice. I think it's a little bit narrow-minded to call people who do decide to wait until marriage idiots. My wife and I both waited and neither of us regret the decision a bit.
Me: My Father was 82nd Airborne. He'd throw my ass out a window. Also, I'm older than you.
Yes, my suggestion that women not be taught that their virginity is some precious flower to be protected is saying women are responsible for rape. This view that women are "giving themselves up" is the root of the fucked up consent situation you so detest. Women think they need to say no by default, men think they need to convince the woman to say yes by default. Nowhere in this situation is the potential that a woman likes a dude, and wants to fuck him. Nope, she's got to say no. Why? Because girls are pure and pretty and boys are lustful creatures of sin. The dude has to convince and trick her, because she's been told to say no.
Now obviously I'm not ruling out a scenario where the chick simply doesn't want to bang a dude, but the current rediculous and seedy situation where a dude has to work so hard pick up a chick is caused by this puritan view that sex is dirty and shameful and not a highly enjoyable aerobic exercise. Ask a woman how receptive she is to the idea of cruising for sex. I bet you'll see a markedly different view then you would from guys, and that's culture speaking.
And my point about IUD vs Pill was from the POV of a medical provider. If something goes wrong with the pill, it's the drug company's fault. If the woman having the IUD inserted develops PID because of a bacterial infection and goes sterile, the doctor is now facing a malpractice suit.
Risk of signing a scrip for the pill: 0
Risk of inserting an IUD: very low, but not 0
I'm not saying that sex education is ineffective, such that stepping it up won't reduce teen pregnancy by a significant margin.
And I'm not saying that all young girls in poor areas generally want to get pregnant. I'm just saying that this phenomena exists, that I feel it's not necessarily a rarity (I don't know where you'd find hard numbers, though, beyond the fact that Phisti's info suggests it), that it's probably more likely to occur in places where there aren't as many alternatives to full time motherhood, and that sex ed is probably ineffective against it.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
t robos: It is actually pretty common for women to opt for motherhood young when other options are limited. That's logical, what else are you going to do with your time if you know damn well that you're never going to get into college or get a job with any prospects of advancement beyond running tills.
Something like 90% of the women that develop blood clots have an undiagnosed thrombophilia. And most of the rest smoke. But there are women who have no other predisposing factors than being on hormonal BC.
The current risk in the US (averaged over all the different formulas) is 3 in 10,000 for strokes on hormonal BC (pills, patch, ring) the risk is thought to be lower with pills with less estrogen.
The current risk in the US (both models combined) for death from an IUD is 1 per 100,000, and the rates of infertility have been shown to be the same among users of modern IUDs and women who have never used an IUD.
Both pills and IUDs are thought to cause problems during pregnancy if the woman gets pregnant and continues using the method. But these pregnancies are rare so I couldn't find any good statistics.
I don't know if you guys will be able to follow any of these links so I will put links to a bunch of reviews and hope one of them is free to people not on university computers:
no infertility with copper IUDS
no infertility associated with mirena
EBM review showing both modern iuds have no risk of infertility
Note: I misspelled the IUD from the 70s that did cause infertility, it was Dalkon shield, not Dakron.
How am I freaking out about the pill?
I'm just pointing out that everyone else freaking out about IUDs are hilarious considering that the risks are on different orders of magnitudes (in IUDs favor). They are both infinitesimal. But the risks with the pill are a handful out of 10,000 and the risks with the IUD are a handful out of 100,000, people really shouldn't be freaking out about either.
And I pointed out that is false b/c doctors get sued when women have strokes from pills. The risk of singing a scrip for the pill is not 0.
EDIT: and I apologize for so many posts so close together. I will go do work now.
And what are these reasons, exactly?
I'm 23 right now. Please tell me what logical reasons there are for waiting until I'm 27, the median age of marriage for men.
It makes sense if you're planning to marry someone who waited for marriage themselves, or if your interest in sex is so small that the risks inherent in it are considered too large to make the experience worthwhile.
Also, if you're a Praying Mantis or Dr. Zoidberg.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
Those suits get tossed if the doctor read the riot act the pill company provided. It's very easy.
That the doctor followed proper procedure in a sterile insertion ( :winky: ) is more annoying to prove.
I took all that bullshit to heart, and now it really bothers me when I see how prevalent it is, even today.
Apart from predatory monsters who rape strangers, I think most men rape women because the basic model in our society is "man enthusiastically wants to bang, woman reluctantly lets him" and there's an easy slope from that to "man enthusiastically wants to bang, woman doesn't put up a fight." You have to conceive of women as beings who can desire sex before you can have an ethics of consent. The issues are connected.
http://numberblog.wordpress.com/
The whole abstinence-only thing smacks of the same sort of blind magical thinking that leads to mothers not wanting their daughters immunized for HPV. As long as their children don't hear about that dirty old sex they won't want to have it. Considering that everyone is, at some point, a teenager I'm not sure I understand how anyone can possibly believe that abstinence-only sex ed could possibly work. Not only are teens hormonal and prone to being horny, they're known for being actively rebellious against what teachers tell them they should be doing.
I guess I just really don't get the whole abstinence thing in general. I understand that it's the most effective means of STD prevention, but if you want to have sex and are willing to do it safely (get tested if you've had previous partners before having a new partner and use protection) I don't understand the hangup. First time sex is generally not especially pleasant for either party, and sexual incompatibility can be a pretty major hang-up for a relationship. Waiting for your wedding night to deflower one-another seems like a pretty much all-around bad idea to me. But then I don't tend to romanticize sex, so maybe the abstinence thing isn't for me.
As far as IUDs and whatnot go... I know someone who had post-implantation complications from an IUD. I don't know the details other than that it perforated something in there and she had to have it surgically removed. She says it's a 1 in some-large-number case, but it scared my wife off of getting one. We really, really don't want kids, though, so I had a vasectomy and we still use both condoms and the pill. She also had ovarian cysts or something before I met her, which her doctor tells her gives her like a 40% chance or so of being able to get pregnant at all. And in the event of divine intervention somehow making her pregnant, she's had an abortion fund in her savings account since she was 16.
Absolutely none outside of your own personal beliefs. At a certain point I would have to think abstinence leaves the realm of a preventative measure, and falls into the area of your own thoughts on morality and relationships.
Rape, in the traditional sense, is very rarely about wanting to bang someone. It's a domination and power crime. I think you're probably pretty close to the motivation for date rape, though (note: complete lack of studies to back this up, though I've seen the statistics before on the first bit).