Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   abstinece-only sex education
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 1 of 306 (311999)
05-15-2006 1:09 PM


So, some more studies have come in, and it doesn't look good for abstinence-only programs.
It's not just that kids to take pledges to not have sex before marriage still have premarital sex (just a year or so later than those who do not take such pledges) and are more likely to not use any protection.
Now studies are showing that the pledge-takers are more likely to also engage in oral and anal sex, also with less liklihood of using protection.
In particular, the Latina, (very patriarchal and very Catholic) teen population) is most likely to engage in anal sex, which is an activity particularly likely to spread AIDS and other STD's when engaged in without condoms.
It looks as though all of these strict Christians who love to tell their kids "just say no" are stupidly steering them into, um, somewhat more exotic endeavors.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by EZscience, posted 05-15-2006 1:22 PM nator has not replied
 Message 3 by nwr, posted 05-15-2006 1:51 PM nator has not replied
 Message 4 by Faith, posted 05-15-2006 2:03 PM nator has replied
 Message 150 by macaroniandcheese, posted 05-18-2006 4:20 PM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 93 of 306 (312819)
05-17-2006 12:16 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Faith
05-15-2006 2:03 PM


quote:
But you know what, until the sixties it pretty much was the status quo. There was always sin, there will always be sin, but there was never sin in this country before the sixties on the scale there has been since, with popular and political support yet, and partly this is because people take a practical view of it instead of a moral view.
Yes, of course.
Anal and oral sex didn't exist before the 60's.
How naieve you are, faith.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Faith, posted 05-15-2006 2:03 PM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by iano, posted 05-17-2006 12:27 PM nator has not replied
 Message 98 by CK, posted 05-17-2006 12:32 PM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 94 of 306 (312820)
05-17-2006 12:21 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Faith
05-15-2006 7:24 PM


Impressive indeed
quote:
I HAVE all the facts about the Bible.
Wow, I had no idea that you had perfect knowledge in that way.
Tell me, how often do James Dobson, Jerry Falwell, and Pat Robertson call you to ask your advice on Biblical matters?
Surely, the Pope must contact you regularly, does he not?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Faith, posted 05-15-2006 7:24 PM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by iano, posted 05-17-2006 12:36 PM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 97 of 306 (312824)
05-17-2006 12:31 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Faith
05-15-2006 8:27 PM


Re: Reference on increase in STDs
quote:
The increase in STDs worldwide can be partly explained by people starting sexual activity at a younger age and having more sexual partners. The use of the oral contraceptive pill and IUCDs has also reduced the rate of condom use.
Just to be clear, let us please restrict the discussion to the effects of abstinence only programs.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Faith, posted 05-15-2006 8:27 PM Faith has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 99 of 306 (312827)
05-17-2006 12:34 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by Faith
05-15-2006 9:29 PM


Re: Failure is the result of moral decline
quote:
My answer to the "failure" of abstinence programs has already been given. It's irrelevant. In my view it's a moral problem, not a mere health problem and you won't deal with the health issues UNLESS you deal with it as a moral problem.
So, it would seem that comprehensive, real sex education results in a greater liklihood of moral behavior by teens, as those armed with the truth delay sex longer and indulge in oral and anal sex less than those who only get abstinence-only.
Right?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Faith, posted 05-15-2006 9:29 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by Faith, posted 05-17-2006 12:39 PM nator has replied
 Message 104 by jar, posted 05-17-2006 12:41 PM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 108 of 306 (312842)
05-17-2006 12:56 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by Faith
05-17-2006 12:39 PM


lemme get this straight
So, you suggest that we should keep on with abstinence-only programs even though they result in teens having sex at an younger age, engaging in more anal and oral sex, and them being less likely to use condoms and other forms of birth control?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by Faith, posted 05-17-2006 12:39 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by Faith, posted 05-17-2006 1:04 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 113 of 306 (312857)
05-17-2006 1:22 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by Faith
05-17-2006 1:04 PM


Re: lemme get this straight
quote:
I haven't said ONE THING about abstinence "programs."
Then you have been off-topic for this entire thread?
quote:
I simply abhor this "scientific" mechanical manipulative instrumentalistic way you all talk about this stuff, it's dehumanizing.
Educating young people about the mechanics of how babies are made and disease is spread is the most humanity-enforcing thing I think we can possibly do for them.
Remember, in the ideal sex education program, the emotional aspects of relationships are going to be stressed. Love, coersion, feelings, and all the rest of it need to be discussed, most of all the importance of respect, both for oneself and one's partner.
quote:
Abstinence IS what should be taught, but HOW it is taught is a big subject I haven't investigated enough to be able to advocate anything in particular.
Well, the Christian Right has been funding these programs for long enough for there to be fairly long-term data to collect about the results, and it isn't favorable.
Clearly, the good Christian folks advocating, developing, and teaching this stuff are doing something wrong.
quote:
Again, this self righteous carrying on about how there's something wrong with teaching abstinence simply because young people in our sex-saturated culture ignore it is just mindlessness.
Nobody said there was anything wrong with teaching kids that abstinence is a perfectly valid option, with the very best track record for preventing all sorts of consequences. What little sex-ed I got in school definitely taught about it along with the facts of what to do if one wasn't going to abstain.
However, I have been criticizing abstinence ONLY programs since the OP.
They do not work, and in fact seem to lead to more dangerous and, in your eyes, immoral, sexual deviant behavior.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Faith, posted 05-17-2006 1:04 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Faith, posted 05-17-2006 1:37 PM nator has not replied
 Message 126 by Silent H, posted 05-18-2006 8:10 AM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 205 of 306 (313756)
05-19-2006 11:04 PM
Reply to: Message 138 by Faith
05-18-2006 12:24 PM


I'll explain it to you AGAIN, Faith
how many must die for your "we'll wait and see?"
quote:
Ask the anti-abstinence camp. They're the ones I was talking about. How long indeed before the pragmatic instrumentalist method is shown to be a huge mistake.
Strawman argument.
There is an "anti-abstinence ONLY" camp.
Abstinence-ONLY.
ONLY, ONLY, ONLY.
This means that in a good comprehensive sex-education program, abstience is included as a perfectly viable option along with comprehensive education about preganncy and STD prevention and other sexual and relationship health.
So, please stop using the term "anti-abstinence" to refer to people who want to teach comprehensive sex education to children, because they do NOT hold the position of being against abstinence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by Faith, posted 05-18-2006 12:24 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 207 by Faith, posted 05-20-2006 1:08 AM nator has replied
 Message 214 by Silent H, posted 05-20-2006 6:29 AM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 221 of 306 (313844)
05-20-2006 9:18 AM
Reply to: Message 207 by Faith
05-20-2006 1:08 AM


Re: I'll explain it to you AGAIN, Faith
quote:
Technically you are correct, but in spirit what I said is the truth.
I am not against abstinence if that is what someone decides is right for them. In fact, I heartily support anyone who decides to remain abstinent. It would be silly to do that because that would be how I chose to live for many years as a teenager and a young adult.
I doubt very much that most here would actively oppose abstinence as a valid choice.
Now, can you explain to me, please, how that makes me anti-abstinence?
quote:
I've pointed out that on this thread everybody thinks there's nothing wrong with sex outside marriage and all the traditional moral boundaries.
There isn't anything wrong with sex outside of marriage if that is what the individual person so believes and freely chooses.
Also, there isn't anything wrong with remaining abstinent until marriage if that is what the individual person so believes and freely chooses.
There are also "traditional moral boundries" against having sex in any position except missionary, for women to initiate sex, for sex to ever be engaged in for non-procreative reasons, against masturbation, against interfaith and interracial marriage, etc., etc.
So, it very much seems to me that you have your own particular moral code that you believe everyone else should follow.
quote:
That's like being against abstinence as such.
I am not against abstinence if it is chosen freely within the context of knowledge rather than ignorance and fear.
quote:
Even if technically it is presented as an option, a rather weakly defended option I'm sure.
Why are you sure? You yourself have made it perfectly clear that you have no knowledge of sex education programs at all.
quote:
But yes, technically you are correct. Mea culpa.
I don't want you to be sorry.
I want you to stop misrepresenting the position.
Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 207 by Faith, posted 05-20-2006 1:08 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 225 by Faith, posted 05-20-2006 1:01 PM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 222 of 306 (313847)
05-20-2006 9:28 AM
Reply to: Message 214 by Silent H
05-20-2006 6:29 AM


Holmes, I am not going to comment upon this line of argument other than to say that you are the only person in the world I could ever imagine thinking it's a bad idea to teach children in our culture (which is the culture they live in and will likely continue to live in) that respect for one's self and one's chosen sexual partner is a bad thing.
Honestly, this is what I take away from your posts, and I am aghast.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 214 by Silent H, posted 05-20-2006 6:29 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 228 by Silent H, posted 05-20-2006 3:29 PM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 257 of 306 (314232)
05-21-2006 9:57 PM


To everyone in this thread
Holmes wrote:
quote:
Well I should say that not all operate as you suggest, nor must they, but certainly you have seen it suggested by schraf and MrJack and brenna. You should have noticed me fighting them on that. To be fair to them they were not teaching the tenets of the sexual revolution exactly, but a more modern fem postfem victim culture version. But the idea is the same.
After reading this, I'd just like to remind everyone that if they would like to know what my position is, please ask me directly rather than rely on others', um, "characterizations".

Replies to this message:
 Message 260 by Silent H, posted 05-22-2006 4:05 AM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 262 of 306 (314268)
05-22-2006 8:05 AM
Reply to: Message 260 by Silent H
05-22-2006 4:05 AM


Re: To everyone in this thread
quote:
You may not like the label I just put on what your proposed teaching came from, but it is not inaccurate at all. Faith called it sexual revolution and "if it feels good do it". Clearly yours was not that. From your own statements it is about cautioning people and attempting to get them to view sex from the vantage point of "sex is good and you should feel good about it, but be careful as there is a lot of harm and later is better so that one can be better prepared to handle everything that goes with it." Am I right or wrong? If I'm wrong state how.
Yes, you are wrong.
My view should read something like this:
"Sex is good and you should feel good about it, but be careful as there is a lot to consider not only regarding yourself and your own feelings but the feelings of other people. Later is better for some people and that is a valid choice and must be respected. Each person is ready and able to accept responsibility for all that is involved with having responsible sex at different points in their lives."
quote:
You suggest that ideal sex education should include discussion of love and self-respect, in order to deal with what issues exactly?
To deal with the issue of clear communication between sexual partners, and also to discuss the many reasons why a person might want to have sex other than because it is physically pleasurable (fear of losing a boyfriend or girlfriend, to bolster poor self-esteem, to feel power over another, to take revenge or make another jealous, as an expression of love, etc.).
quote:
Which of those issues/concepts existed within the the public mind before fem/post fem victim culture?
Which of these concepts hasn't existed in all of human history?
Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by Silent H, posted 05-22-2006 4:05 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 268 by Silent H, posted 05-23-2006 6:07 AM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 279 of 306 (315083)
05-25-2006 8:24 AM


Please, let us come back to the topic
This thread is supposed to be about the success or failure of abstinence-only programs in US schools.
I've allowed myself to drift off topic along with several others.
If anyone wants to discuss sex education in general, please start your own thread.

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 281 of 306 (315194)
05-25-2006 8:55 PM
Reply to: Message 280 by macaroniandcheese
05-25-2006 9:50 AM


Re: misunderstanding
What she said.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 280 by macaroniandcheese, posted 05-25-2006 9:50 AM macaroniandcheese has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 285 by Silent H, posted 05-28-2006 9:09 AM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 290 of 306 (362371)
11-07-2006 7:41 AM
Reply to: Message 289 by Silent H
11-07-2006 5:52 AM


Re: Spam restarts thread?
quote:
Do you think it is smart to have a sex ed program that either discusses legality from just the US point of view, or one that attempts to understand and discuss sex from the legal standpoint of all the different cultures they'd be taught in?
Considering that I was speaking only of sex ed in the US, I think that discussion of US law, both local and national, wrt sexual behavior is entirely appropriate, regardless of the subcultures that individual students may belong to.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 289 by Silent H, posted 11-07-2006 5:52 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 292 by Silent H, posted 11-07-2006 11:04 AM nator has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024