Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Swordsalmon Jun 27 2008, 07:10 PM

Well, I was reading the news and came upon this horrible and disheartening http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-national/20080626/Bathroom.Baby/. Which led me to make this topic...I hope this is considered serious enough for a debate.

Horrible things such as this, I think could be prevented with more education on breeding in schools. However, there's been a controversy on whether this should be a course in schools. I have to support teaching young teens about pregnancy and prevention. Though this might increase the amount of young intercourse (Which I, morally think isn't right, but whatever), allowing these teens to know prevention could prevent more tragedies. If more promiscuous teens is the after-effect of lowering infantcide and abortions, I think it's worth it.

Sorry if this topic isn't "Debate"-worthy, but it's something I would like to discuss, considering how important it might become in the future.

Posted by: Etnie Jun 27 2008, 07:15 PM

..........OMFG.....well if I had a kid when I was 14 and I didn't know I was pregnant then i wouldn't kill the thing by stuffing him and flushing him.
other than that I really don't know what to say.......

Posted by: shadow the hedgehog Jun 27 2008, 10:03 PM

i had a sex education class in the eighth grade but i went to a private skool. i think there should be sex education classes in every skool but some parents view that as "profane" or "obscene." its not like they're having sex in class, they're learning about sex to help prevent tragedies like in that article swordsalmon found. i agree with swordsalmon 100%.

Posted by: Wymsy Jun 27 2008, 10:17 PM

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.

Posted by: Shade Jul 5 2008, 11:49 AM

First of all I just want to say, that its horrid what that girl did. If she was old enough to have sex and get pregnant, then she is old enough to know that killing a newborn is wrong, and that there are other ways to handle things like that.
Secondly. YES YES YES, a thousand times over to if schools should teach sex ed. Sure they say, when you are younger, "Don't have sex, its wrong," but that just doesn't cut it. Teenagers are going to have sex any way, no matter what people tell them. Sex ed should also start earlier. My school started in 8th grade. By then we already had 5 girls in our class pregnant. Perhaps about 6th grade or even younger is best. The earlier students learn about this type of thing the better of people are going to be. Students today are having sex and a good deal of them do not know of the consequences. Sure a lot of them know that sex can get you pregnant, but a lot of people do not understand about the consequences of an STI (Formally known as an STD).

Posted by: Mister Sa Jul 5 2008, 02:38 PM

They really had sex ed that late for you? 8th grade? The earliest grade had sex ed in was 5th grade. I also had it in 7th, 8th, 9th, and 10th.

I also agree that schools should teach and have sex education. It would inform the kids on what sex is, and preventing unwanted pregnancies, etc. Just like everyone has said so far~

It would also teach the kids about STDs ( if it was taught ) at a lower grade level, like it was for me.

My position on sex is kind of, erm ... well you know, if you love the person and they love you back or you and your partner feel comfortable enough to go to that base, sure. But I don't mean stupid little middle schoolers and early high schoolers saying or thinking this. I'm having trouble explaining myself. Okay, ...

I don't support sex at a REALLY young age, like you know, 13, 14, 15, 16! I feel that you're still immature about love and sex at this age. I guess that's what I was trying to say.

I'm not conservative about sex, I'm really really open to it. I don't think it's right if a 17 year old was dating and having sex with a 13 year old. coughcoughcoughmytwinbrothercoughcoughcough xC

I don't know what more to say. I'm all over the place with this post, not sure if it's gonna make sense.

Posted by: Aeroy Jul 6 2008, 12:53 PM

lawlz it's probably wrong that i thought this was funny

anyway my school teaches it like wymsy said. it's the best class EVER lol.

Posted by: Mister Sa Jul 7 2008, 01:06 PM

Hahaha, it's alright. I finally figured out what I was trying to say at the end of the post.

I'm not conservative about anything, especially not sex. I don't believe it SHOULD be done after marriage, but you need those special feelings there for it to be right, in my opinion. :0 SEX without love is nothing. You don't need to be married to prove that.

But yeah yeah, sex education is lol. I use to love how immature my fellow classmates were. "Now the penis..." "Oh hahaahah heeeheeeeheeeeheeeeheeeeheeehaahahsdhuihsudihsauisad HE SAID PEEEEEEE-NIHS!!!! n.n "

I remember in my 8th grade sex education class 2 people came in to explain the significance of condoms. One straight women, and a lesbian. And then I also remember my 10th grade science teacher saying female condoms are indestructible. HAHAHA. Sex education... ilu, sex education. xD;; So many funny memories.

ANYWAY. Yeah, sex education is important. I believe it should be mandatory to begin teaching it when most kids start hitting puberty, ( which I'm assuming IS when I hit puberty ) at the start of 5th grade. I'm not sure if boys hit puberty that early, actually. But I still think it'd be the ideal grade to begin sex education.

Posted by: FidelCastro Aug 13 2008, 05:49 PM

My view is a little difficult, so read all of my post before judging me.

I don't technically think it should be taught in schools, because I think that parents should teach their kids when they're too young to be disgusted, but old enough to understand it. I can't ever remember NOT knowing about it, and my brother told me that my parents taught us about it when we were really young.
The one thing is, it probably SHOULD be taught in schools a little early so kids who weren't taught will know. I learned all my dirty stuff from the internet, though. But if it's never taught, and they don't learn until they're like 14-16, there will be awkward moments when they don't get jokes.
And if they do learn it, but not from you or a school, it will be awkward for everyone when you're just telling them stuff they already know.
I'd also like to add something:
I think, that s long as you know what you're doing and the consequences of what you're doing, sex is fine for kids age 15+. Sex is something natural. I don't think sex should be restricted to only with people That love you and you Really and truly love. Sure, it's probably a better experience, but what if someone wants a baby, and wouldn't do it with anyone but you? I'm not saying pity-sex is A-otay, but how could it hurt? and casual sex can be used for stress-releving purposes.

Posted by: berettapunk Aug 13 2008, 06:44 PM

i too have mixed opinions on this. i believe the kids should be taught at a young age, mostly because all throughout human history, except for the last 50 or so years, humans have been getting married at a young age(12-17) due to the fact that human life expectancy wasnt all that long and several other factors. so the fact is people of those times knew what sex is and what all it was for. unfortunately, in recent times, sex has been deemed inappropriate by many people especially in the church. therefore it became taboo to tell them about it as well. i guarantee that if they kept tabs on teens in the past like they do now, teen pregnancys would be just as "high" if not substantially higher than they are now. the only difference is they were getting married instead of just "doing it."

basically it has all come down to the world developing a new perspective on the way it does things. as far as im concerned tho, parents really do need to take up some responsibility in teaching their children about sex. yes, i know how awkward it can be. sex was always a taboo in my house growing up. but i will say i gained more perspective on things after my parents told me about it than i ever did from a teacher who just wanted to breeze thru the subject and collect a paycheck at the end of the year.

as for the parents and older people shouting about how sex shouldnt be taught in schools, they are the same people who wont take up the responsibility to teach their children about sex in the first place. it mostly boils down to a lack of responsibility on most parents, and others wanting the government to take care of everything. as far as im concerned, those who dont take the responsibility should be punished, and the government has no business raising children.

p.s.: normally im not so preachy lol. i just get very opinionated at times lol.

Posted by: the quiet quilava Aug 13 2008, 07:41 PM

......sex ed? i didn't have that. i had this:

dad: justin, we need to talk.
justin: about what?
Dad: sex. here is what happens. fuck her all night, dont break the condom. or your'e fucked.
if you have any questions, read the penthouse forum.
justin: *scarred for life*

6 years later: i have a daughter.

moral of the story: listen to your dad when he is drunk. he might save your life.

Posted by: TyraniBoah Aug 13 2008, 08:02 PM

I think it should be taught in school, some parents may view a class such as this as' disgusting'. Instead of parents being given an option weather their child can learn about sex, it should be compulsory.

Like Wymsy said, you cannot stop teenagers having sex, but you can tell them about the ways you can stop or reduce the rate of pregnancy and tell them how to prevent STDs such as HIV, which can stop them having children when they are older.

If Sex Education was taught all around the world, I'm sure that countries with High Births Rates would gradually go down in population which would be good.

Posted by: berettapunk Aug 13 2008, 08:10 PM

imo, if i know there is a chance someone is infected with something, or i know that person has been around...im not going to sleep with them...what is lacking is a state of common sense. if teens and adults would think before they act, there would be a lot less people infected with stds...seriously...its not a hard decision to make, and its not like you wont eventually find someone later who will sleep with you that you know you can trust.

Posted by: Pokii Aug 13 2008, 10:36 PM

I remember we had a sex ed class as a sub part of a Health in the 7th/8th grade (I took it in 8th), and they actually did do all that stuff you guys are saying they should do. Most of it was "Abstinence is good!" kinda stuff, but then there was the STD's slide-show...

...I am scarred for life after that

Posted by: Sweet Apple Pi Aug 13 2008, 10:52 PM

Oh, my school does sex ed in health class, throughout middle school and for one semester in high school. I just took my high school health last year, and I have to say I'm still a little immature. I had to try so hard to not laugh every time the teacher said "penis."

I think that sex ed should be taught in every school district starting at middle school, and definitely in high school again, as sexual urges rise. As for teenagers having sex, I believe that sex is a natural human tendency, and that if kids are being safe about it then sex is ok.

I remember "Contraceptive Day" in Health class, when the teacher showed us every single kind of contraceptive. She even had flavored condoms! "This one is fudge, and I think this one is mint!" I was laughing so hard for days.

Posted by: Maikeru Sep 24 2008, 09:58 PM

They should teach it in all schools but seriously how hard is it to NOT have sex u keep ur dam penis in ur pants geez. But yah im waiting till marriage that night will be the best night of my life
(BTW im 15)

Posted by: Moist Sep 24 2008, 10:40 PM

sex is the greatest gift EVAR.
end of discussion.
no.... i change my mind.....
not the sex, the end of dscussion part... lol
sex education is justified in some ways, and completly fail on the other side.
abstinance is a choice, not a rule. sex is okay, as long as you are safe. i lost my virginity when i was 14, and i have no regrets, because that was with a women i loved, and years later, we had a beautiful baby girl. a planned baby.
if i was used as an example of MOST (not all) sex ed classes, i would be the bad example, even though it was of my own accord. my sex ed experiance was horrible...... i got kicked out of class every day of that wek for questioning the instructor. she preached her "ZOMG ABSTINANCE IS AWESOME!!!11!!!oneoneoneLMNOP" schtick, and i stood up and questioned her instructioning. if you feel that you would like to have sex, by all means, HAVE SEX> sins are forgiven, right? WRONG. but that by no means mean you are sinning by having sex. sex is a natural urge, and if you want it, well go fetch the fucking stick. it is by no means a sin.

Posted by: Carmani Sep 29 2008, 08:28 PM

I agree completelly with sex education in schools.

Here in Brazil, the Public schools have no goverment suport. There's a lot of alienated people but not for option (ok, there's these ones too lol)

I think if it was implanted a education improvement in my country we could advance very much in this area.

But that's not our situation nowadays.

Posted by: lightbird Apr 13 2009, 10:20 AM

I think that sexual education should exist at all schools, with pure facts and no moralizing or personal advising.

Posted by: nebz5 Apr 13 2009, 03:17 PM

The school i went to had sex ed in 6th-8th grade it was weird, we had to see childbirth. it was over all kinda scary the teacher said by the time you all leave high school at least 1/8 of you will have some sort of std and when i heard that i was like o.o but the didn't teach abstinence public school ftw we have 3 teen pregnancies last year o.o

Posted by: simplestar70 Apr 13 2009, 03:33 PM

Sex is most likely a natural urge like almost everyone said up their,
Sex ed started for me in 3rd grade. (I know YOUNG) they started teaching the girls about periods.
We were all to grossed out to understand a thing.

I think they should start sex ed around the maturing age NOT to little kids.
My mom is all for sex. XD She doesnt mind talking about it and all my brothers are pervs.

My older brother even had sex at a young age. Mom always says use a condom

Posted by: Blue Giratina Apr 13 2009, 03:48 PM

While I am pretty sure abstinence is the only foolproof way to prevent this kind of stuff, it seems that it is impossible to stop people from having sex. How tragic. Safe sex or a super-strict government limitation on sex seems to be the most logical answers. And since people get all freaked out about "OMG the government is too strong", I guess safe sex is the way to go.

Posted by: Saya Apr 13 2009, 05:39 PM

I think sex education is absolutely necessary, because abstinence is simply out of the question. Teenagers are having sex and will continue to have sex; if you pretend like that fact isn't there, you're only doing kids a great disservice. Take Sarah Palin's daughter for example: she thought it was wrong to teach her kids about sex, and now her daughter has a kid at 17 and is without a father/husband because he left her.

Unfortunately, there are many influences that will disrupt the effect of sex education on kids nowadays. You have movies like "Juno" glorifying teen pregnancy, and of course you have parents and kids who just don't give a shit, which is their own problem and another discussion altogether.

There are many teens who make smart decisions when it comes to sex, and many who don't. I was taught sex education in the fifth grade, and although I'm still happily a virgin, I know what decisions to make and what not to make when the time eventually comes.

I don't really see a solution to either problem at this point. As a teenager myself, I see and know how other kids my age act towards sex, and it really doesn't inspire any kind of faith in them at all. All I know is, stupid people need to stop breeding.

Posted by: nebz5 Apr 13 2009, 05:54 PM

well said saya but with no stupid people who would do manual labor xD

Posted by: Bakehebi Apr 14 2009, 12:36 PM

I agree with all previous posters about how sex ed should be taught in school and at a fairly early age. 5th or 6th grade is good because that's when I noticed the relationship between girls and boys began to really change.


I want to add on that the consequence of pregnancy and the resulting child should be emphasized. Babies are not walks in the park. They cry, they need fed, they need to be changed, they need to be played with, etc. The potential parents should know that they will not be able to sleep well for the next 18+ years of their life. They will not be able to go to parties for a few years. They will not have fun time to themselves. All of it goes down the drain including your DREAMS. Want to go to college but you also want to have a baby? I laugh in your face. True some can do it but not many and most who do mooch off their own parents. Oh yeah that's a real show of responsibility there, Here mom could you raise my child while I go and achieve my dreams?
:|
Many young girls are under the impression that babies are there to love them. They don't realize that the baby won't love them until a year or so down the road. You have to invest a lot in that child before you get ANY sort of return.

I'm sorry that I've started ranting.
Anyways, I took a course on sex while in college which was brilliant. It was taught by a psychology professor and practicing psychologist which I think is wonderful. If you could get more people trained in psychology to teach sex ed. classes I think it'd be far better because they understand how people think and for the most part why they think it.

Posted by: Hikarii Apr 14 2009, 05:14 PM

THIS. Having a child requires the utmost amount of time, care, work, and MONEY. If you think you can just dump the kid on your parents, then you're a shitty mother/father and don't deserve to have that child. You think you can go out partying? Think again, unless you want to be a bad role model. Life is over as you know it once you have a baby, and the VAST majority of teenagers are not ready for such a huge responsibility. Hell, I know plenty of -adults- who aren't ready for that kind of responsibility.

Posted by: Emphyria May 18 2009, 04:03 PM

We had "staggered" Sex-Ed in our schools, I'm not sure what it comes up as in terms of 'grades' (we don't have that here) but we tended to experience sex-ed at...

1. 11 Years
2. 13 Years
3. 14-15 Years
4. 17-18 Years

Even by the time we hit 18 Years old it was still really clinical, clean and avoided the major issues. I learnt most of my sexual education from my parents who; unlike a lot of parents nowadays, didn't shy away from the subject. My mother gave me as much information as I requested and even went into further detail which I sometimes didn't need to know! Well; I assumed I didn't need to know it but it helped me make a lot of decisions in events that happened later and I'm greatful for that.

Sexual Education is FREQUENT here (and starts young) but it's not practical; it's as I said before "too clean".

They talk about it in a very practical and detatched way, they don't really hit the nail on the head so to speak. A lot of kids nowadays are ALREADY sexually active by 16 and teaching them about STDS/Child birth around about then is already too late, more to the point they're 'immune' to a lot of the lessons they're tutors give. More than once I've seen kids' eyes glaze over during talks.

If I were to change anything about the system here (and my god I would if I could) I would make it MUCH more graphic. The information would be more detailed, more in depth and it would show you EXACTLY what happened. Whether it be pregnancy or STDs they need to know exactly what it looks like, the specifics need to be shown so they realise and can understand the severity of the situation - frankly... There's too much censorship.

That being said with all the legislation over here regarding teacher/pupil relationships the whole thing can't rest wholely on the shoulders of the teachers. I would say that alongside improved education in schools, parents would need to throw away that embarassment and talk to their kids. If parents were more honest (like mine were) then kids would understand and may even have a greater sense of self confidence, the strength to say 'no' if they really don't feel ready etc.

I definitely agree with it being vitally important that kids be taught that a baby is NOT easy but there are always going to be kids who think they know better unfortunately. At the very least people should still TRY to teach them. =/

...So tragedies like severely underaged young mothers and that article can be completely avoided.

Posted by: Sarge May 19 2009, 11:11 AM

You can't stop teenagers from having sex any more than you can stop the continents from moving and the universe from expanding. Even kids who take abstinence pledges may still have oral or anal intercourse because they believe it allows them to have sex without losing their virginity. I heard one story from my biology teacher about a former student of her's - an intellegent young woman who did very well in her class, but who was sadly misinformed about sex and procreation. She believed that by putting a piece of tape over her belly button during sex she could not get pregnant. Her logic was this: a friend told her that the tape would prevent the baby from breathing, causing it to die.

Sex education is absoultely neccessary.

Posted by: Animato May 20 2009, 10:20 PM

I've entered high school this year, all they did was teach it during P.E. for five classes. Sometimes, it wasn't even told because we picked the lessons we would learn. There were things like Health and Nutrition, Media and Its Influences, STDs and STIs, etc. I think it should be mandatory from an early age, like some suggested Grade 5 or 6.
I was only taught about was pregnancy stages. I wasn't told about how tough raising a child is, or STDs, STIs, HIV, or AIDS. In fact the only teacher of mine that openly discussed those was my grade 9 science teacher who was also my basketball coach. If we, his students or children he knew from sports, asked him a question like that then he would go into discussion. If I ask a teacher in my high school they shy away from the question.
For me it seems the internet will be my teacher, that and Law and Order Special Victims Unit. I'm not to keen on that idea, seeing as electronics will be teaching me more than my teachers.

Posted by: Suzuki May 22 2009, 10:30 PM

Holy crud. My school just had the "Boy and Girl Films"
That crap was scary.
Its hard to say if they should educate in school. I mean, the other genders could make fun of eachother and it would all end in chaos. And like what Simplyy said:

I totally agree.

Posted by: Zero Chaos May 25 2009, 08:00 AM

It's definitely needed. My district doesn't offer sex education at all. I'm in 8th grade and well... I know two people that are pregnant because they didn't know the risk of pregnancy of sex; one is still in 7th grade.

When looking at those people, it makes me say that every district must have sex ed.

Posted by: musical May 25 2009, 08:10 AM

we had puberty in fourth and fifth grade. we had to watch these videos, and everyone was just laughing and like, "Eeeeeew, that's gross." by the time we were watching the video in fifth grade, i already had gotten my period (frick) and with everyone laughing, i was thinking, "shut up, it'll happen to you, too! gAH!"

even in fricken 6TH GRADE we learned about puberty and still separated the boys from the girls. we didn't have sex ed/puberty ed this year (7th grade). we get sex sex ed next year, and i bet everyone will still be, "lolz dis is teh nastiez."

sex ed is really needed.

Posted by: Grovyle May 26 2009, 05:34 PM

I think we should have Sex Ed classes.
Teenagers should know what they are getting into before they, you know.

Posted by: RheaDark May 27 2009, 09:54 PM

I had very good sex ed classes. Complete with "birth control pills - explained" and "how to put on a condom."

Abstinence only is stupid. It doesn't work

Posted by: Grovyle May 28 2009, 08:32 PM

Don't tell a teenager to not do something. It doesn't work.
They will do in spite of you.


(do you know how hard it is to catch up on topics that people post back in every five seconds? *pant*)

Posted by: ninjacookie May 28 2009, 10:11 PM

Yes yes yes! We need sex ed! And not just the scare tactics kind either. My old school did nothing but show horrifying pictures of STDs and all the kids started doing it because they thought it was cool and risky. Years later I heard rumors that when the school hosted a blood drive they couldn't take like %60 of the donors.

The school That I spent the last few years of high school in had a very good sex ed class. We could ask questions about anything even anonymously and they answered everything from how to put on a condom, gay sex, kinky sex, and even told us where to get free birth control and check-ups. No question was a wrong one and they gave us honest answers to help us make our own choices.

Luckily I had something even better. My parents taught me early on about sex. They didn't go into detail just basically, a guy sleeps with a girl naked and they use their parts to make a baby when they love each other. I was still pretty clueless but I didn't really care about it as it was treated as a normal thing. They had to tell me when I was young anyway, I was humping things at the age of 2 and if they didn't tell me about it someone might have taken advantage of me. Sure enough the day someone asked me to play doctor with no clothes when I was six I knew darn well what it was they really wanted to do so I walked away and told my parents before he could trick any of the other kids. I wish they had told me what masturbation was though. As I had no idea what "alone time only in your room" really was. And I went through a stage of self hate and confusion when I found out...

Anyway if you treat sex as a normal thing that should only be done safely and only if a mistake did happen you could care for the child, kids will take it more seriously than "the dirty thing that spreads disease and you shouldn't do until your an adult"

Posted by: BrokenLatias May 28 2009, 10:14 PM

Sex ed is always good. Who else is gonna teach all these 8th graders that are getting pregnant with highschoolers why that's messed up?

Posted by: Bakehebi May 31 2009, 01:14 AM

I've been thinking about sex ed. and what should be taught.
I agree with all of you pretty much who've posted after my first one. But I do think it should be started with young kids. The kids think it's OMG EWWW because it's a taboo subject. But if they're exposed to it enough times then it's just something normal.

:\ Anyways, back onto what I was thinking about. Wouldn't it be good to include that sex shouldn't be a taboo subject? For example encourage the students to inform their potential children when/if they have them. Parents want to have the schools teach their kids about it instead of themselves but I think it should be both parties.


I intend to tell my little sister that she can ask me whatever she wants whenever she wants when I return home. She's about 9 so it's a time of false facts and urban legends. |D I can still remember some of the stories that popped up when I was her age and to tell the truth none of us really knew what we were talking about. I'd like her to be informed.

Posted by: Otawan May 31 2009, 01:22 AM

I've had Sex Ed since grade three. Right now I'm in High School, grade nine, and everything there teaching us is common knowledge. (Except about some STIs.)

Sexual Education should start at a young age, and be in all schools. There's no point in dancing around the subject.

Posted by: johnrichard1991 May 31 2009, 01:41 AM

For me, Sex Education started at 5th grade.

They did teach us that under age sex is wrong, but they never forced us to not do anything.
They taught us about Condoms, STD's, Sperm, and what-not.

I feel very strongly that Sex-Ed should be taught in school.
If you think that it's offensive, you should go screw yourself. It's a subject that actually teaches you something and it's worth sitting through. It's also a very easy class, so I enjoyed going through it.

Posted by: Lolikon Jun 5 2009, 01:33 AM

Parents are so silly sometimes that they shelter their children from the wrong things. If you're not going to be the one to teach your child everything about sex (And seeing as the parents themselves cannot teach the same as a real educator) you should let the school do it. Often it's the Christian parents that are so frightened of their children having sex before marriage that they fight to keep anything that isn't mainly abstinence only out of schools.

Anyway I agree with the majority here, sex education should be started at the beginning years of puberty. As they get older more of the subject should be revealed such as STDs and pregnancies.

Also along these lines I really think that the media should cool down on scaring parents over teens having sex and rather showing the result of not allowing your child full use of contraception. Both my parents are very lax with me but having a boyfriend is a huge ordeal for them. I'm terrified to ask my mother for permission to have birth control pills, but really wouldn't she rather have me safe then both of us sorry? >>;

Posted by: Miyuki Jun 5 2009, 06:20 PM

sex ed is VERY important. Teens who KNOW about it, are less likely to engage in it then those kept in mystery. Plus, there is less chance of them being molested iwthout knowing it. But not the whole 'you have sex you will get deceases. Condoms break, so don't do it' crap. That was the kind of bullshit my highschool fed us. Thankfully my mom knew that we needed REAL education. Kids need to know about birth control, how to get it if they DO need it, be taught that condoms SHOULD be used(and it's NOT encouraging them) while still warning them of all the risks, and that even if yo udo take birth control AND use a condom, there is still a chance of getting pregnant, but it is GREATLY reduced and very highly unlikely. I mean, seriously, the chance of a condom breaking is rare unless it's old.

But I am against just not teaching your children anything about it, or just doing 'basics' yes, you have to think of how much information for their age, but I learned basics in fourth grade =/ no real DETAILS but enough to know to be careful. Then I didn't get it again until like...junior year(moved from cali to texas, god texas sucks at sex ed) I don't like using religious beliefs to deprive children of important information. Knowledge is power! And the more you know about it the less likely you are to do it until you are ready =) but seriously, as teens if they are gonna do it they are gonna do it. So might as well help them protect themselves. Teens are stubborn, and you are by no means encouraging it.

Posted by: Reyo Jun 5 2009, 06:58 PM

In this day and age, a kid finding out about sex is inevitable. If the kid was internet access, he WILL find out about sex. Thanks to newgrounds, I knew what sex was before the 7th grade and I turned out just fine. I think it comes from the parents though. My parents didn't treat sex like taboo like most other parents seem to do. If there's even a HINT of sex on today's programming, parents will freak out.

Here's a hypothetical situation.
little johnny: "Hey ma, can little girls have babies?"
Mom: "Uh...oh...oh of course not Johnny, babies come from the stork."
little johnny: "Oh ok, thanks ma."
*When little Johnny was running outside, Johnny's mom overhears him shout "It's ok Suzy, we can keep playing that game!"*

It's not the knowlege of sex that is the problem, it's being misinformed.

Posted by: Rzx282 Jun 8 2009, 11:15 PM

First of all, I apologize if anything I post has already been said before.

I believe that Sex Ed should be more focused on, as it teaches about important bodily functions, and that both parents and schools should teach it. You can't expect not teaching people about this to have them avoid it; if anything, it draws them in (opinionated, yes, but based on personal observations). It should be something explained by the parents, however I understand that for some it might be awkward to explain something as intimate as sex to a child; however, if the school teaches about it, the instructors should be able to take the responsibility to teach the students.

And the education should be thorough and cover everything involved. My school didn't teach Sex Ed until the second year of high school. It was a two-day course, about an hour and a half each day, which briefly explained the female monthly cycle, and that was basically it. They showed pictures of the female reproductive system, and told us what each part was for in enough words for maybe a sentence or two each. Not once was anything other than the monthly cycle discussed. Not once was the male side even mentioned. Not once did they explain the side effects of engaging in sex. In reality, even though it was called Sex Ed, it was simply a short lecture on the female's bodily functions, which by that time everyone already knew about (I was the youngest in the class, at age fifteen, and I already knew about my own body functions).

My parents didn't even attempt to take the time to cover what the lecture didn't. What they did was basically say, "Sex is bad, don't do it." What little I learned from someone else was explained to me by my grandmother over the phone, and that was also more of a talk about growing up and bodily functions.

Everything I learned regarding the subject, I learned on my own, mainly through sites like Wikipedia (and before anyone says anything about it, yes, Wikipedia is an online "encyclopedia" that anyone can edit; however, they have many moderators on the site that prevent false information from being posted, and quickly work to reverse any false edits or page vandalism so that the pages display only correct information (and the information not fully verified is labeled as such)).

If the parents don't take the responsibility of raising and teaching their children, then the school should at least take some responsibility for teaching them. I've moved around a lot, and the high school I went to from sophomore year to graduation was the only one that even remotely offered a Sex Ed course. School should be a learning environment, and Sex Ed is no different. I personally believe that Sex Ed should be a mandatory class as early as fifth grade, and should be a required course every year or every other year; the information changes all the time, and it would also help ensure that students actually learn about it. It would also help to ensure that people are ready for everything involved should they chose to have sex, both the positive and the negative, before they engage in the activity.

Not to mention that when younger children do ask about sex-related situations, the parents seem to typically treat it like it's a taboo subject, as Reyo said. The media is allowed to show violent scenes (such as mutilation, torture, ect) and it simply be brushed off as "just another show"; however, the moment something sexual comes up, it's immediately banned from the public. And when it's not banned, it's usually so unrealistically depicted that it becomes more of a grotesque horror scene than anything else. In the instances where it's not banned or unrealistically depicted, the book/show/movie/game is rated so high that only someone eighteen and older can see it.

Everyone says it's to "protect the children". But how is preventing Sex Education protecting them? Teach, and they'll learn and understand, and be more responsible in their decisions; prevent, and they'll be curious and experiment with it (opinionated, yes, but based on personal observations).


And I'm going to stop there, before I end up writing an essay.

Posted by: Aknara Jun 10 2009, 09:11 AM

I thought all schools did sex ed in year 8 (12 - 14 year olds)

Besides which, why the hell hadn't her parents spoken to her?

I started learning about the birds and the bees when I was around 6-ish. My son is 9 and knows what causes pregnancy and whatnot.

Where the hell are the parents of kids like that?

I really wish they would stop leaving it to the schools to teach their kids E.v.e.r.y.t.h.i.n.g. It's pathetic.

Posted by: Raitozaki Jun 13 2009, 07:32 PM

I had sex education in fourth grade to teach me about the female body. Then again in 8th grade to learn about both. And again in 10th grade, because it was mandatory or else I wouldn't graduate.

I'm pretty sure I know the consequences of having sex without protection.
I don't understand why people don't get it...

I didn't get to see the article since it was probably taken down, but from what I've read, it sounds pretty horrible. If it was about a 14 year old having a baby (without knowing she was pregnant) and then stuffing it and flushing it, she's a complete... [insert extremely bad swear here].

Posted by: Zelda Girl Jun 13 2009, 07:36 PM

Haven't had sex-ed yet but my mom says:"Don't get pregnet until you're ready"If i have a baby at 18 my mom is going to kick me out of the house.

Posted by: Airotia Jun 15 2009, 10:28 PM

I think they're wouldn't be a NEED for sex education if parents would just be up front with their children. For girls, 'the' talk should come with the first period, and for dudes, 'the' talk should come... I guess whenever the guys go through puberty, the only real indication of that that I'M aware of is the whole voice-changing thing. xP

But, the fact is, parent's don't speak about it. They keep their mouths shut and hope that their children will make the correct decisions, without being well-informed on which kinds of decisions are actually the 'correct' kind.

So, how do we stop all of these 'bad choices?' We have classes in school, which take away from ACTUAL school time (I personally think Health classes should incorporate Sex Ed, which is the case in many schools, but not all), and inform students. HOPEFULLY, they inform students well enough to know that if you have sex, you can get pregnant / get a girl pregnant, or get STDs, or what have you.

((As for the article, I didn't get the chance to read it, but I think I caught the gist of it. That's just wrong. xP And another 'bad choice' that a student can make because they haven't been informed enough.))

Posted by: RheaDark Jun 15 2009, 11:26 PM

The talk should come before the first period. Ya know how freaky it is to bleed from your nethers?

"My Little Red Book." More than one case of hiding one's period.

Posted by: Hagane no Yuurei Jun 17 2009, 05:34 PM

it would be helpful, that much I can be certain of.

Posted by: GodEneru Jun 24 2009, 05:32 PM

I think sex ed. should be both; taught at home and school but when kids are still kids not when things are already happening; meaming that everything must be taught when they are between 9-11 not 12-13 cuz they might get confused or misslead.

Also I think the best way to learn is with experience (NOTE: I'm not sayng sex ed. classes should be a teacher telling a bunch of eleven-year-olds "Take off your clothes..." you get the point.) cuz the fact that you know what to do doesn't mean you know how to put it into practice; Let me use an example: when you are learning to write someone tells you how to grab the pen and how to ovet to create a letter you will not understand untill you have a pen in your hand.

To this I'd like to add that kids should see how things actually look like. (NOTE: Again, I'm not saying kids have to whatch explicit videos.) What I mean Is that teachers should show realistic pictures of healthy and unhealthy genitals so when they reach the age to be doing things there are no surprises.

People tend to learn form others so testimonies of people in their teens with unwanted kids could go to schools to talk with the students so they realize they could ruin their whole life by mistakes that could be avoided easily.

Posted by: Lino Ludocx Kaito Jun 24 2009, 05:52 PM

I was taught it when I was 12 and I always knew by my parents but this past year (would be freshman year in america, 3rd year in ireland) a came in to talk about us and said what do you want to know anything, and know one said anything so I started i said STI's coz I barely knew about them, then the loud and faggots (annoying fuckwits) started going on about , anal sex, sex toys, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc, all the stuff you knew about but didnt want to LEARN about so yeah we learnt, a bit late mind you.

Posted by: Palm Island Jun 26 2009, 05:06 PM

I don't know about 6th grade, but apparently 5th is to young(or maybe it's too late? I don't know exactly, keep reading). We had to watch films (that had pictures of naked boys and girls in them) And you wanna know the comment of one boy in my class? 'The girls boobs were jiggly' I think that's all he noticed. I state my point.

Posted by: kaitenmia May 21 2010, 10:26 AM

Something should be done about current sex education because most of the young I know think it's a laugh.
Some of my classmates just stole some condoms when we had lesson on this matter and then just went
ahead and had fun with some random. Really thick if you ask me.

Posted by: Eliot Kovach May 21 2010, 10:37 AM

It of course is very important. I myself am 15, and I know many of my "friends" or better said, many students still know very few about all this.
Maybe it should be a class, but only in last grade of elementary school or something. Education about that is unimportant for immature kids of 5th or 6th grade.

Posted by: Knight Jun 9 2010, 11:56 PM

Seriously, the lack of sex ed is absurd. We might as well stop teaching our kids to wash their hands after using the toilet. Who cares if it lessens the spread of disease and helps prevent you from catching those diseases in the first place? It's obviously immoral.

It's a good thing there's so much sex on the internet to remedy this. Parents, make your kids watch a little bit of porn each day, but make sure the actors are using condoms.

Posted by: BlueBrooke Jun 16 2010, 02:18 PM

I agree with most everyone here, I'm thirteen, and I don't think I would ever do or have sex, safe or not.
No sex before marriage. (And no, I don't watch pornography.)
The thing is when you're thirteen and you haven't done it you don't know anything about sex except what it is, which does often entail how one would have sex.
Meaning, you probably want to find out what everyone is going on about.

I talked with a girl, and I found out (don't even ask me how the conversation took this turn) that she knew how to masturbate, and what sex was when she was around six.

Does anyone else find this completely horrific?

I'm going into Eighth next year, and I've never had a Sex Ed. class, I think it should definitely be earlier.
Are they just putting it off till eighth because they (as in schools, government, etc.) are worried children at that age don't know about sex and they're worried about starting a problem earlier?
Seems likely, but I estimate approximately everyone on my seventh grade class in the past year knew what sex was.

Posted by: AbsolutelyAlexis Aug 23 2010, 03:37 PM

If you tell someone not to do something, they'll want to do it. It's human nature. The way to start steming the tide (in my opinion) of teenage pregnacies is to teach children and teens about sex and how to use contraception like condoms and giving them someone to talk to about contraception and relationships.
Something sensible would be to give out condoms in like secondary schools, because actually, no one wants the embarasment of asking for condoms, ect, when they can go ahead unprotected. (and to be honest it's less embarrasing to be getting morning after pills...)

Posted by: Aperture Aug 28 2010, 01:30 PM

I learned A bit of sex Ed when I was 10. A bit young? Not really.
The only thing I regret was having a teacher that MADE it funny. Its a serious matter. Not something to laugh about.
Got it again this year.

And they give out condom's in my school now (High schoot FTW!) to 13 years olds. How young do they think tell will do it at? Well, All the boys want to do is made water balloons out of them.

I'm glad the other teenagers in my school don't want to go straight into sex and stuff....Because I would seriously hate that.

Posted by: Immersion Aug 28 2010, 02:05 PM

I did it at 11. Then again at 13.

I don't see what's wrong with it, but kids need to realise it's not cool and having sex at 14 doesn't make you cool

Posted by: P o r y g o n Sep 21 2010, 11:11 AM

I attended a Catholic school up until High school.
So all they taught was 'no sex'.
Apparently preventing sperm from reaching an egg is killing a baby, how that even makes sense I still don't know.
Anyways that's a whole different topic.

I had a friend who at age 12 started having sex, and due to the lack of Sex Ed she had no idea what was going on.
First of all she thought if she urinated it would flush out the semen. I had to inform her that those are two very different holes.
She also had no idea what types of birth control there were other than a condom, again soemthing she did not have to use.
Almost all my friends from that school are now pregnant teen moms.

In my current, public, high school we learn sex ed.
I've yet to asee a pregnant girl.

People are having sex younger and younger lately, whether or not sex ed influences it is irrelevant.
They're going to do it, they need to know how it works and how to do it safely.

Posted by: Zack777 Sep 23 2010, 12:43 PM

I agree with the implementation of sex-ed... becuase now the kids have "the massive library of (almost) all" (AKA "Internet"), even if they aren't searching for this, they will found it as advertising...
One Time I was searching for NDS games ROMs in different pages... and, in almost all had things like "kamasutra, light up the fire...", and things like that...while searching for NDS ROMs!

(incredibly) my school starts teaching sex education at 6th under the name of "health education"...they make jokes about it, in a serius way(I don't how) but everyone learns by "the good way": there are "no sex" "ABSTINENSE!,ABSTINENSE!", instead they say: you have 4 options:Don't remember the 1º one), (if you are planning a child)trust your couple and plan carefully with your couple, (both)use protection, abstinence.
The only oxception was A 10th grader, which had an unplanned baby. (in 10 years I'm in school)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WOw........my mom says if I have a baby I have to support the baby(no one of my family), I can stay home 'cause my mom doesn't wants to be involved with the already high uninstructed kids rate
She'll kick me out if I: do drugs, I'm drunk, smoke, go to jail,etc.,etc.,etc

Posted by: rileyup Jan 2 2011, 09:34 AM

i know everything about intercourse all kids these days do why do we need this class even boys know where babys come from at age 8

Posted by: Gumbreon Jan 8 2011, 08:47 AM

Not true. Sex Ed is still important for other things than just "Where babies come from", it's also about how to prevent STDs and other things. and i didn't know where they came from till i was 10

I have had Sex Ed classes for the past couple years, and I am for the idea of having these classes.

Posted by: rileyup Jan 8 2011, 12:33 PM

it should be only for std prevention not how to do it because many kids know how to and become pregnent

Posted by: PikaDiety Jan 8 2011, 01:17 PM

Well, STD protection is important, but it shouldn't just be showing what STDs you can get, cause that's just plain old scare tactics. They need to actually talk about condoms, both male and female, and tell how to put them on. When the sex ed week came in my health class, they actually taught us how to do that, because a lot of people don't know how to actually put on a condom. And of course they don't show you how to have sex, that would be stupid.xD They tell you how to have safe sex and that was about it. Well, they also told us a little about sex toys, but that was only to keep someone from doing something stupid, or using something stupid. (Their example being vegetables.>.>) But I thought that was helpful cause I can see someone using something stupid like that and it...not ending well.xD

Posted by: Sovereign Jan 9 2011, 12:11 AM

Teach it everywhere. No if's, but's, or coconuts!

Seriously, though. Teens are having sex. All kinds of sex. Teach them how to protect themselves so they don't get STDs/pregnant and things would be much better.

It will be a good day when all the old cranky people die and our generation can start impacting laws.

Posted by: Acacia21 Jun 2 2011, 04:40 PM

I think it's okay to be teaching it. Like, you've gotta know how to make a child when you get older. As long as students don't do it, it's fine. Throughout the years when learning it, we've even been told teens shouldn't get pregnant. So I think it's okay to learn it.

Posted by: amberfunk Jun 9 2011, 08:57 PM

Sex education in schools does not tell you how to have sex. It teaches you how to use condoms and other forms of birth control and also what types of stds there are, their treatments, symptoms and how to avoid getting them. Sex education is needed. Either the parents teach it or the schools have to teach it.

Posted by: Belarus Jun 10 2011, 09:54 AM

I think it's very important to have this class. Even if kids still go out and have sex, at least they'll know what they're doing. At least the know how to prevent STDs and such. At least they know the ups and downs of it. I think just as long as they are actually prepared, what they do is up to them. I personally don't approve of it at a young age, but I digress....

I was the kind of kid where if I saw something on TV and it was "questionable," I kinda stored it in my head until I saw something else pertaining to it. And eventually I pieced together the info and thought I knew enough about sex. And I'm sure there are kids out there that think that. "Oh, I know enough, you know, and now I can go do it with someone that I feel really close to. yayyy." It doesn't matter what they watch/read/hear/etc., I totally think they should take a class on it. It'll allow them to confirm what they thought, but also it'll bring up some other things that are still a little foggy to them. What kind of school wants all these pregnant girls? All these diseases going around? The least they could do is teach them on how to do it safely and what to look out for.
Another thing is, it's kinda common for people to be taken advantage of. Let's say, a young girl and an older guy. That young girl has nooooo idea about anything, but the guy has done it before, makes sexual jokes, watches adult shows, etc. He can totally take advantage of that girl, and she's not going to know what the hell is going on. And it can even be the other way around! That's a problem! Taking a class like that will prepare anyone who doesn't know about it, so they can stay safe and know what's up. That's my two-cents on it. :D

Posted by: kenneth1221 Jun 30 2011, 03:15 PM

There should be sex ed in school. Of course, this is coming from a 7th Grader who knows too much about everything, and is prone to arguments about lots of things. And there will be people who will ignore the class's teachings, but you can't do anything about that. However, there will be loads of teen pregnancies without this class to tell kids how to prevent them, and they may ruin their lives. If they use twisted logic, they will assume 'religion' ruined their lives if they weren't taught about sex ed because some religious parents refused to allow the class taught. (It's that sort of argument that gets me in trouble)

There will be loads of pregnancies without a detailed class on prevention.

Of course, this could get redundant as a class when you can just type in 'teen sex education' on google. But some people absorb better if it's in person.

Overall, it's best if this class is taught and kept.

All innuendo in this post is completely accidental and subconsciously inserted. Freud may have been right if you find any.

Posted by: Skins T Jul 1 2011, 04:09 AM

Sex ed should be mandatory in all schools. PROPER sex ed, not this abstinence only rubbish.

I had a right go at one of my managers about this. We were discussing abortion, and he said "well if everyone closed their legs--"

He didn't even finish his sentence before I snarled "Oh GET REAL."

Because people DO need to get real. Abstinence never works. It just makes kids want to have sex MORE.

Posted by: FlippyBear Jul 23 2011, 06:44 PM

My school doesn't teach us anything about sex until 9th grade by that time most of the kids in my school either had sex or are pregnant. They should have told most of the kids sooner. As much as I want to have sex I chose not to plus my parents would kill me. But my school is really stupid when it comes to the kids at my school. I do believe all schools should teach sex ed. Also i'm 14.

Posted by: Reyo Jul 25 2011, 04:11 AM

I stand by what I said earlier. 19 years old and still holding on to the 'v' card. No worries of "I missed my period" phone calls or "Why does my piss burn..." freak outs. I only got that way, though, because I was told of everything early on and was able to figure that I'd rather masturbate not risk babies and diseases. That and my parents had the best parenting style. "Old enough to be having sex, old enough to take care of the consequences like an adult...alone." Not to say they wouldn't help, they just wouldn't sit there and feel sorry for me, or take most of the responsibility for the kid.

No offense, but that made you sound like a massive jerk. Abstinence does work if you know how to control your urges in the meantime. Besides, it was never meant to control your sex drive. The point of abstinence is no sex = no babies.

So technically, he's right.

Posted by: Monsieur Mittens Aug 8 2011, 06:37 PM

I think it should be in schools. Even though some immature idiots laugh and giggle.

Posted by: PawsrentOrigin Sep 14 2011, 09:51 PM

Children (like myself) should learn about sex. In fifth grade, they gave us a one hour introduction to puberty, in sixth grade, an indepth puberty class, and last year, a three-week course on all of SEX. We watched a baby being born, and fortunatly, all other pictures of genetallia were just drawings. I mean, without sex ed, how are they supposed to learn it? It would be totally weird and awkward if your parents told you everything in a sex ed class.
"Alright, Billy, this is a picture of a penis. We couldn't find anyone willing to show us theirs, so I just took a picture of you father. Same thing with the vagina. And this is the tampon I used last week, just in case you end up gay. Now, I just stick it in here and then..."
SEE?! It gets pretty weird! And without that, this is what could happen:
"I love you George"
"I love you Samantha"
"Let's go all the way."
"Alright. Wait, where do I put it? Here? Or maybe here?"
"I'm not sure. Maybe in my armpit?"
"Alright, I'll try that...No...No. It's not working."
"The mood is gone for me now."
"Me too. I'll see you around the house later. Say hi to mom for me."
IT GOT EVEN WEIRDER!!!

Posted by: Reyo Sep 16 2011, 06:20 PM

While I agree that sex education should be in schools, you'd have to be amish to go through that much of your life without learning about it. Any kid within 10 miles of an internet connection is going to figure out what sex is. Hell, it's how I figured out what it was.

Posted by: Skins T Sep 17 2011, 01:45 AM

None taken, and no, it doesn't. Telling teens or kids to 'control their urges' is akin to telling children not to eat sweets. They're going to do it and when you're in the situation, hormones are NOT easy to control.

So no, he wasn't right. Abstinence DOES NOT WORK. It has been proven time and time and time again that it doesn't work, just as much as it's been proven that telling people to 'control their urges' doesn't work either.

So while I might sound like a massive jerk, I'd rather be a massive jerk and be educated on how stupid abstinence only education is rather than play along with outdated education driven by prude dictators who live in their mother's basements.

Posted by: Reyo Sep 18 2011, 04:33 AM

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.



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. The only way it wouldn't work is if someone was LITERALLY taken over by their own body and then forced to have sex as they helplessly watched as they were raped by their own body with someone else's body. That's an extreme case, but it still stands that the second you make the choice to have sex, you are no longer abstaining. At that point in time, there is 0 abstinence. Then after the deed, it might as well be said that the individual never abstained at all. 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.

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.

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?



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.

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.

EDIT: reviewed, it sounded too angry

Posted by: Skins T Sep 30 2011, 02:56 AM

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

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?

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.

(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)



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? :/



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.



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



*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.

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.



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.

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.

Posted by: Reyo Sep 30 2011, 02:52 PM

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



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.



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.



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.



www.thefreedictionary.com/abstain


dictionary.reference.com/browse/abstinence




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).



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".



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.



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?



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



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!"



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.

Posted by: Bad Kids Sep 30 2011, 03:08 PM

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.

Posted by: Raccoonicorn Oct 2 2011, 07:01 PM

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.

Posted by: Reyo Oct 2 2011, 08:48 PM

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.

Posted by: Raccoonicorn Oct 2 2011, 09:53 PM

http://www.amplifyyourvoice.org/u/kenzie/2011/3/10/Why-I-Skipped-Class-to-Ask-My-Elected-Officials-to-Support-Comprehensive-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/2008/05/alterman_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."

Posted by: Reyo Oct 3 2011, 07:57 PM

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.



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?

Posted by: Dragonflames1994 Feb 5 2012, 08:41 PM

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?

Posted by: Reyo Feb 9 2012, 02:07 AM

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.

Posted by: Limi Feb 17 2012, 10:10 AM

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

Posted by: Samoo Feb 17 2012, 10:32 AM

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.

Posted by: Synx Itax Feb 18 2012, 01:45 AM

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.

Posted by: zerohundred May 26 2012, 05:49 PM

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.

Posted by: strictlyninja Jun 19 2012, 02:47 PM

Thank you. You saved me a lot of typing.

Posted by: daniff Jul 2 2012, 12:53 PM

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.

Posted by: Galahawk Jul 5 2012, 12:17 AM

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.

Posted by: Pikalover10 Aug 15 2012, 08:26 AM

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.

Posted by: NuzzlingPlague Sep 9 2012, 01:19 AM

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.

Posted by: KatjadieTediz Nov 29 2013, 01:48 PM

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.

Posted by: Anarchy Dec 7 2013, 02:41 AM

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.

Posted by: kipwi Dec 14 2013, 02:58 PM

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.

Posted by: Persi the Winged Persian Jan 1 2014, 10:33 PM

I do think that the class is important. Why? So when your old enough 17- olden ages that you know what to do instead of doing it wrong and like Kipwi said Sex ed. will prepare us for Sex and the rights and wrongs of the way to do it.

Posted by: Roscoes Wetsuit Jan 20 2014, 06:39 PM

Sex education is extremely important!

At a certain grade, I think school's should take sex education into their own hands. I'm 17 and my parents have never given me "the talk," but I was learning about this stuff early on. In 5th grade, I remember one of my friends explaining "scissoring" to me. We thought it was funny and didn't understand what it actually was. Kids shouldn't be thinking different sex positions are funny!

Teaching abstinence is a joke--It never gets through to the kids! Either they want to hold out for their final partner/soulmate/marriage/whatever, or they simply won't. So if they're going to have sex, why not at least take the pregnancy and STI's/STD's out of it?

At my school, we have a health class, I believe it was called something real basic like Personal Health or something. Their was a sex chapter where we learned all about STI's, various types of peer pressure/environments/abstinence, and also protections. I mean the teacher literally brought out the most common types of protection (spermicidal lube, condoms, the vaginal ring things, the stuff you get surgically implanted in you, The Pill, ect) and let us all see it. We also covered how much each one cost and where to get them. The teacher put a huge emphasis on how much each protection would cost versus having a baby. I guarantee no one in that class is going to have an accidental pregnancy, seeing as we spent a long time figuring out how often those ways fail (although the teacher did tell us to double up on different types, such as The Pill and a condom, or spermicidal lube and a condom, ect).

My point is, with the proper knowledge, and from an early age (I don't know where, anywhere between 6th and 8th grade I guess), teen pregnancy can be reduced. I know of about 3 girls in my school, since I've been going to High School, who've been pregnant. Granted, my school is small (about 1,200 students each year), but still.

Posted by: Cynder88 Mar 18 2015, 12:00 AM

Sex ed is most definitely needed in schools. Once children enter puberty, they will experience body changes and it is best for them to know what is going on with their body and why. Sex ed also helps people to make good decisions about sex in the future, since they know the risks and consequences. I remember when I was younger, I first came across something to do with sex. I had found a fanfiction site (now one of my favorite sites) when I was searching for pictures of Cynder from The Legend of Spyro. I started reading the fanfic (it was about Cynder mainly) and my first reaction was "Wow! This is cool!", as it started off as a relatively innocent story.

Now, this story was fine in the story area, but was infected with the dreaded "Mary Sue Syndrome". Basically, a Mary Sue in a story is a character who is absolutely perfect; everyone automatically loves them, they have super overpowered powers, they are invincible, etc. The characters were all dragons, and the main character quickly fell in love with Cynder. When I got to chapter 9 of the story, the author said it was a "lemon". For those of you who don't know, a lemon is a sex scene in a story, and has a lot of descriptive sex stuff. Now, since I knew nothing about sex then, I got really confused as I read on. What made it worse was the fact that they were dragons, and the author didn't use terms like "penis" or "vagina", like at one point they said "dragonhood" instead of "manhood" and I had no idea what they meant. By the end of the chapter I was really confused and thought "Uhhh...what was that all about?". Of course Cynder got pregnant later on (prettymuch the only reason characters have sex in lots of fanfics is to get pregnant), and then I thought "Sooo...they did that thing you do to make people pregnant?".

Anyways, I am veering off-topic, but that was the start of my learning about sex. I gradually learned more about it, and when I got the full concept my thoughts were "EEEWWW! That is so gross! Why would people do stuff like this?!". I was still somewhat young then, and I found the idea of sex totally disgusting. But now, I understand why people would do it, and wouldn't put myself past doing it if I found the right partner and am older (if I ever get over my huge phobia of pregnancy, that is). However, it is best for teenagers to learn about sex a little before they hit puberty, so they know what to expect and what sex is. People need to learn that sex has consequences, and it isn't something you can just go do with anyone you want. Babies, for example, can be a result, and babies (in my mind at least) are like leeches on you and your money. They suck up cash like nothing else, and need to be cared for almost constantly. Once you have a baby, you can say goodbye to the next 20 or so years of your free life (if you plan to keep it that is).

In conclusion (sorry for all the text...heh), sex is something that people need to know about, in order to prevent bad incidents and unwanted pregnancies, and to teach people how to be safe when having sex. Some people think sex is super innappropriate, mainly due to stuff like innuendos and rape, and dirty jokes. But sex is a big thing in the lives of a lot of animals (its what allows us to procreate and breed, thus producing more of our species), and it is not something that we can just ignore. My mother didn't need to teach me about sex, I learned about it from society, books, the internet, games, school, etc. She would have told me about it if I asked though, and she is fine with discussing the topic and answering questions I have.

Posted by: kumoku Apr 27 2016, 09:17 PM

I'm going into public health policy and management for my master's degree, because we desperately need to change things up. It's no coincidence that the places with no sex ed or "optional" sex ed have the highest teen pregnancy rates in the country and highest STD rates.