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

SoCo_and_LimeSoCo_and_Lime Registered User
edited August 2009 in Debate and/or Discourse
I don't get how there is still such a push for abstinence programs. I'm firstly disregarding religious purposes, seeking to contend the positive claims made by programs such as Not Me, Not Now and all these other ridiculous parties, not to mention some of their more high profile supporters.

Some "facts" about abstinence:

1) It is 100% effective in preventing STD's

Well that would be true, it abstinence meant the same thing to everyone. Many students of abstinence believe as long as the man part doesn't go into the female part it's all good. Of course since most of these programs don't actually give STD facts and numbers, the kids don't know that you can still contract STDs with all the other touching/rubbing of each other.

2) It lowers depression in adolescence. (Some things like they're not worried about having sex and not constantly concerned about STDs)

Among the ridiculously long list of positive effects of sex are the well known facts that, basically, sex makes you feel better (fill in chemical reactions here)

3) It's effective in lowering sexual promiscuity among teens

No. Just No. It's been proven as effective as the DARE program.


A good majority of our own government recognizes the uselessness of these programs.

I'm even going to go so far as to challenge the whole sanctity/unity/waiting for marriage thing. To all those who remember their first time, would you really want that disaster to be your very first experience with your blushing new bride? (To those who haven't had your first time yet, it's going to be a disaster. We all went through it, we all got better.)

These programs teach you so much about not doing it that they fail to include the bit on what you should do when you actually go to do it. You've just been married to the love of your life, you go back and get ready to consecrate your marriage for the first time, waiting for each other for all your lives...and you don't even know how to put the condom on.

SoCo_and_Lime on
[x] Bolt Bus
[x] Radisson Hotel Boston
[x] Pre-Pax Dinner
[x] BYOC and 3 Day Pass

«13456710

Posts

  • GreeperGreeper Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Virginity, like hair color, is just a thing. I don't think there's really any more way to agree that it's a positive or negative.

    However, sex does exist, I guess, and so we should probably know about it? I guess.

    lolol_zps7df95a14.png
  • TicaldfjamTicaldfjam Beaverton, ORRegistered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Not to mention that people LIE about being "A Virgin" the majority of the time when they brag about it.

  • InHumanInHuman Registered User
    edited August 2009
    Abstinence is only 99.999% effective against pregnancy.

    Case and point..

    Jesus.

    Variable wrote: »

    you're coming off like a massive dick here
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    There isn't really much to discuss here once you take the religion part out of it.

  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited August 2009
    Ab-only programs are already being rolled back by the US's current administration, but what they're being replaced with is anyone's guess. That said, just about anything would be better than the incredibly regressive gender roles and medical lies that were being taught in a lot of those programs.

    tmsig.jpg
  • LoserForHireXLoserForHireX Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    3) It's effective in lowering sexual promiscuity among teens

    No. Just No. It's been proven as effective as the DARE program.

    Wait wait wait. Are you saying that teens who have promised not to have sex (one of the all time greatest things about being alive) until they are married break that promise.

    Second thing. The reason I don't do drugs isn't because I have DARE'd to not do them?

    My world is crumbling, I need hookers and smack stat!

    "The only way to get rid of a temptation is to give into it." - Oscar Wilde
    "We believe in the people and their 'wisdom' as if there was some special secret entrance to knowledge that barred to anyone who had ever learned anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
  • Raiden333Raiden333 Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    InHuman wrote: »
    Abstinence is only 99.999% effective against pregnancy.

    Case and point..

    Jesus.

    I think you need a few more 9s there.

    camo_sig2.png
  • SoCo_and_LimeSoCo_and_Lime Registered User
    edited August 2009
    There isn't really much to discuss here once you take the religion part out of it.

    I feel the opposite way. People who do it for religious purposes are completely useless to argue against since their only point is "I'm doing it for religious purposes." There are no facts to throw at them. At that point you just have to go down the "there is no God" route.

    What these programs push, and what I'm arguing against, is all the misinformation and stigmatizing of sex. Like these idiot parents who keep their kids home on the day that they teach that little sex-ed lite class in school. If they don't want their precious little girl learning about sex in a casual, classroom setting lead by people with actual sex information, then she's going to find out about it by idiots on the playground or porn.

    I just don't understand how people WHO HAVE HAD SEX THEMSELVES can be pro abstinence. Like, ok maybe your first time was some harrowing experience and your worried it will happen to your child. Denial ain't gunna do it.

    [x] Bolt Bus
    [x] Radisson Hotel Boston
    [x] Pre-Pax Dinner
    [x] BYOC and 3 Day Pass

  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Abstinence only prevents STDs and pregnancies as long as it's actually adhered to.

    Abstinence-only sex "education" leads to an increase in teen pregnancies and STD transmission because it does not teach people how to have safe sex if they decide that abstinence is not for them, or come up with ways to "stay abstinent" by having their genitals get stuck together in ways other than penis-into-vagina.

    optimusighsig.png
    Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
  • TicaldfjamTicaldfjam Beaverton, ORRegistered User regular
    edited August 2009
    InHuman wrote: »
    Abstinence is only 99.999% effective against pregnancy.

    Case and point..

    Jesus.

    Christ.

    Don't half ass it son, go full bore as my great grandpappy used to say.

    God damned young kids and their bellachin. Back in my day.......

  • TicaldfjamTicaldfjam Beaverton, ORRegistered User regular
    edited August 2009
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    Abstinence only prevents STDs and pregnancies as long as it's actually adhered to.

    Abstinence-only sex "education" leads to an increase in teen pregnancies and STD transmission because it does not teach people how to have safe sex if they decide that abstinence is not for them, or come up with ways to "stay abstinent" by having their genitals get stuck together in ways other than penis-into-vagina.

    But..but, if I did her in the poop shoot, we're still technically Virgins...right?

    I mean, thats the rationale of a few young couples who do that "promise-ring, 100% abstain until after marriage come to.

  • PasserbyePasserbye The Woman Who Is Not Short at The Moonlite All-Nite Diner; a glass box full of bad food and good people.Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    I'm even going to go so far as to challenge the whole sanctity/unity/waiting for marriage thing. To all those who remember their first time, would you really want that disaster to be your very first experience with your blushing new bride? (To those who haven't had your first time yet, it's going to be a disaster. We all went through it, we all got better.)

    I don't agree with the whole 'sanctity' thing, and I'm not sure what you mean by 'unity', but I do have something to say on the waiting part.

    This is purely anecdotal, but my first time was fine (I credit this to comprehensive sex ed programs from both 7th grade and 10th grade, along with lots of research and making out prior). Not fantastic but not a disaster. After a couple seconds of pain it even felt good.

    That in mind, I still wish I'd waited for my now husband because the guy I was with then, while still a good friend, just wasn't worth that kind of intimacy. Of course, I'm one of those weirdos who places emotional emphasis on sex (I even call it "lovemaking" sometimes), so that may have some effect on my opinion. I appreciate that not everyone is like this, but for those people who are, waiting for marriage can be a good thing - if you've learned enough and are comfortable with talking about those kinds of things with your partner. It really depends on your situation though. I suppose learning about basic relationship dynamics are something they should include with all the biology/statistics/this-is-how-to-use-a-condom stuff in high school.

  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    As I remember sex ed, it taught vanishingly little about actual sex. It was mostly scare stories (although they at least were in favor of contraception, not abstinence) and data that 14 year olds had no ability to contextualize. Oh well, learn by doing and all that.

    Abstinence folks are strange, because sex is a pretty important part of a relationship, and I highly doubt I would go as far as marriage without at least some idea of how compatible we were.

    gkcmatch_zps97480250.jpg
    stand up! It was the smallest on the list but
    pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Passerbye I don't see how you conclude from your experiences that waiting till marriage is a good thing. Or to put the point more succinctly: presumably you didn't wait until you were married to your husband, to have sex with him.

  • Raiden333Raiden333 Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    I got an award from my highschool for being its best writer from this school-wide mandatory writing thingy, so I was pretty good and stating points and arguments well. I sent a very long and civil letter to my health teacher explaining that she had a lot of work to do in her sex-ed class. My main argument was that driver's education not only teaches you the bare minimums of how to drive safely and legally, but is designed to teach you to drive well. Sex education should be similar, I argued.

    Never got a reply to that one. :lol:

    camo_sig2.png
  • PasserbyePasserbye The Woman Who Is Not Short at The Moonlite All-Nite Diner; a glass box full of bad food and good people.Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Passerbye I don't see how you conclude from your experiences that waiting till marriage is a good thing. Or to put the point more succinctly: presumably you didn't wait until you were married to your husband, to have sex with him.

    My point is that it can be a good thing, depending on your personality (so basically don't do a blanket discount on it). For some people sex isn't a big thing, losing their virginity isn't a big thing, for others (even those who aren't religious) it is a big thing. For those people, waiting can be a good thing.

    And no, I didn't wait 'til I married Dyr to have sex with him. Though, if I'd been a virgin still, I probably would have.

  • CervetusCervetus Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Dyscord wrote: »
    As I remember sex ed, it taught vanishingly little about actual sex. It was mostly scare stories (although they at least were in favor of contraception, not abstinence) and data that 14 year olds had no ability to contextualize. Oh well, learn by doing and all that.

    As was explained to me, sex ed in America teaches everything there is to know about sex except the sex part.

    If we're going to talk about facts and be objective then there isn't much argument against a more comprehensive sex ed than even the liberal classes that American youngsters get.

    The libertarian response to anything is, "Sure, that works fine in practice, but it doesn't fly in theory."
  • PasserbyePasserbye The Woman Who Is Not Short at The Moonlite All-Nite Diner; a glass box full of bad food and good people.Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Cervetus wrote: »
    Dyscord wrote: »
    As I remember sex ed, it taught vanishingly little about actual sex. It was mostly scare stories (although they at least were in favor of contraception, not abstinence) and data that 14 year olds had no ability to contextualize. Oh well, learn by doing and all that.

    As was explained to me, sex ed in America teaches everything there is to know about sex except the sex part.

    If we're going to talk about facts and be objective then there isn't much argument against a more comprehensive sex ed than even the liberal classes that American youngsters get.

    I'm just going to ask here, since this seems like a good thread for it.

    I am always astounded by the poor state of things in terms of continental US sex ed programs. Even in so-called liberal areas they tend to pussy-foot (no pun intended) around things, as if talking about everything in abstracts really helps horny teenagers. I grew up in Hawaii and, as I mentioned before, my sex ed program was two fold and comprehensive. I don't just mean we learned all the STDs and how to put a condom on, what the vas deferens is, all that - we were also encouraged to ask anything. Literally, no matter how silly it seemed. I remember my seventh grade teacher especially informatively answering questions like 'What's a G-spot? How do you reach it?', 'What do you do about an ovarian cyst?', 'How do I tell he/she is aroused?', etc., with a completely serious and straight face.

    My question is, how is it that Hawaii, in the middle of the Pacific ocean with a fairly sizable Christian population, has managed such good sex ed programs, while places like Seattle and San Francisco seem to be lagging behind? Maybe one of you knows the history behind this.

  • DocDoc Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited August 2009
    Dan Savage wrote:
    I'm a 17-year-old girl. My 16-year-old boyfriend doesn't like condoms, and I don't like what birth control pills do to my emotions and my skin. Now what?

    Pregnancy Isn't Looking Likely

    I'll be with you in a minute, PILL. But first...

    More stupidity and opportunism: Bristol Palin is now a spokesperson for an organization that encourages teenagers to abstain from having sex. "Regardless of what I did personally," Bristol advised America's youth last week, "abstinence is the only... 100 percent foolproof way you can prevent pregnancy."

    Here are a few other 100 percent foolproof ways to prevent pregnancy, Bristol, right off the top of my head: mutual masturbation, oral sex, anal sex (aka "saddlebacking" when practiced by Christian teens), outercourse, sex toys, cybersex, GAY SEX. There are actually lots of "foolproof" ways for teenagers (and adults) to be intimate without risking an unplanned pregnancy.

    Instead of telling teenagers to say no to sex—which will work about as well as telling them to say no to drugs—we should tell them there are ways to be sexual that carry no risk of pregnancy. But if they do decide to have sex, of course, they're going to need to know about and have access to contraception and the "morning after" pill—and, yes, abortion services. But if we continue to present being sexually active as either/or—either abstinence or vaginal intercourse—we're going to see more outcomes like yours, Bristol.

    When you explain to nervous, inexperienced teenagers that they don't have to jump right into full intercourse—that there are degrees of intimacy, and risk, and they can have enjoyable sexual experiences without vaginal (or anal) penetration—they're often relieved. (And just imagine what we could have been spared—all of us, Bristol, from your family to Levi's family to the McCain campaign—if Levi had limited himself to inseminating your tonsils.)

    So, PILL, here's what you do: Enjoy outercourse, oral, masturbation, and sex toys—and tell your boyfriend that these aren't consolation prizes for teenagers, but honest-to-God sex acts that adults enjoy—until you and your boyfriend find the condoms and lube that work for you.

  • sanstodosanstodo Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Passerbye wrote: »
    Passerbye I don't see how you conclude from your experiences that waiting till marriage is a good thing. Or to put the point more succinctly: presumably you didn't wait until you were married to your husband, to have sex with him.

    My point is that it can be a good thing, depending on your personality (so basically don't do a blanket discount on it). For some people sex isn't a big thing, losing their virginity isn't a big thing, for others (even those who aren't religious) it is a big thing. For those people, waiting can be a good thing.

    And no, I didn't wait 'til I married Dyr to have sex with him. Though, if I'd been a virgin still, I probably would have.

    Losing your virginity can be a big thing even for those who don't believe in waiting for marriage. It's more about waiting until you're ready to handle it and in the right relationship to make it great. This can be before marriage as well as in marriage.

    For example: I lost my virginity at the age of 17 to someone I loved very much. It was uncomfortable and awkward but also very sweet and romantic. Even though things didn't work out in the end, I wouldn't have changed a thing. It was a significant event for both of us, no less so than for those who choose to wait longer. How long one waits to have sex does not directly correlate to how one views sex. You can choose to lose your virginity at a relatively young age and still place emotional emphasis on sex.

    The headquarters for my writing:
    hummusandkimchi.blogspot.com

    http://us.battle.net/d3/en/profile/FriedRice-1814/hero/11834264
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    sanstodo says what I'm getting at.

    When you frame it the way you have Passer it feels like trying to rewrite history - well, because that's what it is. And when you do it like that, well then any first time is likely to end up being the wrong time retroactively if you don't spend the rest of your life with that person.

    My first time was not with my current girlfriend, yet I don't feel in any way that it was the wrong time or a bad thing to do even though that relationship didn't work out.

  • FarthingFarthing Registered User
    edited August 2009
    Rawr, we had some woman come into our school that said, and I quote:
    If you have sex, you will get an std.

    We don't even have sex education, it's more 'don't have sex' education. (ba dum tisss)

    They think if they teach us how to use condoms, we will be encouraged to have sex.

    'tis very silly.

    edit, perhaps I was a little harsh.

  • TicaldfjamTicaldfjam Beaverton, ORRegistered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Farthing wrote: »
    Rawr, we had some woman come into our school that said, and I quote:
    If you have sex, you will get an std.

    We don't even have sex education, it's more 'don't have sex' education. (ba dum tisss)

    They think if they teach us how to use condoms, we will be encouraged to have sex.

    'tis very silly.

    edit, perhaps I was a little harsh.


    Must've been a leftover from a local Town Hall meeting.

    Did she also scream "YOUR HEATHEN SCHOOL IS RAN BY SOCIALIST!!" and yelled out a "Heil Hitler!!!" for added measure?

    Ah Shit, fuckin just Godwined this thread.

  • RMS OceanicRMS Oceanic Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Ticaldfjam wrote: »
    Farthing wrote: »
    Rawr, we had some woman come into our school that said, and I quote:
    If you have sex, you will get an std.

    We don't even have sex education, it's more 'don't have sex' education. (ba dum tisss)

    They think if they teach us how to use condoms, we will be encouraged to have sex.

    'tis very silly.

    edit, perhaps I was a little harsh.


    Must've been a leftover from a local Town Hall meeting.

    Did she also scream "YOUR HEATHEN SCHOOL IS RAN BY SOCIALIST" and yelled out a "Heil Hitler" for added measure?

    Ah Shit, fuckin just Godwined this thread.

    Yep. The abstainers win. Sex is EVIL! Touching condoms is an eternal sin, and God will not forgive you! Vaginal intercourse will turn you gay, and we all know the gays have HIV.

  • TicaldfjamTicaldfjam Beaverton, ORRegistered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Ticaldfjam wrote: »
    Farthing wrote: »
    Rawr, we had some woman come into our school that said, and I quote:
    If you have sex, you will get an std.

    We don't even have sex education, it's more 'don't have sex' education. (ba dum tisss)

    They think if they teach us how to use condoms, we will be encouraged to have sex.

    'tis very silly.

    edit, perhaps I was a little harsh.


    Must've been a leftover from a local Town Hall meeting.

    Did she also scream "YOUR HEATHEN SCHOOL IS RAN BY SOCIALIST" and yelled out a "Heil Hitler" for added measure?

    Ah Shit, fuckin just Godwined this thread.
    Yep. The abstainers win. Sex is EVIL! Touching condoms is an eternal sin, and God will not forgive you! Vaginal intercourse will turn you gay, and we all know the gays have HIV.

    That should be the new Slogan on the newest King Whatever Version of the Bible.

    And it could end with an "After all..its God's Will anyway...fuckers!"

  • saint2esaint2e Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    I'm pretty sure I'm wired differently. I'll be 31 in April, and I'll be getting married in July of next year. I'm also a Christian.

    I'll freely admit that I'm still a virgin, and am looking forward to to the wedding night. :winky:

    That being said, back in grade... 5 I think it was, we started having sex ed classes in school that were pretty informative and not "abstinence-only". It didn't go to the level of "putting a condom on a banana", but I suppose it was something.

    All that being said, I'd still agree with the "abstinence-only" naysayers... Clearly it doesn't work, clearly most teens (I freely admit I'm an aberration) will have sex before their married, and so you may as well inform them of all their options because when an opportunity *ahem* "rises", they can be prepared.

    banner_160x60_01.gif
  • celandinecelandine Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Of course abstinence-only doesn't work. Abstinence is a vow, not a method. (Well, I guess every method of contraception depends on compliance -- you actually have to take the pill -- but it's easier to remember a pill than to forgo, you know, a major part of being human.)

    The proponents of abstinence-only education don't argue for it because it works, but because they think sex is foul. And that's infuriating and tragic. No wonder Bristol Palin is a spokesman for abstinence, really. Sex ruined her life. Sex got her pregnant, publicly humiliated, and married to a jerk -- I can only imagine how her mother treated her -- so is it any wonder that she views sex in that Victorian sense, as the road to ruin? I don't blame her so much. But I do get violently angry at those who want to return us to a world where a young woman must pay a terrible price if she is sexually adventurous.

    Of course, sex ed has never been very useful even if it isn't abstinence-only. Sure, I learned all the details, but even in high school I assumed none of it would apply to me since it would be at least a decade until I had sex. And I knew it all from home anyhow.

    One thing I like is Dan Savage's point about sex that's not intercourse -- oral, mutual masturbation, and so on. That makes sense. You can't get pregnant if you don't attach the baby-making apparatuses. But I grew up being taught that "men are pigs" so if you so much as make out, or even go to the wrong party, a boy will physically force you to go "all the way". One of the most pernicious ideas ever, imo. If schools could add one more thing to the curriculum, it should be this: all guys are not rapists. Not only the "Guys, get consent" angle, but also "Girls, don't be cowed and terrified of everything with a penis."

    I write about math here:
    http://numberblog.wordpress.com/
  • saint2esaint2e Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    celandine wrote: »
    One thing I like is Dan Savage's point about sex that's not intercourse -- oral, mutual masturbation, and so on. That makes sense. You can't get pregnant if you don't attach the baby-making apparatuses. But I grew up being taught that "men are pigs" so if you so much as make out, or even go to the wrong party, a boy will physically force you to go "all the way". One of the most pernicious ideas ever, imo. If schools could add one more thing to the curriculum, it should be this: all guys are not rapists. Not only the "Guys, get consent" angle, but also "Girls, don't be cowed and terrified of everything with a penis."

    Yeah I don't know what's more insulting, the insinuation that ALL men are sex-crazed maniacs who want nothing but to get in a woman's pants, or the fact that ALL women aren't smart enough to recognize the men who are like that and can be duped into falling for it.

    banner_160x60_01.gif
  • KistraKistra Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    3) It's effective in lowering sexual promiscuity among teens

    No. Just No. It's been proven as effective as the DARE program.

    Wait wait wait. Are you saying that teens who have promised not to have sex (one of the all time greatest things about being alive) until they are married break that promise.

    What, a six month delay in sexual debut isn't what the abstinence people were going for?

    I was never encouraged to wait until marriage by my parents. I was encouraged to wait until I was ready. Of course when I was actually ready I was at a point in my life where I wasn't interested in a relationship. So I had sex with a good friend of mine. It isn't something I would change and I do attach emotional importance to some sex (but not all, it can just be a good time).

    I really don't see the point of abstinence but it was never presented to me in a positive light so that might be part of it. Abstinence can be effective pregnancy prevention but depending on what you are doing instead (dry humping in only underwear?) it isn't perfect. It definitely isn't good STD prevention unless you are not having any skin to skin contact with each other's genitals (even with hands). Oral and anal fall into my definition of sex, but obviously not everyone's and I don't think we actually need to discuss the transmission of STDs through those routes.

    Animal Crossing: City Folk Lissa in Filmore 3179-9580-0076
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    saint2e wrote: »
    celandine wrote: »
    One thing I like is Dan Savage's point about sex that's not intercourse -- oral, mutual masturbation, and so on. That makes sense. You can't get pregnant if you don't attach the baby-making apparatuses. But I grew up being taught that "men are pigs" so if you so much as make out, or even go to the wrong party, a boy will physically force you to go "all the way". One of the most pernicious ideas ever, imo. If schools could add one more thing to the curriculum, it should be this: all guys are not rapists. Not only the "Guys, get consent" angle, but also "Girls, don't be cowed and terrified of everything with a penis."

    Yeah I don't know what's more insulting, the insinuation that ALL men are sex-crazed maniacs who want nothing but to get in a woman's pants, or the fact that ALL women aren't smart enough to recognize the men who are like that and can be duped into falling for it.
    I don't know, most men are capable of being pretty connivingly persuasive about going just a little bit further. The only real difference is if you have the education to be aware that this is something everyone is capable of doing and thus can recognize when you're about to.

  • MagicPrimeMagicPrime "We're ready to believe you..." FireSideWizardRegistered User regular
    edited August 2009
    I was having sex with my now wife about 2 years before we got married. We used condoms 95% of the time, and she was on the pill from the get go.

    And guess what. She never got pregnant and we never got any STDs from each other. And now we're having a baby because we planned it.

    I'm a poster child for sex education!

    flzthy.png
    This neo-feudalism would be more tolerable if our betters had fancy titles.
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    I had sex with my ex- for 3 years using just the pill pretty much the entire time.

  • MagicPrimeMagicPrime "We're ready to believe you..." FireSideWizardRegistered User regular
    edited August 2009
    I had sex with my ex- for 3 years using just the pill pretty much the entire time.

    The two years after we got married we just used the pill. We figured during the college years we better double up on the protection.

    flzthy.png
    This neo-feudalism would be more tolerable if our betters had fancy titles.
  • DuffelDuffel Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Bristol Palin didn't actually marry Levi Johnston, did she?

    In any case I don't really see much to debate here. Ab-only has been pretty widely debunked as ineffective for years and seems to be on its way out.

  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited August 2009
    celandine wrote: »
    One thing I like is Dan Savage's point about sex that's not intercourse -- oral, mutual masturbation, and so on. That makes sense. You can't get pregnant if you don't attach the baby-making apparatuses. But I grew up being taught that "men are pigs" so if you so much as make out, or even go to the wrong party, a boy will physically force you to go "all the way". One of the most pernicious ideas ever, imo. If schools could add one more thing to the curriculum, it should be this: all guys are not rapists. Not only the "Guys, get consent" angle, but also "Girls, don't be cowed and terrified of everything with a penis."
    Well, first you'd have to hammer into everyone a clear definition of consent. One of the most disturbing things about young people and sex is that very young men in particular regularly turn up in surveys believing that clear examples of sexual assault are a-ok ("if she kisses you that's yes to everything", "if she's wearing a short skirt you can do what you want", "if you browbeat her until she stops saying no, that's a proper yes" etc etc). Something like 40+% in most of the surveys I've seen in the last couple of years, which focused on 14-16 year olds. Sadly, a lot of young girls also agree. Presumably, a fair few of them grow out of that (although not so many, take this UK survey of adult attitudes as an example), but there's definitely no widespread formal curriculum around that teaches proper consent (enthusiastic participation, people!!) or respect for a 'no' to young teenagers of either gender. So yeah, teaching girls to be gun-shy sucks, but right now its actually the most sensible option if you give a crap about teaching girls to keep themselves safe.

    tmsig.jpg
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    MagicPrime wrote: »
    I had sex with my ex- for 3 years using just the pill pretty much the entire time.

    The two years after we got married we just used the pill. We figured during the college years we better double up on the protection.
    Honestly I consider the pill to be the more reliable of the two. We agreed an abortion was probably best should the worst happen. Now I'm doing a Ph D - I'm sure worse things could happen.

  • RobmanRobman Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    The Cat wrote: »
    celandine wrote: »
    One thing I like is Dan Savage's point about sex that's not intercourse -- oral, mutual masturbation, and so on. That makes sense. You can't get pregnant if you don't attach the baby-making apparatuses. But I grew up being taught that "men are pigs" so if you so much as make out, or even go to the wrong party, a boy will physically force you to go "all the way". One of the most pernicious ideas ever, imo. If schools could add one more thing to the curriculum, it should be this: all guys are not rapists. Not only the "Guys, get consent" angle, but also "Girls, don't be cowed and terrified of everything with a penis."
    Well, first you'd have to hammer into everyone a clear definition of consent. One of the most disturbing things about young people and sex is that very young men in particular regularly turn up in surveys believing that clear examples of sexual assault are a-ok ("if she kisses you that's yes to everything", "if she's wearing a short skirt you can do what you want", "if you browbeat her until she stops saying no, that's a proper yes" etc etc). Something like 40+% in most of the surveys I've seen in the last couple of years, which focused on 14-16 year olds. Sadly, a lot of young girls also agree. Presumably, a fair few of them grow out of that (although not so many, take this UK survey of adult attitudes as an example), but there's definitely no widespread formal curriculum around that teaches proper consent (enthusiastic participation, people!!) or respect for a 'no' to young teenagers of either gender. So yeah, teaching girls to be gun-shy sucks, but right now its actually the most sensible option if you give a crap about teaching girls to keep themselves safe.

    Teaching girls to say no when they want to say yes is why there's such a fucked up situation with consent in the first place.

    The message should be: do you want to fuck? Go for it! Here's a condom. Here are the risks of STDs, and the reliability of birth control methods.

  • RobmanRobman Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    MagicPrime wrote: »
    I had sex with my ex- for 3 years using just the pill pretty much the entire time.

    The two years after we got married we just used the pill. We figured during the college years we better double up on the protection.
    Honestly I consider the pill to be the more reliable of the two. We agreed an abortion was probably best should the worst happen. Now I'm doing a Ph D - I'm sure worse things could happen.

    The pill's reliability depends entirely on the compliance of the woman to a regular schedule of pill-popping. A hormone-treated IUD is the most reliable method out there, with 99.99% or so success rate.

  • KastanjKastanj __BANNED USERS
    edited August 2009
  • CantidoCantido Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Ticaldfjam wrote: »
    Ticaldfjam wrote: »
    Farthing wrote: »
    Rawr, we had some woman come into our school that said, and I quote:
    If you have sex, you will get an std.

    We don't even have sex education, it's more 'don't have sex' education. (ba dum tisss)

    They think if they teach us how to use condoms, we will be encouraged to have sex.

    'tis very silly.

    edit, perhaps I was a little harsh.


    Must've been a leftover from a local Town Hall meeting.

    Did she also scream "YOUR HEATHEN SCHOOL IS RAN BY SOCIALIST" and yelled out a "Heil Hitler" for added measure?

    Ah Shit, fuckin just Godwined this thread.
    Yep. The abstainers win. Sex is EVIL! Touching condoms is an eternal sin, and God will not forgive you! Vaginal intercourse will turn you gay, and we all know the gays have HIV.

    That should be the new Slogan on the newest King Whatever Version of the Bible.

    And it could end with an "After all..its God's Will anyway...fuckers!"

    And married intercourse cures your HIV and gives you antioxidants.

    steam_sig.png
«13456710
Sign In or Register to comment.