Abstinence only vs Sex Education

LadyErin · Post by **LadyErin** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 12:44 am

ROFL!

That was great Paws.

But yeah, some *uhen* interesting stuff there.

Post by **fourpawsonthefloor** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:03 am

Originally posted by BAMFCentral
Originally posted by fourpawsonthefloor
You know, I think you are all overlooking the glaringly obvious (and I've mentioned it before in this thread) "only" safe sex. MASTRUBATION!
Not to be picky, but you are talking about safe in terms of no stds or anything.

Not so much physical damage that can incur from inproper (vigorous use).

An improper stroke can sink your boat.

Yep. No STD's unless you are mutually mastrubating or sharing toys. Of course you could chafe your poor kielbasa all to heck - but one would hope that you would stop before blisters formed.

Still - one is not likely to die of genital over manipulation.

Paws

Bamfette · Post by **Bamfette** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:04 am

Originally posted by fourpawsonthefloor
and there is always the life sized "realistic" ladies that the guys can get...

actually, the ladies can get those now too: http://www.realdoll.com/maledoll1.asp (warning - nudity. it'snot a realperson, but he's still shown semi nekkid)

Post by **fourpawsonthefloor** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:47 am

I like the creativity of the positions that they propped him in...but I noticed one in the tub that I don't think was aimed at attracting the ladies...

Still - what would happen if you died in a car wreck and your mom had to find that cleaning out your closet? Just adds a whole nother dimention to the sex toy thing...

That reminds me. If my husband and I die, I better be making sure it is friends cleaning out my home...

Paws

NachtcGleiskette · Post by **NachtcGleiskette** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:00 am

This is Fuzzy Bunny.....

[Edited on 22/3/06 by NachtcGleiskette]

Crawler · Post by **Crawler** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 8:51 am

First, I admit that I have not read this whole thread due to a strange desire to keep my sanity.

But I went through sex ed. Repeatedly. It started in 4th grade and it was at least mentioned every year until 10th. (Though I failed the 10th grade class by not showing up on a regular basis and so took it again in 12th.)

So perhaps my memory is newer than some others.

Not once did anyone encourage us to have sex.

Not once did anyone say anything to the effect of "well, you're gonna do it anyhow."

That may have been the reasoning behind teaching us about how things work, but never was it SAID to us.

I was with the same classmates for 3 years after SexEd started. It did NOT encourage ANY of us to have sex. I mean, we were 10/11 when it started. And all of us were virgins at 13/14.

And what about the non-sexual parts of sex ed that you cannot deny are important? I've read recent articles of women going to the hospital or even dying from toxicity from not knowing how to use a tampon. (I have man parts and even I know that you have to take them *out*...but still, there are people that will not know.)

Anyway, the original point was this:
Every year, EVERY YEAR, there was at least one question that asked "What is the best way to avoid pregnancy and STDs?" to which the answer is "Abstinence."

That was drilled into our heads alongside the information about condoms and such.

So teaching kids sex ed because "they'll do it anyway" is NOT a self-fulfilling prophecy. The people that were going to have sex had sex and the people that were going to wait waited.

Angelique · Post by **Angelique** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 5:57 pm

I do think that if the message is that abstinence is not only best, it's what's expected, more people will abstain, simply because the message will come through more clearly.
Saying "abstinence is best, but here's how to use a condom" is a classic example of a mixed message, which can give some kids cause to question just how much better abstinence is. How can a kid be expected to believe abstinence is best if the teacher doesn't really believe it? How is a kid expected to believe there is no equal substitute for abstinence when he or she is taught all about how to use sub-par substitutes, but is not equipped with the tools to remain abstinent in a society that screams, "you are not complete if you don't do it"? Remembering from my own adolescence as well as mine and my husband's work with children and adolescents, I am convinced that kids have little to no tolerance for dishonesty and hypocrisy. If you say one thing but assume that kids won't listen, of course they won't think you deserve to be taken seriously.

NachtcGleiskette · Post by **NachtcGleiskette** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 6:15 pm

So, all you have to do is tell people to do something, and they do it? You have to believe that its right, believe in it, and tell people, and they'll do it..

Angelique! Give us some facts to back up those numbers you were spouting!!

Is it working??

Angelique · Post by **Angelique** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 7:33 pm

You didn't read my post. It's not enough to just say something. Kids are more likely to respond favorably to a clear, unambiguous message delivered without any duplicity.

Other factors, such as education (which most abstinence proponents do not oppose, contrary to the stereotype presented here), awareness of the fertility cycle (which is woefully lacking in a culture that expects women to simply drug their cycles into submission), greater social support for abstinence, and yes, to an extent, conservative norms regarding sexuality have been shown to prevent teen pregnancy.

http://www.etr.org/recapp/theories/Risk ... _Kirby.pdf

NachtcGleiskette · Post by **NachtcGleiskette** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 7:45 pm

Ange, no one has been perpetuating that stereotype more than you.

And thanks for the 74 page pdf.

I think I'm done with this too. If you could stick to one point of view, it'd be nice, but this latest post says to me that you even *gasp* agree with us that sex education is important? Jesus, have some conviction, do some research and then maybe we'll take you seriously.

Yeah, upon looking at that, how does it back anything up now? How do these matrixes you posted prove you right and us not? Show me where they mention the 15% failure rate in condoms.

What ever, I'm finished with this. Ange, you make every single topic exhausting and take the fun out of even the most mundane discussions. Teach your kids to abstain, I'll teach my kids to wear condoms, and we'll call it a draw.....have fun in candyland

[Edited on 22/3/06 by NachtcGleiskette]

The Drastic Spastic · Post by **The Drastic Spastic** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 7:50 pm

Originally posted by Angelique
conservative norms regarding sexuality have been shown to prevent teen pregnancy.

Yes, the lowest teen pregnancy rates are in highly conservative countries like North Korea. GOOD FUCKING ARGUMENT. Let's be a dictatorship!

I hate when people twist data to their own ends.

chicory · Post by **chicory** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 8:09 pm

Ang - they taught us how to read scientific studies in bio - because even some of the stuff that actually is published is reputable peer reviewed journals is faulty and can be disproved.

That one's a joke! It's scary. First of all their sample sizes are ridicuously small - second of all they admit in their methods section (or what passes for that since its just footnotes

) that they chose to include data with smaller sample sizes if it was a 'good study.' Read>they agreed with the data.

And what's all this with risk factors if a partner is of a different race/ethnicity, how students from private religious schools are more 'protected' than students from urban schools, and kids from two parent (should we assume opposite sex) households are more protected as well.

There are no numbers! It's just a rating system. It's like they just made if up from what they already believed is true! And I can't find a section where they explain how their data is non-biased. So, I'm deeply offended.

(Now I have to go to work - but if you want good data - try the Guttmacher Institute. They know how to do science there.)

Post by **fourpawsonthefloor** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:15 pm

The real facts...

On masturbation myths:
http://parentingteens.about.com/od/mast ... bation.htm

Some interesting statistics that have studies to back them up:
http://63.73.227.69/pubs/fact/fact0001.html

But really, here is where it is at. The ONLY safe sex, married, single, teen or 80 yr old...this is the only STD free sex.

For boys:
http://www.healthystrokes.com/young.html

For girls:
http://www.healthystrokes.com/female.html

And even...drumroll please...for Christians!!!!
http://www.healthystrokes.com/christian.html

Even I learned something. Guys you are supposed to not do it laying face down (it even has a name! TMS)!! Evidently you can cause some physical damage that way. As well don't stick anything up the urethra, though one would hope that would be pretty self explainitory. Men that do traumatize themselves through TMS are ususally mastrubating in that fashion through self discovery and were not taught proper mastrubation techniques.

I think I have found another favorite website.

Paws

Angelique · Post by **Angelique** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 10:56 pm

The Guttmacher Institute is a tool of organizations that have vested interest in not promoting abstinence, and even they once admitted that the teen sex rate declined after abstinence was introduced to make comprehensive sex education truly comprehensive. They set out to prove the opposite.

Chicory, that was the first one I could find that had a fairly complete list of protective/risk factors. I wasn't going to spend hours digging online just to make a point that my opinion is backed up by more than just hot air. And one fact is that societies where abstinence is not only regarded as realistic, it's regarded as the norm, do tend to experience fewer problems that are directly related to premarital and extramarital sex.

And Nacht, that was utterly uncalled for. Again with that false dichotomy, that anyone who feels more clear, unambiguous attention needs to be drawn to the superiority of abstinence are in favor of perpetuating ignorance. I think perpetuating the myth of "safe sex" is almost as dangerous as saying nothing at all.

I thought all leading experts abandoned using that term about ten years ago, because they felt it was misleading, contributing perhaps to a false sense of security rather than minimizing high risk behaviors. Even "safer sex," as in "not as dangerous," isn't perfect. But I didn't think anyone even pretended any more that condom use guaranteed safety. Thank you for correcting me on that point. There are ignorant people out there who still think a piece of rubber makes them invulnerable, apparently.

Post by **fourpawsonthefloor** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:25 pm

Angelique, I don't know what you are expecting if you won't back up your arguements with anything more that a "I know its this way, so take my word for it". Its not just nacht, its everyone here that is saying that in order for anyone (not just you) to prove their point, they have to do so by using actual facts that they can back up with proof. If we can all find contrary evidence on multiple sites (the sites that I posted btw were all found in a 10 minute period of time) to post, and you think that all we are posting is not true, then it shouldn't be that hard to find other stats supporting your therories. Ones that have statistics, not that are propreganda for a specific abstinence program.

No one here is saying that there is such a beast as safe sex. No one. The only one that is std free is self mastrubation. (provided you guys don't try and hump your mattress - cause that can break your willy)

I personally had teachers that were careful to pound into our heads that there wasn't "safe sex" just "safer sex". As for people feeling invulnerable, well that is a particular trick of teens isn't it? Teens pretty much expect to be able to leap of the empire state building and not die. Which is WHY education is so valuable to teens!!!

Really, I think that maybe you feel a little picked on here, perhaps in particular by nacht. This isn't the case. Your arguements are simply faulty, have no backup rather than "your word for it" and are easy to tear apart. If you want to make your point, then go about it with a logical, factual manner, and I am sure that you will find that there are more people in here that are willing to listen, rather than dismiss the points that you are trying to make.

For me this isn't about "winning" this thread, but rather on keeping the world that we live in as open, honest and accountable as possible. Lying and witholding information from kids hoping that they will mindlessly obey you is not my idea of an advancing society.

Paws

NachtcGleiskette · Post by **NachtcGleiskette** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:46 pm

FOr the record, Paws and Chic are my heros and I agree with everything they said above..

Originally posted by Angelique
But I didn't think anyone even pretended any more that condom use guaranteed safety. Thank you for correcting me on that point. There are ignorant people out there who still think a piece of rubber makes them invulnerable, apparently.

Putting words in our mouths doesn't make you anymore right. No one said that condoms make you invulnerable, in fact, i believe its been repeated they DON'T. But if I ever do meet a retard like the one you describe, I'll certainly send them your way.

Oh, and this isn't about winning in the least, it never was. But you proved yourself the loser when all you could do was say the SAME fucking thing over and over without backing it up! It's an actual RULE on this board that we have been very lenient with you over. You must back up your information, especially in heated debates as this. AND the rest of us who provided information backed it up. Since when are you above that? Since when are you so special that WE need to prove to YOU what we're saying is true, but you just need to flutter your golden lips and we bathe in the wisdom spewed foward. POINT: Its a rule. You could have seen disciplinary action over this. But you didn't. So do us all a favor and take the sand out of your vagina, lest the condom break...

And, Jesus H. Christ, WHAT is so bad about sex? It feels so good! The way YOU describe it, Ange, people would be safer with a gun in their mouth and their worst enemy on the trigger than with a condom and a 16 yr old classmate....

[Edited on 23/3/06 by NachtcGleiskette]

Thu Mar 23, 2006 5:08 am

I went on vacation for a day. It was nice.

Now it is time for this thread to go on vacation.

Remember, if we can't discuss topics civilly as a community, it will be up to the administration remove potentially disruptive topics and posts as we see them come up. I don't know about you, but I certainly don't want to have that kind of censorship here.

So, while this thread is off in Thread-Mexico drinking margaritas on the beach and stuff, take some time to re-read our rules and think about ways to express your opinions without tearing each other down. It's good to be passionate about the things that matter, but we need to respect each other too.

This thread will be unlocked in 5 days.

Peace.
-e

Mon Mar 27, 2006 4:48 pm

This thread is now back from vacation and unlocked.

Have fun and play nice.

-e

The Drastic Spastic · Post by **The Drastic Spastic** » Mon Mar 27, 2006 4:54 pm

Did you have to come back, you stupid thread? *kicks thread in the nuts*

Post by **Saint Kurt** » Mon Mar 27, 2006 6:08 pm

OW! Those weren't my nuts! I'm a girl thread!

Didn't you have basic sex ed in high school? ow....

- A vs E thread

Post by **HoodedMan** » Mon Mar 27, 2006 7:07 pm

Originally posted by Saint Kurt
Didn't you have basic sex ed in high school? ow....

Ooh, touchÃ©!

The Drastic Spastic · Mon Mar 27, 2006 10:07 pm

Originally posted by Saint Kurt

Didn't you have basic sex ed in high school? ow....

That's where I learned how to keep things from reproducing!

NachtcGleiskette · Post by **NachtcGleiskette** » Mon Mar 27, 2006 10:56 pm

This thread kicks ASS now!

Best thread ever!

LadyErin · Post by **LadyErin** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 2:52 am

ROFL That was funny.

Post by **Saint Kurt** » Mon Apr 17, 2006 9:25 pm

I think we can all be thankful that our sex education experiences weren't like this.

Just call it a vagina already!

Well at least mine wasn't like this. Warning - may not be work safe. While no actual womanparts are shown, it is a laboriously slow demonstration of how to use a maxipad.

-e