[X] My Assistant

[Reyo]

Then explain me. Halfway through 19 and still holding on to my 'v' card. You saying that to me is tantamount to a morbidly obese person...well...telling ME that it's "oh so difficult" to lose weight. Hormones are not that difficult to control, you just need a respectable amount of self control.

Just because you're a virgin doesn't make you better at self control than someone who isn't.

I fail to see where I said that. I can see where it's implied, but that wasn't the point of my post.

You've never had sex before, so how can you say that they're so easy to control? Have you been in a situation where you could've had sex but chose not to?

The point in abstinence is you don't have sex until you are married to the one you love. The moment you have sex outside the bounds of marriage, you are no longer abstaining. Sure, after you have sex you can choose to not have any more sex until marriage, but it's not really "abstaining" in the true sense of the word.

Not everyone is you, has your beliefs, your morals, or your feelings towards sex. Don't judge people, please, for doing it by saying they have no self control because they chose to do the deed. For some people, it isn't so easy to control those urges, and a majority of the time it's nothing to do with weakness.

You DO know that's exactly the point I was making to YOU, right? You may have failed at abstaining, but in saying that it never works you're making HUGE assumptions on the peers you have. A lot of people have chosen abstinence and are still with it, so yes...it works.

(Also, your obese reference - some people are obese because of genetic reasons, so for them, it IS extremely hard for them to loose weight, just an fyi)

Taking an example meant to simplify the point of the comment, and trying to turn it into a separate argument doesn't make an argument.

Do you understand the premise behind abstinence? The whole point of it is controlling yourself enough NOT to have sex in order to avoid getting someone pregnant, or catching a disease.

Not true. There are many reasons people choose to obstinate, including those reasons, religious reasons, sexual preference reasons, sexuality reasons... ect ect.

So are you saying that people are only abstinent if they have waited until marriage? :/

www.thefreedictionary.com/abstain

1. To refrain from something by one's own choice: abstain from traditional political rhetoric. See Synonyms at refrain1.
2. To refrain from voting: Forty senators voted in favor of the bill, 45 voted against it, and 15 abstained.

dictionary.reference.com/browse/abstinence

1.
forbearance from any indulgence of appetite, especially from the use of alcoholic beverages: total abstinence.
2.
any self-restraint, self-denial, or forbearance.
3.
Economics . the conserving of current income in order to build up capital or savings.
4.
the state of being without a drug, as alcohol or heroin, on which one is dependent.

At the exact moment you have sex on your wedding night, you can say that you abstained, and I know of several people who can say that.

In today's environment of social evolution, the term "abstinence" reflects one's intend to abstain from the act of sex until marriage keeping the traditional definition of the word to heart in that "to abstain" is to refrain yourself, willingly, from an act. The second you commit the act, you are no longer restraining yourself, and are therefore no longer, by definition, abstaining. THAT is the point of what I said, not that people only abstain for a singular reason (which I never even implied).

Also, there's no such thing as "it has been proven time and time again" because...well first off, how do you know? Are YOU an example? Did you hold a scientific study in which a random, yet large groups of students were given a survey? Did you have them volunteer for a live study where x group of virgins were closely monitored after taking an abstinence pledge? Has it been done already? And secondly, how do you explain me? Am I an outlier? I shouldn't be ignored because I don't fit the 99.7% that's supposed to fit within 3 standard deviations of the mean (or 89% given an irregular histogram)? I can infer that way more than .3% of the population has control over their urges.

Go to any school that teaches abstinence only education if you don't believe survey statistics, and tell me how many of them are pregnant, or have left due to pregnancy, or in the case of the men, have left to help pay for their babies by taking jobs.

Let's see, at my old high school? 0%
At the high school before that...0%
At the charter school I went to after traditional high school......0% (then again, there really was no "health class" there).

I'm sorry if where you live is a bad neighborhood and the local pickings can't keep their legs shut population is composed of horndogs, but you're making, again, an assumption on a much much MUCH larger population that I know you've witnessed.

Now at the school my mom was the school nurse for, there WERE pregnancies, but that was contributed to the poverty of the area causing apathy in the student population...and yes, I believe the curriculum for sex was more advanced than "just abstain".

Lastly, what justification is that for displaying your knowledge in public (in a less than clever manner I might say) at someone else's expense?

Meaning what exactly? That I'm not allowed to disagree with someone's point of view based on my own knowledge?

No, I'm saying you sounded like a complete ASS at the expense of someone who was obviously successful in finding a means of avoiding STDs and pregnancy. There were at least a dozen ways to disagree with the guy without snarling at him from behind your teeth.

What education!

I have the sneaking suspicion that you, and you alone went through an experience of sex, regretted it, and then decided to put all of the blame on your teachers for teaching abstinence instead of god knows what would have kept you from having sex. If such is the case, then I'm sorry, but THEY are not to blame for your weak self control. If someone like ME can keep their penis in check, it's obviously possible.

*cracks up*

I'm a virgin, idiot, and it has absolutely nothing to do with abstinence. I simply didn't find someone I liked enough to do the deed with.

Oh good, you're a virgin. so tell me, how many STDs have you caught? How many phone calls have you received in reference to a one night stand, or girlfriend ending in pregnancy? Tell me of your emotional level in reference to any feelings of regret you may have in reference to having made the decision to have sex "before you were ready"?

And lastly, are you really basing personal choice on the decisions made by other people?

My sexual education was second to none, also. I was taught from age 10 up until 18 about sexual education, every year, at a CATHOLIC high school, and not ONCE did I hear a whisper of 'abstinence only'. It was only mentioned as another option, of which the teacher laughed at, along with the class, whenever mentioned. So if they can teach it, and teach it well, then every school should be able to.

OH...so it's not the lesson...it's the teacher...that doesn't help your point.

I'm sorry if I ranted a bit and sound like a dick, but this strikes a nerve with me, given how easy it is for high school kids to ream someone for choosing to wait until marriage.

People have sex for all a manner of reasons. Just as it is a personal choice to wait until marriage, it is also a personal choice to not wait as well, and it shouldn't be shameful to do so no matter what you choose. I have friends who have chosen to wait until marriage for a variety of reasons, some religious orientated, some fear orientated, or some simply because that is how they feel. I wouldn't rib someone for their choice on that.

Ok, really? This again? Give me a direct quote where I said "People are not allowed to have sex ever because it is evil and wrong!"

On that note however, you seem to come across as someone who has it in for people who don't choose to wait, for whatever reasons they had. I suspect bullying, but I'll abstain from guessing further.

No, I have it out for people who 1) Base personal preference on the actions, or inaction of others, and not their own experience, 2) base a generalized statistic on observations of a much much MUCH smaller population, 3) have sex, and then complain relentlessly about various sex related problems. My roommate and his girlfriend will ask for the room on occasion for "massages" and I let them. I just play Dead Space or Assassin's Creed on my xbox until they finish. I don't care if you have sex. Now if he were to approach me and say "I think *girlfriend* may be pregnant" I'd say "Congratulations" and then ask if it was intentional. If it wasn't, I'd ask if any contraceptive was used. If no, I'd call him a dumbshit and offer names for the baby. If they decide to abort, I'll still be his friend and roommate, but tell him that it's not a very responsible decision given that he was smart enough to KNOW the consequences of his actions and choices. I would do this as calmly and as logically as possible and not pursue the point further than a small discussion because I respect him. I also realize that it would not really be my problem to deal with considering my plan to abstain from sex is still working, despite you telling me it shouldn't.

And yes, I was bullied, but that was more because I actually cared about academic influence and less about appealing to the popular crowd.

This post has been edited by Reyo: Sep 30 2011, 02:54 PM

[Yamper]

No, I have it out for people who 1) Base personal preference on the actions, or inaction of others, and not their own experience, 2) base a generalized statistic on observations of a much much MUCH smaller population, 3) have sex, and then complain relentlessly about various sex related problems. My roommate and his girlfriend will ask for the room on occasion for "massages" and I let them. I just play Dead Space or Assassin's Creed on my xbox until they finish. I don't care if you have sex. Now if he were to approach me and say "I think *girlfriend* may be pregnant" I'd say "Congratulations" and then ask if it was intentional. If it wasn't, I'd ask if any contraceptive was used. If no, I'd call him a dumbshit and offer names for the baby. If they decide to abort, I'll still be his friend and roommate, but tell him that it's not a very responsible decision given that he was smart enough to KNOW the consequences of his actions and choices. I would do this as calmly and as logically as possible and not pursue the point further than a small discussion because I respect him. I also realize that it would not really be my problem to deal with considering my plan to abstain from sex is still working, despite you telling me it shouldn't.

And yes, I was bullied, but that was more because I actually cared about academic influence and less about appealing to the popular crowd.

Pretty much agree with this. The whole "Girlfriend pregnant" thing anyway. The rest I mostly agree with. I jut personally find it sickening that people go around having sex willy nilly (no pun intended), get someone preggers and then abort it. I just don't think it's ethically right.

I mean yeah, have sex, go for it, it's your life not mine. But at least BOTHER using some form of contraception. Then again with the whole aborting part.. I agree with the entire underlined bit for this. I'd probably rage at x person if they got someone pregnant from recreational. It's not hard. Hence why I'm for sex education and all that. But of course, I think personally they should express more on contraception. They didn't really do it with us (they just did how people grew up from puberty etc) so I really think they should show the risks with what COULD happen if you don't use a condom. After all it's their choice... people have been given enough warnings. It's their own stupid fault if they don't use one.

[Horse Divorce]

people have been given enough warnings. It's their own stupid fault if they don't use one.

The thing is, though, that they haven't. There's an entire generation of kids who grew up with abstinence-only education who have been taught that contraception doesn't work, that condoms have holes in them.

[Reyo]

people have been given enough warnings. It's their own stupid fault if they don't use one.

The thing is, though, that they haven't. There's an entire generation of kids who grew up with abstinence-only education who have been taught that contraception doesn't work, that condoms have holes in them.

Wha-...not a single abstinence only classroom has even come close to saying that about any other form of contraception...only that abstinence is the only 100% effective way.

[Horse Divorce]

people have been given enough warnings. It's their own stupid fault if they don't use one.

The thing is, though, that they haven't. There's an entire generation of kids who grew up with abstinence-only education who have been taught that contraception doesn't work, that condoms have holes in them.

Wha-...not a single abstinence only classroom has even come close to saying that about any other form of contraception...only that abstinence is the only 100% effective way.

http://www.amplifyyourvoice.org/u/kenzie/2...e-Sex-Education

"...abstinence-only materials in Texas regularly contain medical inaccuracies, especially about condoms. As a result, many high school students have been taught that condoms provide no protection from STIs, HIV/AIDS, or unintended pregnancy, despite the overwhelming support from the medical community, including the CDC, that condoms are extrememly effective at preventing pregnancy and the transmission of STIs."

Edit: Here, another source:
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/200..._ignorance.html
"Of the 13 federally funded programs studied in a minority staff report by the Committee on Government Reform, just two provided students with accurate medical and scientific information, a finding that was consistent with a U.S. Government Accountability Office study released two years later. In the rest, students learned such “facts” as:

* Half the gay male teenagers in the United States have tested positive for the AIDS virus.
* Touching a person’s genitals “can result in pregnancy.”
* A 43-day-old fetus is a “thinking person.”
* HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, can be spread via sweat and tears.
* Condoms fail to prevent HIV transmission as often as 31 percent of the time in heterosexual intercourse. (The actual rate is less than 3 percent, according to the Centers for Disease Control.)
* Women who experience abortions “are more prone to suicide,” and as many as 10 percent of them become sterile."

[Reyo]

people have been given enough warnings. It's their own stupid fault if they don't use one.

The thing is, though, that they haven't. There's an entire generation of kids who grew up with abstinence-only education who have been taught that contraception doesn't work, that condoms have holes in them.

Wha-...not a single abstinence only classroom has even come close to saying that about any other form of contraception...only that abstinence is the only 100% effective way.

http://www.amplifyyourvoice.org/u/kenzie/2...e-Sex-Education

"...abstinence-only materials in Texas regularly contain medical inaccuracies, especially about condoms. As a result, many high school students have been taught that condoms provide no protection from STIs, HIV/AIDS, or unintended pregnancy, despite the overwhelming support from the medical community, including the CDC, that condoms are extrememly effective at preventing pregnancy and the transmission of STIs."

So a segment of the country which has been stereotyped as a region devoted to religious conservatism and extreme social ostracism of those who do not follow it is an accurate representation of the entire the country. Seems legit.

Besides, I received half of my education in Texas. Now given that I wasn't a wonderchild and didn't receive said education in the ENTIRE state, I can still say that such a thing is still something that I would distinctly recall.

Edit: Here, another source:
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/200..._ignorance.html
"Of the 13 federally funded programs studied in a minority staff report by the Committee on Government Reform, just two provided students with accurate medical and scientific information, a finding that was consistent with a U.S. Government Accountability Office study released two years later. In the rest, students learned such “facts” as:

* Half the gay male teenagers in the United States have tested positive for the AIDS virus.
* Touching a person’s genitals “can result in pregnancy.”
* A 43-day-old fetus is a “thinking person.”
* HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, can be spread via sweat and tears.
* Condoms fail to prevent HIV transmission as often as 31 percent of the time in heterosexual intercourse. (The actual rate is less than 3 percent, according to the Centers for Disease Control.)
* Women who experience abortions “are more prone to suicide,” and as many as 10 percent of them become sterile."

More from the great state of Texas! Now while I must congratulate you on being consistent I must, again, remind you that a single state, given it's the 2nd largest state, does not constitute the country as a whole. Anything from a region of the country other than that of the south, generally stereotyped for blind religion obedience, of which I didn't even see from personal experience?

[Dragonflames1994]

I'm nearly 18 and a virgin. I wish I had sex ed cause I don't know what AIDS is. Is it one of those diseases?

[Reyo]

I'm nearly 18 and a virgin. I wish I had sex ed cause I don't know what AIDS is. Is it one of those diseases?

AIDS is a condition caused by HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus) where, basically, your immune system goes to shit and something as simple as the common cold can have you flailing your arms towards the nearest hospital. HIV attacks your T-cells, a vital part of your immune system, and BAM! AIDS. It's not exactly a death sentence anymore though since there are numerous treatments out to keep you alive and active enough in your daily life, but it's still pretty permanent, and the medicine does nothing for how contagious it is. Unless you want to be a complete dickwad, you'll be telling every one of your future girlfriends "Hey, before we have sex, I have AIDS" and hoping that the relationship has either developed into something more than just sex, or that she's eerily into that sort of thing.

Kinda ironic how it forces every future relationship you get into to sway away from being sex oriented and more towards how much you actually "love" each other...you know...given how it's transmitted.

[Limi]

Personally, I think every school should have sex education. It is important and teaches students the risks if they're not careful

[Yamper]

I'm nearly 18 and a virgin. I wish I had sex ed cause I don't know what AIDS is. Is it one of those diseases?

AIDS is a condition caused by HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus) where, basically, your immune system goes to shit and something as simple as the common cold can have you flailing your arms towards the nearest hospital. HIV attacks your T-cells, a vital part of your immune system, and BAM! AIDS. It's not exactly a death sentence anymore though since there are numerous treatments out to keep you alive and active enough in your daily life, but it's still pretty permanent, and the medicine does nothing for how contagious it is. Unless you want to be a complete dickwad, you'll be telling every one of your future girlfriends "Hey, before we have sex, I have AIDS" and hoping that the relationship has either developed into something more than just sex, or that she's eerily into that sort of thing.

Kinda ironic how it forces every future relationship you get into to sway away from being sex oriented and more towards how much you actually "love" each other...you know...given how it's transmitted.

Just to add on, T-Cells are T Memory Cells. Basically you get an infection, your body does it's business and kills the disease with Antibodies released by Phagocytes (White Blood Cells). Once you get infected again, these "T-Memory Cells" recognise the bacterium and release Antibodies at a much faster rate which means you'll be rid of the disease quicker. However because some diseases etc mutate which can cause the rate of antibodies to be less, meaning it'll take longer for the disease to be eradicated. /end biology student eradication

HIV will attack the T Cells causing them to not function properly

---

back on topic, it'd be easier if kids learn sex education throughout their early teen years or so. At least do it every year and not once or twice. Cover everything. How it happens, diseases caused by it and elaborate how you can prevent STI's and so on and so forth.

[Synx Itax]

Of course sex ed should be in schools. Real sex ed, as in learning about birth control. Not abstinence-only. Fuck abstinence-only.

If you are able to wait and want to, then wait. But for those who want to have sex, they will. It's better for them to know what precautions to take and do it safely as opposed to not know how to use protection at all.

Now, the abstinence-only people are trying to scare teens as opposed to pushing morals on them. Now, it's all about what horrible STDs you'll get if the condom breaks or some shit, so technically, you could say abstinence-only works... however, those that will have sex anyway will be in trouble.

This post has been edited by Synx Itax: Feb 18 2012, 01:54 AM

[The Unholy Diver]

I support sex-ed in schools. It could prevent a lot of bad things from happening. NOT this "abstinence only" state crap. that is just ignorant. Of course "abstinance based" because is is a school and therefor has to encourage positive behavior by law.

[strictlyninja]

Of course sex education should be in schools. And none of this "abstinence" crap, we need sex education classes that actually teach the students important information regarding sex. Such information would include info about STDs, different types of contraception, pregnancy, etc. You can't stop teenagers from having sex, but you can (and should) definitely arm them with knowledge. If they're going to have sex, it should be safe sex. And I know contraceptives aren't fool-proof, but the two consenting teenagers would know the risk they are taking when they have sex, safe or otherwise.

Thank you. You saved me a lot of typing.

[daniff]

sex education at my school was terrible, it just told you how to keep safe and what can happen if you don't.

i think they should have taught us about love and respect too.

[Galahawk]

I was waiting to post here until I could honestly summarize my thoughts on the manner quickly so here goes.

I believe that abstinence-only teachings are only valuable to those who know with 100% certainty they want to remain abstinent. I have absolutely no problem with anyone who wants to save themselves for marriage because that's not my place to judge. HOWEVER, to those who wish to become sexually active, then having learned about contraceptives such as condoms, spermicides, birth control, etc should always be a failsafe.
The sex ed I got in highschool was superb and even went beyond sex to talking about how to build healthy relationships, and my teacher, while teaching us about contraceptives, still pushed abstinence as the only 100% effective way to prevent pregnancy and STDs from happening. And you know what? She's completely right. It is the only way. However, since I chose to not remain abstinent, the education I got despite being told that sex does have risks and that abstinence is the only completely effective way to be safe, saved me from possibly turning my future into a trainwreck for choosing to have sex. I lost my virginity at 18 and currently I'm in a healthy, sexual relationship with my current boyfriend and taking birth control pills daily, and I have yet to get pregnant or contract an STD because we both keep safe with our collective knowledge of contraceptive methods.
Everyone who chooses not to be abstinent should have the right to proper knowledge on contraceptives because by denying people who wish to be sexually active information about things that could prevent pregnancy and STDs, you're only serving to essentially screw them over in the long run unless their parents decide to step up to the plate before something bad happens.

In short, I don't think people who want to be abstinent should be forced to learn about contraceptives if they don't want to learn about them. However, those who want to be sexually active deserve to know all the ways to keep safe, for their own good!
Sex ed doesn't promote sex. It promotes SAFE sex for those who choose to have it on their own.

PS: figured I'd touch on this too while I'm here -- I also absolutely can't stand when parents force their child to be abstinent and shun the idea of sex education from their lives against their will. For god's sake if your kid wants to take a sex ed class, let them! It's their life and their future, not yours.

This post has been edited by Galahawk: Jul 5 2012, 12:25 AM

[Pikalover10]

people have been given enough warnings. It's their own stupid fault if they don't use one.

The thing is, though, that they haven't. There's an entire generation of kids who grew up with abstinence-only education who have been taught that contraception doesn't work, that condoms have holes in them.

Wha-...not a single abstinence only classroom has even come close to saying that about any other form of contraception...only that abstinence is the only 100% effective way.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't you the one who said not to judge the minority based on the majority of something or vice-versa? Or, am I wrong in assuming that you've been in EVERY single abstinence only classrooms? Because when I was in one they told us that condoms pretty much never work and that a girl was likely to get pregnant if we used one.

[NuzzlingPlague]

I remember when we learned about sex ed, it was only about the bad stuff, like STDs and teenage pregnancy. Granted, we still learned about the anatomy and the process of childbrith, but it just made me all the more uncomfortable when my mom started pressuring me to find a boyfriend (to this day she still does it). I understood that the class was just trying to prevent those sort of issues in the future, but it doesn't exactly encourage me to do that kind of stuff when I get older.

[KatjadieTediz]

I notice that a lot of people are talking about STD and pregnancy prevention.
This is, of course, extremely important to be taught in schools because many parents flat out refuse to do so
for fear of giving their horny teens ~ideas~. And look where we are now! We're one of the most teen pregnancy countries out there. The children are suffering for it.

My sex education was nice, I suppose. It taught anatomy, contraception, abortion, etc. It was honest and informative.
If you are straight.

The only mention of LGBTQA+ issues was in the form of "many families are different" speeches. That's it.
And here I am, on this forum, not knowing how to protect myself from STDs because apparently lesbian-friendly
sex ed is just too difficult.

So, the moral of the story is, be honest and be inclusive. You don't know which kids will need different information.

[Anarchy]

I remember I went through sex ed in grade 5-6. Although we did not get into direct sex ed (such as the protections and solutions) until grade 8, I don't really think that made an impact on anybody in a way where they would behave any differently than they do. I do not believe that individuals behave based on their education, rather, on their personality and experiences. I'm in my teens and I am sexually active because I choose to be. I make sure I take all precautions possible, but I don't feel like the sex ed really taught me anything. When I started being active I did the research myself simply from a logical thought that I don't want to have a child.
Basically, I don't believe sex ed is necessary nor unnecessary. All this talk of being responsible sexually should not affect you nor anybody but the individual themselves. So, if one gets pregnant or gains an STD, that's their fault and they can do whatever they want, even if it doesn't fit into your morals. Criticizing the person or trying to morally justify what they do is not in my place to do, nor do I think it is in anyone's else. To sum it up, I think sex ed is as useless as criticizing the actions of the youth.

[kipwi]

I do think sex ed is important. My school never taught us about sex at all, and we have about twenty pregnant girls in my class of three hundred or so. I'm seventeen and I have only recently become sexually active, and luckily for me I decided to do my research online before going with it. I did not know where to buy condoms, how to use condoms properly, where to get a STD test and abortion if I needed one, and what forms of birth control there were. Hell, I barely even knew what went where when having sex. It took me a long time to figure everything out, and I know that most people my age wouldn't take the time to research like I did. For most of us, asking parents for help is most definitely not an option. Sex ed would give us all the information we need to prepare us for something that is almost inevitable in our lives. Almost all teenagers discover sex at some point, and it is much better for them to be well prepared and ready for it when it comes than have absolutely no idea what to do.