|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: abstinece-only sex education | |||||||||||||||||||||||
SuperNintendo Chalmers Member (Idle past 5860 days) Posts: 772 From: Bartlett, IL, USA Joined: |
The life problems you are describing are way beyond the scope of any sex education program. You needed a personal counselor about a lot more than sex. Pot, Kettle, Black
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
RickJB Member (Idle past 5016 days) Posts: 917 From: London, UK Joined: |
I'm not going to argue with you because I agree with much of what you say!!
I was simply making the point that sex ed is not always a science-only proposition, for better or for worse. Save your energy for another poster.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1309 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
Is it not conceivable that in fact the incidences of these viruses have not increased as much as you may think much, but rather REPORTED cases have increased dramatically?
i.e. In the course of making sexual issues less of a Taboo, people are more likely to talk about problems, concerns, and thus get them treated?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1470 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
quote: Pot, Kettle, Black My remark was not intended as an insult. What Brenna described seemed to be asking a lot more of a sex ed program than any such program offers. I thought it was even sympathetic to say that she needed a lot more than that, needed personal counseling. She had a lot of awful experiences that it seemed to me a class couldn't be expected to deal with. Personal counseling is regarded as a comfort or luxury in my circles, apparently as an insult in others. Too bad.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1470 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
See my Message 184
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Silent H Member (Idle past 5845 days) Posts: 7405 From: satellite of love Joined: |
So an abstinence only eductation program does not appear to change the initiation of intercourse but taking part in a pledge scheme does. Perhaps those who take pledges are also those who would have waited longer before initiating intercourse anyway and all the pledge programs are doing is identifying a more abstinent subset of the teenage population.
That's a very good point. I realize there is a difference between purely abs-only ed and a virg pledge, and you have highlighted a potential issue in taking anything away from the results shown. The point I was trying to make... though your caveat is well made against it... is this could support Faith's argument that the issue may be how rather than what an abs-only ed currently involves in the areas where failures have been noted. Perhaps a pledge type drive within such an educational scheme would work, or at the very least change the failure rate. That certainly would add a nice 1984-ish form of peer pressure to keep kids from having sex. Victory over the orgasm! holmes {in temp decloak from lurker mode} "What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Silent H Member (Idle past 5845 days) Posts: 7405 From: satellite of love Joined: |
Actually sex is not the problem.... Unprotected sex is the problem.
As well meant as that is, I am going to challenge your claim. Unprotected sex is NOT the problem at all. The problem is willful ignorance. We have the means to test individuals and identify who is infected or not. With this knowledge we could begin drastically reducing infection rates. Instead we want to continue pursuing this epidemic unlike any other epidemic we have ever faced before in history... simply because it has sexual stigma. The problem is that people who do not know their status, but are infected, are allowed to live in a dream world that they may not be and so continue to have sex. And those who want to have sex have no easy way of knowing whether their partners are infected or not. This is protected for the privacy concern of the individual with the contagious disease. Most people that know their positive status get the help they need and move into safe sexual practices that do not involve the uninfected (or at least with those who know and are willing to take risks). Yeah, condom use is USEFUL for the prevention of its spread in cultures that refuse to enact better identification programs and address the disease for what it is, a contagion, instead of some socio-religio-political issue. But it is not as good as knowledge. That said condoms are also useful for prevention of other diseases as well which while not of "plague" quality, are also maintained in societies by cultural guilt complexes. And it might be mentioned there are safer sexual acts involving NO condoms than acts with a condom. That is another bit of knowledge people don't seem to want to spread around. Not ranting at you, just frustrated that the debate seems to get stuck at condoms vs abstinence when there is a world of better options out there. Edited by holmes, : added who holmes {in temp decloak from lurker mode} "What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
SuperNintendo Chalmers Member (Idle past 5860 days) Posts: 772 From: Bartlett, IL, USA Joined: |
Not ranting at you, just frustrated that the debate seems to get stuck at condoms vs abstinence when there is a world of better options out there. Holmes, if you are talking about AIDS specifically I might agree with you somewhat. But I think that unprotected sex is the problem for STDs in general. I mean, people are going to have sex with people and not know what they may or may not be infected with. I think that's just a fact of life. I read somewhere that some huge percentage (might have been 70%?) of people have HPV, but most don't show symptoms
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Jazzns Member (Idle past 3937 days) Posts: 2657 From: A Better America Joined: |
Nice to see you are still hanging around holmes.
Instead we want to continue pursuing this epidemic unlike any other epidemic we have ever faced before in history... simply because it has sexual stigma. I think this is an important point and I never really thought about it that way. We really DO treat STDs different than any other disease because we treat it on a social level stronger than we do on a medical level. Although treating some STDs like we might an outbreak of bird flu does not quite sit well with me. We have no problem putting a quaranteen on people with some kind of fatal flu even though it is their personal medical information yet a potentially malicious person could keep their HIV, HPV, Herpes status secret under the guys of dr patient confidentiality. I guess the problem is that STDs are easy to hide PLUS protected under medical confidentiality law. That being said I don't necessarily think an HIV registry is the right way to go either. What route do you think is acceptable for dealing with the problem more as a contagion and less like a sociopolitical problem? Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
macaroniandcheese  Suspended Member (Idle past 3953 days) Posts: 4258 Joined: |
the point isn't that the class should deal with these issues, but instead that a properly designed sex-ed course could have prevented them. a properly designed sex-ed course will deal with preparing children for the emotional, physical and psychological reprocussions of sexual activity without moral judgement. telling children that what their bodies tell them is BAD or EVIL is counterproductive. you create self-hate and distrust and shame. it is acceptable to discuss the wisdom of early sexual activity (or the lack thereof) but you must share this information without berating and shaming people. we're trying to prevent abuse, not perpetrate it ourselves.
often, honest sexual information will succeed in delaying sexual activity. for several years, in fact. there is no evidence to suggest that shame-based abstinence-only education succeeds in this... quite the opposite. and forgive me for being offended, you don't tend to give advice that isn't also biting and hiding insult. Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
macaroniandcheese  Suspended Member (Idle past 3953 days) Posts: 4258 Joined: |
i think it's between 1/3 and 1/2 of sexually active people have hpv. but 3 in 4 people with hpv don't have symptoms.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
SuperNintendo Chalmers Member (Idle past 5860 days) Posts: 772 From: Bartlett, IL, USA Joined: |
i think it's between 1/3 and 1/2 of sexually active people have hpv. but 3 in 4 people with hpv don't have symptoms. Yeah, maybe that's it. I know they think that near half (or even more than half) have it but so few exhibit symptoms that it's impossible to tell. Thanks for the correction
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1470 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
We have no problem putting a quaranteen on people with some kind of fatal flu even though it is their personal medical information yet a potentially malicious person could keep their HIV, HPV, Herpes status secret under the guys of dr patient confidentiality. Who exactly is this WE who is supposedly refusing to having STDs tested and identified? Are you guys aware that when AIDS was getting known that it was the Gay Community that absolutely refused to let Public Health investigate, test and identify the disease in individiauls, because they didn't want it identified as a gay disease? Thus it was allowed to spread among those who had most to lose from it. Public Health SHOULD be identifying these diseases and would be if it weren't for the political correctness that REFUSES. You think any government representatives are going to be allowed to interfere with individual FREEDOM to that extent? And think about it. The reaction isn't all crazy either. You don't just stigmatize individuals with their diseases like that. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
CK Member (Idle past 4153 days) Posts: 3221 Joined: |
quote: I don't know much of the history of this but I thought it was pretty quickly established that drug-users were at risk (1981 onwards)? as were other hetrosexual groups? Do you have a source or a link for this claim?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Jazzns Member (Idle past 3937 days) Posts: 2657 From: A Better America Joined: |
The WE here are the laws that protect medical information at the federal level. The only time that your medical information can be officially released by medical practicioner that holds it is by patient consent or judicial order for purposes of a legal investigation or control of a catastrophic epidemic. HIV, HPV, Herpes, etc don't fall under either category.
Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024