Young adults and being sexually responsible [slight rant]

[BigJim]

Well, yeah, you are. Didn't you know that already?

It wasn't a statement of rhetorical "realisation" RM, which I suspect you knew anyway.

 

[Redmage]

It wasn't a statement of rhetorical "realisation" RM, which I suspect you knew anyway.

What it looked like to me was "Well, it must not just be topics few are interested in, because look at all these that I read where it's happened." To which I said, "You like lots of things that few people are interested in." 😉

You tell them not to have sex, and give them all the reasons not to, but you've got to teach them about protection also. It's too easy nowadays for young people to have sex.

Nowadays? Heck, it's ALWAYS been easy for young people to have sex (except perhaps when they had official chaperones, and that only affected the rich).

But I certainly agree that kids need to know about safer sex practices. Making effective contraceptives and prophylactics widely available is one of the few ways in which the modern world really has made our sex lives different from those of our grandparents.

 

[BigJim]

What it looked like to me was "Well, it must not just be topics few are interested in, because look at all these that I read where it's happened." To which I said, "You like lots of things that few people are interested in."

Well it's certainly true that I have a few passtimes some people would consider obscure, high-brow or just outright prententiously boring (astronomy, pre-Jurassic Park driven paleontology, politics, general sciences, having the last word, tickling and flat lawn bowls to name a few). By and large I don't really read about them on Wiki though. I tend to only go there for something that is obscure even to me.

I have a weird mind. I don't an exceptional amount of shit, but I do remember an exceptional amount of shit. If a topic comes up in conversation that I saw a TV program about when I was eight (twenty years ago) I'll recall it in near perfect clarity.

 

[Deleted member 2452]

i blame a lot of people

let's start with the kids who are stupid enough to have unprotected sex! then let's turn to their parents and give them a swift kick in the nuts for not teaching their brats to respect themselves, and others. and finally look at the schools where sex is being taught to 5th graders for crist sake!
is it any wonder that kids are having sex younger and younger when it's being taught to them earlier in school every couple years!? when will people open their eyes and see what's happening in front of their faces, and to their kids!

 

[Tickle Fiend]

let's start with the kids who are stupid enough to have unprotected sex! then let's turn to their parents and give them a swift kick in the nuts for not teaching their brats to respect themselves, and others. and finally look at the schools where sex is being taught to 5th graders for crist sake!
is it any wonder that kids are having sex younger and younger when it's being taught to them earlier in school every couple years!? when will people open their eyes and see what's happening in front of their faces, and to their kids!

Or you could just blame the people who had sex. WTF, just because you teach someone about sex, all the do's and dont's, doesn't mean they'll use protection. I think you all aren't giving younger people enough credit when it comes to their knowledge about sex. Kids in elementary school probably don't know as much but people around the age of 15 and up know something. Parents can't follow their kids everywhere they go. All they can do is talk to them. After that, it's up to those individuals.

 

[kis123]

let's start with the kids who are stupid enough to have unprotected sex! then let's turn to their parents and give them a swift kick in the nuts for not teaching their brats to respect themselves, and others. and finally look at the schools where sex is being taught to 5th graders for crist sake!
is it any wonder that kids are having sex younger and younger when it's being taught to them earlier in school every couple years!? when will people open their eyes and see what's happening in front of their faces, and to their kids!

I had my first sex ed class in fourth grade; I was sufficiently grossed out enough to not be interested in exploration if you know what I mean. The next class was in 10th grade; I was still sufficiently grossed out enough to not want to experiment!

Kids have to be taught safe sex practices at younger ages nowadays; they're exposed to everything in ways we weren't at their age. Nothing is left to the imagination and kids need to know the consequences of their choices if they choose to have sex regardless of age.

I do agree that parents should be more plugged into their kids' lives; don't just give them money to go to the mall in order to get them out of your hair. They might be using that money for trouble that will cost a parent more than what they're willing to pay down the road.

I never hid anything from my kids when it came to sex ed; it starts when you point out your kid's body parts. Imagine the look on my ex's face when during a bath, my daughter points out her "bagina" (she couldn't prounce the "v" back then)! I heard about that for about a week-she was only about two at the time.

I just remembered something that happened when the kids were small. I'm going a little off topic, but believe me it's pretty darn funny. My children were 5 & 10 years old at the time; my daughter came running down the stairs to tell on her brother (he said something naughty). I felt this was an educational moment so I asked them what they knew about sex. My daughter responded "that's when two people get butt-naked in the bed; Robert (her childhold friend) told this to her. Believe me, Robert knew since his mother pushed out about six kids! I asked my then 10 year old son what he knew about sex? His response was "it looks kinda' violent to me!" He used to sneak out of bed and watch cinemax while we were asleep-looks like he saw something he shouldn't have! I nearly fell off the couch with his response! His dad was unable to find the humor in this when I told him a few hours later. 😛

 

[Redmage]

Parents can't follow their kids everywhere they go. All they can do is talk to them. After that, it's up to those individuals.

I think that's part of what the "abstinence only" crowd forgets: They tend to treat kids as though they were extensions of their parents. If the kids make mistakes then it's because the parents didn't teach them right, or because the schools undermined the parents with sex education, and so on. The fact that young people are people with minds of their own, and that it might be useful to equip them with information rather than just telling them what to do or not do, doesn't seem to cross the radar.

 

[Icycle]

I never hid anything from my kids when it came to sex ed; it starts when you point out your kid's body parts. Imagine the look on my ex's face when during a bath, my daughter points out her "bagina" (she couldn't prounce the "v" back then)! I heard about that for about a week-she was only about two at the time.

Good for you! I think it's really sad when parents are too embarassed or ashamed to teach their children the proper names of all their body parts. And you are right, age appropriate sex ed starts from the time kids are old enough to learn the names of their body parts.

 

[drew70]

Ok, looks like you found a safe way have sex. Great! Would you have no objection, then, if your way was taught to the children in highschool as an alternative to abstinence, instead of the condom way?

None whatsoever. Because boiled down to it's basics, my way means NOT to have vaginal sex with anybody you aren't 100% sure about. It means not relying on condoms but common sense. It means taking control of one's urges and not being controlled by them.

 

[BigJim]

I definitely agree with Drew's last post, and mostly with Steve's too.

However, I have plenty of my own ideas, which I imagine would be as popular with most ‘normal’ people as a pork pie in a synagogue.

I think sex is stigmatised a great deal more than it should be. I do not agree with kids being taught about more than just the basics before they’re old enough to appreciate what they’re being taught. What I do think though is that there would be more to be gained in falling gymslip mum pregnancy rates, lower STD levels among teenagers and lower therapy rates in later life because of less repressed guilt and thinking their bodies or urges are “unclean”, if sex education was more thorough, open-minded and frank.

Let me be clear: I do not think the message should be,
“C’mon kids, you’re halfway through the lesson in sex education and only three quarters of you have had it off so far. What’s keeping the rest?”
I do however believe that education should promote safer, sounder (and probably therefore more enjoyable) knowledge of sex among people who are going to do it anyway and would be a of a lot safer if they knew what the hell they were doing. An end to hurried fumblings and the danger they hold.

I do however have to admit that I come at this debate from an angle nearly everyone else does not. I hold no religiously or culturally imbued beliefs in sex only being right inside of marriage, or that it should be done only by those of 18 years and over. (In Britain, the age of legal consent is 16 years old, which I think is about right for a relationship of comparative ages – in Italy it’s 14 years old! Too young, most times I think, even if there is a sliding scale for comparative ages.) I also come from a standpoint that holds the middle ground between insistence on monogamy and profligate promiscuousness. Because I have no concept of guilt about sex, I see no moral outrage in someone having more than one sexual partner, assuming there is honesty in such an open relationship and both members know what is going on. Indeed, I think there is a great deal to be gained in open relationships, for all parties concerned, if the barrier of guilt can be overcome about such a thing. I think I’ve waffled about this before, regarding the characters played by Alan Rickman and Emma Thompson in Love Actually.

 

[BigJim]

Why am I doing this God? Because I'm an insufferably smug bastard? Because I'm a glutton for punishment? Because I'm really just love taking it from RedMage? Because I just can't stop myself scratching at a scab? Because I just have to have the shagging last word? (Some buggering hope.) All of the above? Smeg knows!

Anyway, a slightly on-topic article in The Times newspaper on 11th of April 2007 says...

Lifted wholesale from a newspaper by BigJim
The founder of the Wikipedia online encyclopaedia critiscised the Education Secretary yesterday for suggesting that the website could be a good educational tool for children.
Mr Johnson described the internet as “an incredible force for good in education” for teachers and pupils, singling out Wikipedia for praise.
“Wikipedia enables anybody to access information which was once the preserve only of those who could afford the subscription to Encyclopaedia Britannica and could spend the time necessary to navigate its maze of indexes and content pages,” he told the annual conference of the National Association of Schoolteachers and Union of Women Teachers (NASUWT) in Belfast.
But Larry Sanger, who helped to found Wikipedia in 2001, said that the site was “broken beyond repair” and no longer reliable.
Wikipedia is among the top six most-visited sites on the internet, containing more than six million articles contributed only by members of the public. But it has been critiscised for being riddled with inaccuracies and nonsense.
Last month it was revealed that a prominent and long-standing Wikipedia contributor had lied about his identity, having claimed to be a tenured university professor, when he was in fact a 24-year old college drop-out.
Concerned about the web-site’s integrity, Mr Sanger left Wikipedia, and two weeks ago launched an online encyclopaedia called Citizendium.org, which he said would be monitored and edited by academics and experts as well as accepting public contributions.
He told The Times: “I’m afraid Mr Johnson does not realise the many problems afflicting Wikipedia, from serious management problems, to an often dysfunctional community, to frequently unreliable content, and to a whole series of scandals. While Wikipedia is still quite useful and an amazing phenomenon, I have come to the view that it is also broken beyond repair.”
Nick Gibb, the Tory schools spokesman, said: “A huge amount of the current curriculum, particularly in history, is devoted to teaching children to be discerning when it comes to information on the internet.
“It appears the Secretary of State is not quite as modern as he needs to be in this information age.”

Etc etc etc that isn’t relevant to anything to do with Wiki-everfucking-pedia…


A bitter ex-founder trying to discredit the opposition in the face of his new initiative (and thus laying himself wide open to a humongolous lawsuit in the process, one would've thought), or a legitimate opinion of someone who knows something? In a topic that is mostly based on opinion, you decide.


Excuse me now while I get very lost.

 

[Icycle]

A bitter ex-founder trying to discredit the opposition in the face of his new initiative (and thus laying himself wide open to a humongolous lawsuit in the process, one would've thought), or a legitimate opinion of someone who knows something? In a topic that is mostly based on opinion, you decide.

In this case, I think it is important to consider the source. Larry Sanger was a co-founder of Wikipedia along with Jimmy Wales. Mr. Sanger left Wikipedia in March 2002, after 15 months of employment. After he left Wikipedia, he was a strategist for Encyclopedia of Earth, and spearheaded the Citizendium project. Both projects are online encyclopedias which do not allow free and open collaboration like Wikipedia, and relies on content experts to write and/or edit the content. Mr. Sanger has been a prominent critic of the Wikipedia project since at least 2004, citing problems such as "anti-elitism, or lack of respect for expertise."

To me, Mr. Sanger sounds like a bitter ex-employee, who strongly believes in an alternative model for an encyclopedia, who is critisizing his primary competitor as a means of promoting his own project. What would you say if Bill Gates critisized Linux? Or if the CEO of Ford critized the products of Toyota? In all those cases, you should probably investigate the claims very careful and come to your own conclusions rather than take claims at face value coming from someone with a very strong vested interest.

 

[BigJim]

Sounds to me as if he is more in the business of slander (as I guess, would be The Mail also), rather than encyclos, if this is the case. I await the lawsuit.


The "dysfunctional community" made me laugh. Reminded me of the old thread wars on which was better out of here, AMT or Tickle Theater.

 

[BigJim]

What would you say if Bill Gates critisized Linux? Or if the CEO of Ford critized the products of Toyota? In all those cases, you should probably investigate the claims very careful and come to your own conclusions rather than take claims at face value coming from someone with a very strong vested interest.

To be sure, I don't know without more than a hypothetical scenario. Would depend on the basis for it. I don't think either of those situations compare though, because Bill Gates never invented or had a hand in Linux, nor did ol' Henry Ford start and then sell up from any Japanese car company.

 

[BigJim]

What the smeg, I can't stand the twats for their attitude, but I really enjoyed this clip!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6row3Z7CTf4&mode=related&search=

 

[emilyemilyemily]

i totally agree with you, mairead. i get so fucking annoyed when a guy tells me he doesn't do condoms. that's funny, because i don't do pregnancy out of wedlock.

 

[thetmfobserver]

One of my good friends doesn't do condoms, apparently, which is the dumbest thing I've ever heard in my life. Actually, that's not true. The dumbest thing is that the girls he's been with go along with it, even though they are nervous and angry about it.

Condoms can be a pain in the neck, and you can spend so much time worrying about them that you wind up not being "ready" for sex when the time comes. Been there, done that. But it's better than getting a girl pregnant when neither of you want to me, or getting a disease.

Wrap it up, fellas.

 

[Candis20]

Topic necrophilia yayyyyy

 

[mabus]

Wow, this is an old thread! Any new input, 4 years later?

 

[Sandrock74]

i totally agree with you, mairead. i get so fucking annoyed when a guy tells me he doesn't do condoms. that's funny, because i don't do pregnancy out of wedlock.

This reminds me of a former co-worker of mine. He refused to use condoms....and he had 2 kids with 2 different women by the time he was in his early 20's. Eventually, he was terrified that he had knocked up a third woman! He eventually quit one day and we lost track of him.

Months later, we found out he had shot and killed himself.

Rumor has it that he was overwhelmed with the burden of having to pay child support for three kids. Talk about an overreaction...

 

[Persephone]

I agree with Emily completely. I will never have a child or unprotected sex out of wedlock. Call me old-fashioned, but I am not going to jump into bed with any guy with a boner walking around. Sex isn't that big a deal, I mean you can have sex for the rest of your lives. But for young kids who are confused about the changes in their bodies and want to explore, they probably find it easier to confide and explore with someone their own AGE than their parents (because it can be awkward). My parents were always very conservative and never discussed anything of a sexual nature with me. I had to learn everything from my sister about what sex entailed exactly, how sex could be safe, and so forth.

Having unprotected sex can easily lead to an unplanned child or a disease. You just have to be smart about your choices and accept whatever results come about because of it.

I just know how having babies at such a young age can derail any other plans you might have had, because the child has to come first.

Call me greedy, but I have no desire to have to put all my focus and money into a unplanned child when I am such a young age. That is why I keep my legs crossed, am super conservative when it comes to sex, and want to plan to have children when I am better prepared, and ideally when I am married and have a decent job to support the child. My dad struggled with having a son when he was only sixteen and he never wanted that for my sister or I. Because it takes a lot of sacrifice, which can be hard at such a young age.

So use condoms and be safe people 😀

 

[LD_Tickler]

i totally agree with you, mairead. i get so fucking annoyed when a guy tells me he doesn't do condoms. that's funny, because i don't do pregnancy out of wedlock.

LOL - guys actually tell you they don't "do" condoms?? That's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. 😵

 

[chicago]

Why would someone drag this out again?

 

[socktickler86]

Why would someone drag this out again?

I don't know but I wish I were around when it started

 

[LD_Tickler]

Pure fluke. A spambot bumped it.