Teen Abstinence

[azalea]

Originally posted by Sminty_Smeagol
it seems to me that once somebody has gone so far with someone... it's easier to go that far again. It's sort of like an addiction I guess... after a while making out isn't good enough anymore... next thing you know you want to go further again... It's like a cycle. I think the resolution that to somebody who hasn't done something.... what they haven't done seems a bigger deal in their mind then it turns out to be, and nothing totally sates the desire. That doesn't really make sense, hrmm...

But it seems with most people that I know, let's say they've had oral. It would be easy for them to jump right to it in a newer relationship.

I don't know. OT

I find this to be quite insightful and believe it to be true myself. I think you're absolutely right.

In response to your other post about condoms, it's still considered sex because there is

penetration, anyway there is still some skin to skin contact, just not certain parts

.

[Janny]

Originally Posted by Inked, in the venting thread

Abstinence Can Be Taught To Teenagers
by Michael J. McManus

CHARLESTON, S.C. For 15 years I've written columns about how teenagers can be taught to abstain from sexual activity, but I have never seen a program as effective as what Heritage Community Services offers to 25,000 students a year in South Carolina and elsewhere.

Dr. Stan Weed, President of the Institute for Research and Evaluation, studied the sex initiation rates for a large sample of 8,346 S.C. students in Grades 7-9 from 1999-2001. He found that on average, 15.6 percent began sexual activity over a year's period.

However, if the students were exposed to 450 minutes of the Heritage Keepers Abstinence Program, or ten 45 minute classes in the 7th grade, only 9.1% initiated sexual activity, a remarkable 42 percent reduction. And if the students attended another 450 minutes in the 8th grade, only 4.3 percent became sexually active.

That is a stunning 72 percent reduction in the initiation of sexual activity.

"Abstinence education, when thoughtfully designed, carefully developed and rigorously implemented, changes the sexual behavior of adolescents," Weed asserted in a recent speech.

"The process by which these changes occur is becoming better understood. We know some of the key factors which affect that behavior, many of which are amenable to influence, and that programmatic intervention can effectively address them," he added.

What are those factors? There are five:

1. Self Efficacy, "the degree to which you can do what you have set out to do," says Anne Badgley, Heritage President. It is more than self-worth - a self confidence about their ability to accomplish something important, such as remaining chaste.

2. Future Orientation is "the degree to which they see their future so clearly that it influences what they do today." Most adolescents have only a present orientation, doing what gives them immediate satisfaction. Heritage helps them "to get a vision for the long-term, by developing an expectation that if they can delay gratification, the rewards are deeper and longer lasting," asserted Mrs. Badgley.

Most of the kids in South Carolina public schools have never seen or had explained what a healthy marriage is. Its building blocks are what is emotionally familiar, socially and intellectually satisfying. "We say that sex is like fire, which means it is important to have it surrounded by a fireplace, which makes it a safe place - a lifelong relationship, a commitment that they are worth that kind of love and are built for a vison that all long for, which a genital relationship would destroy. They must avoid the risk of sexual activity if they are to have hopefor the future," she explained.

3. Sexual Values affirm the value of abstinence and reject permissiveness.

4. Peer Independence is the degree to which a student can resist pressure from peers that would put him or her at risk. Like the other qualities, "refusal skills" are measured with a series of five to seven questions that are predictors of the degree to which they can take a stand with their peers: "Even when my friends want to do something I believe is wrong, I can stand up to them even if they get mad with me."

5. Behavior Intentions is one of the strongest predictors of whether they will remain chaste. Those who intend to abstain are more likely to abstain than those who are not sure what they want to do.

These five important predictors of future sexual activity were first identified by Dr. Stan Weed more than a decade ago. What Mrs. Badgley and her associates have done is to construct a course that builds upon them, creating a life skills program that incorporates a future orientation and peer independence into lessons that young people can understand.

After the core curriculum is delivered in Grades 6 and 7, there is a Heritage Keepers Life Skills Education offered at five levels, a dozen 90 minute lessons for Grades 8, 9, 10,11 and 12 that helps students maintain their commitment as they get older, and the temptations grow.

Finally, Heritage developed courses for churches and even parents on how to help their children achieve the benefits of sexual abstinence and avoid consequences of sex outside of marriage, which many of them know all too well. Parents love the course and are grateful.

"When you think that the children are bombarded with sexual messages, just two interventions can make a huge difference," Mrs. Badgley concluded. "Every child should have the opportunity to hear this message, delivered by people who really believe in them and the message."

END TXT Copyright 2004 Michael J. McManus

Interesting, I was pondering this just last night. I actually came to the conclusion that it might just be wrong to give children sex ed so young as secondary school age. I can't quite remember the rationale for this, but I think it probably had something to do with the permissivce nature of the classes. It's not disuasive... more resigned than encouraging though.

[Valandil]

How interesting that of all areas, THIS is the one where society does NOT encourage young people to aim for what is best. Instead, it is more 'resigned' to a lesser standard, as you say, Janny.

[Sminty_Smeagol]

Originally Posted by Valandil

How interesting that of all areas, THIS is the one where society does NOT encourage young people to aim for what is best. Instead, it is more 'resigned' to a lesser standard, as you say, Janny.

Sex also has pretty severe consequences, so I think it makes more sense to "play it safe".

Teaching safe sex rather than abstinance, that is.

[Rían]

"safe sex"?!?!

AAAAHHHHHHhhhhhhhhh!!!

"safer" sex, not "safe" sex, please - let's not mislead anyone!

[Sminty_Smeagol]

safeR.

Geez, I don't even get a "welcome back" for my temporary return?

[Rían]

Sorry - the "safe sex" myth is just one of my hot buttons -

WELCOME BACK, SMINTY!!! Nice to see you again!! How are things?

[Millane]

Originally Posted by Janny

Interesting, I was pondering this just last night. I actually came to the conclusion that it might just be wrong to give children sex ed so young as secondary school age. I can't quite remember the rationale for this, but I think it probably had something to do with the permissivce nature of the classes. It's not disuasive... more resigned than encouraging though.

If you had a gun in a cupboard and either had the choice to teach your child how to use it safely (maybe unintentionally condoning the use of the gun in the process) or hoping that they would just leave the gun alone (knowing that there was nothing to stop them from getting the gun), which would you choose?

[Sminty_Smeagol]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Sorry - the "safe sex" myth is just one of my hot buttons -

WELCOME BACK, SMINTY!!! Nice to see you again!! How are things?

Things aren't all that much different than they were when I was last around.

It seems like ages since I've dropped by. Kinda miss you all in a crazy way.

[Starr Polish]

SMINTY! ::does a jig::

[Janny]

Originally Posted by Millane

If you had a gun in a cupboard and either had the choice to teach your child how to use it safely (maybe unintentionally condoning the use of the gun in the process) or hoping that they would just leave the gun alone (knowing that there was nothing to stop them from getting the gun), which would you choose?

Maybe I'm an idealist, but I'd tell the kid not to touch the gun EVER. Not... 'you know... I'd be annoyed if you touched the gun'... not 'if you murder someone, you know, you'll get the support you need to see you through the rough patch'.

The gun would not be touched. Period.

[Rían]

We have a gun. Actually we have several. We control access to it.

We keep the ammo in a separate place. We control access to it.

Millane, I see your point, but as a parent, I have control over what my kids are exposed to when they are very young. I think Janny was just saying that he thinks kids don't need to be exposed to this type of information as young as they currently are. They definitely need to hear good, accurate info on the subject, BEFORE the hormones kick in, but not at, say, age 6, IMO.

[Starr Polish]

Who has sex education at age six? I mean, yeah, if a/my child asked where babies came from at that age, I would give the basics, but not go into detail. The first actual sex education I can remember having was in fourth grade (9-10 years old), and you're parents were given notes and could request you didn't watch the videos. They really weren't even all that graphic...just talking about things a little more in depth in a scientific way, and touched on pubertal changes. Then we could write anonymous questions and have them answered by the school counselor.

I think 9-10 is a good age. Around there is when "crushes" and such start, even if hormones aren't raging...it's kind of like the very beginning of awareness of the opposite sex. Also, anymore, it's not too unusual for girls to begin puberty around that age.

[Janny]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

...I think Janny was just saying...

Yes, it was a little stylistic to the point of being non-sensical.
Children can be (and are) given an education which results in them following parental orders. It is not some unattainable... er... plateau.

I think I first had sex education in year 5... which is 9 - 10 as well. I don't think the education wa particularly bad at this point, it struck as more scientific than moral. But as 9/10 year olds we had crushes, but we didn't want to watch videos with naked people on them. IMH(uninformed)O children don't even make the connection between crushes and sexual attraction until maybe three, four years later.

Starr, you mention puberty and I think that it is of course important to teach children about their bodies... and in retrospect, this is what the sex ed in primary school did. In secondary school at 12 or 13 the actual morality kicked in. Or the non-morality. I just think it's wrong to introduce the possibility of it to hormonal 13 year olds. I understand that without sex ed at that point, children learn from their peers, but in my experoence the way it works now, it just seems like the state is sanctioning it.

[Millane]

Originally Posted by Janny

Maybe I'm an idealist, but I'd tell the kid not to touch the gun EVER. Not... 'you know... I'd be annoyed if you touched the gun'... not 'if you murder someone, you know, you'll get the support you need to see you through the rough patch'.

The gun would not be touched. Period.

ive got a neighbor who has views like that about her kids and it gets so damn annoying, my kids will never touch drugs, my kids will never have sex until there at least 21, sometimes i just feel like telling her your kids a ****ing rat open your eyes I just think that telling a kid not to touch the gun and expecting that it wouldnt be touched is ridiculous, have you ever done something your parents said not to do.

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

We have a gun. Actually we have several. We control access to it.

We keep the ammo in a separate place. We control access to it.

Millane, I see your point, but as a parent, I have control over what my kids are exposed to when they are very young. I think Janny was just saying that he thinks kids don't need to be exposed to this type of information as young as they currently are. They definitely need to hear good, accurate info on the subject, BEFORE the hormones kick in, but not at, say, age 6, IMO.

I knew someone would pick through my flawed analogy i mean if the child wants to play with the gun, he can. just like with sex, if a child wants to have sex, they will... to be quite honest i dont know how beneficial sex ed would be at age 6 but i couldnt see any harm.
I guess its kind of stereotypical but ive seen a lot of people from stricter families become exactly what their parents feared, all through high school i saw it with sex drugs and alcohol, most of my friends like me have had parents who gave us a certain amount of freedom you know said if your going to have sex use a condom but who turns out to get the most emotionally ****ed the girl whos parents dont let her really have boyfriends and try to control every aspect of her life and maybe in rebellion i dont know, she goes out and has sex with heaps of guys.

I just think it's wrong to introduce the possibility of it to hormonal 13 year olds.

but thats the point, give it to them when they need it, you can stick your head in the sand and say that kids WONT have sex but they do, and sex ed provides some info thats life saving for some people, places to turn to etc.

[Sminty_Smeagol]

Originally Posted by Starr Polish

Who has sex education at age six? I mean, yeah, if a/my child asked where babies came from at that age, I would give the basics, but not go into detail. The first actual sex education I can remember having was in fourth grade (9-10 years old), and you're parents were given notes and could request you didn't watch the videos. They really weren't even all that graphic...just talking about things a little more in depth in a scientific way, and touched on pubertal changes. Then we could write anonymous questions and have them answered by the school counselor.

I think 9-10 is a good age. Around there is when "crushes" and such start, even if hormones aren't raging...it's kind of like the very beginning of awareness of the opposite sex. Also, anymore, it's not too unusual for girls to begin puberty around that age.

They don't have sexual education in any form at my highschool. It's pretty terrible. I got more than enough in seventh grade, but it wasn't really relevant then. I got initial, brief sex ed from my mom when I was 8 or 9, as my parents are open to answering questions when kids begin to ask them regarding that matter. It's kind of weird, seeing sexually mature children. I was pretty early myself, but it's a little unsettling seeing 5th and 6th graders with larger breasts than mine. It may not be saying much, but still. They need to take all those hormones out of food, children are looking like adults too fast, while their minds are still too young.

[Starr Polish]

Not teaching sex education leads to beliefs like "If we have sex standing up I can't get pregnant!" and thus, babies!

It's sad, but some 13/14 year olds are going to have sex whether or not there's sex education in school. They learn about things from older peers that may not be well informed. If anything, sex ed SCARED me, because we had to view an actual birth ::shudder...ow:: and go over different STDs that were NOT fun to read about or imagine. Abstinence wasn't completely left out, either. In fact, our instructor (and this was in ninth grade, so 14/15 year olds) stressed that abstinence is the only real way to completely prevent pregancy and STDs, and pointed out many of the myths that kids that age believe about sex. I was fairly well informed (my mother is a nurse and not shy about this topic, and I had a few books throughout junior high that she bought for me as well) and was amazed at how misinformed many of my classmates were.

[Sminty_Smeagol]

Originally Posted by Starr Polish

Not teaching sex education leads to beliefs like "If we have sex standing up I can't get pregnant!" and thus, babies!

It's sad, but some 13/14 year olds are going to have sex whether or not there's sex education in school. They learn about things from older peers that may not be well informed. If anything, sex ed SCARED me, because we had to view an actual birth ::shudder...ow:: and go over different STDs that were NOT fun to read about or imagine. Abstinence wasn't completely left out, either. In fact, our instructor (and this was in ninth grade, so 14/15 year olds) stressed that abstinence is the only real way to completely prevent pregancy and STDs, and pointed out many of the myths that kids that age believe about sex. I was fairly well informed (my mother is a nurse and not shy about this topic, and I had a few books throughout junior high that she bought for me as well) and was amazed at how misinformed many of my classmates were.

Some people are so naive! Even 16, 17, 18 year olds.... It sickens me to see little kids (this includes kids my age) "making out" and stuff. Many of them who I know seem to do it for all the wrong reasons. It's for the physical sensation, it's so selfish. I swear, a bit of the teenage sex that happens seems to me more like masturbation. And some people consider me perverted because I am interested in learning about sexual topics, and know a bit more than some people my age.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Sminty_Smeagol

They need to take all those hormones out of food, children are looking like adults too fast, while their minds are still too young.

No kidding! I buy the milk from cows WITHOUT that RBST or whatever hormone it is that makes them produce more. Girls in third-world countries that don't regulate that hormone are developing REALLY early - it's just not good for the body, IMO.

[Starr Polish]

Well, it may not be just the hormones in food. The fact that in more developed countries we get better food than we did thousands of years ago is leading to early puberty, and apparently girls whose fathers aren't active in their life tend to go through puberty earlier as well (and that is sadly becoming more and more common).

But yes...I only drink milk if it's from a free range, no hormone cow. I don't like the stuff anyway.