Teen Abstinence

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by Starr Polish

And Nurv, people actually use that myth? If a guy said that to me, I'd look at him and go "if you're that big you'll kill me."

I read a book on sex ed once, and apparently people do. I'd probably tell him to go take a cold shower, but since you can probably fit your whole forearm into a condom, you're probably right too. (Anyone who has made condom balloons can attest to that )

And I agree with you about safe sex Starr, as long as the term safe sex is accompanied by an explanation of what it is, I don' think it's misleading.

[inked]

"The trouble with most folks isn't so much their ignorance. It's know'n so many things that ain't so." -- 19th century humorist Josh Billings

AMEN.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Starr Polish

Um...condoms do protect from pregnancy and STDs...so that makes no sense to me. Obviously they don't work 100% of the time, but neither do seatbelts.

I said "more than it actually does", and I stand by my opinion (as you do yours! )

So we'll just have to disagree on this. Oh well!

From IRex's article:
One curriculum, called "Me, My World, My Future," teaches that women who have an abortion "are more prone to suicide" and that as many as 10 percent of them become sterile. This contradicts the 2001 edition of a standard obstetrics textbook that says fertility is not affected by elective abortion, the Waxman report said.

I"d sure like to hear from inked on the suicide/sterility issue. And considering one possible side-effect of abortion is DEATH (and thank God those scumbag doctors are being prosecuted), I'd say it affects fertility.

(and I'd just say that I STRONGLY believe that truth should be presented - accurately and completely.)

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

I"d sure like to hear from inked on the suicide/sterility issue. And considering one possible side-effect of abortion is DEATH (and thank God those scumbag doctors are being prosecuted), I'd say it affects fertility.

(and I'd just say that I STRONGLY believe that truth should be presented - accurately and completely.)

Yes, I think someone who's interested in all the facts (not the one's that prove an agenda, either yes or no) should look into it. Just to make sure. We should know these things.

Speaking of knowing things, great quote Inked! Did you have any statement in mind when you said that?

[inked]

Nurv:"Speaking of knowing things, great quote Inked! Did you have any statement in mind when you said that? "

Well, yes! All the excuses I have had from patients for being pregnant...the main one being: WERE YOU TRYING TO GET PREGNANT?
"No."
WHAT METHOD OF BIRTH CONTROL WERE YOU USING?
"None."
WHAT PART OF UNPROTECTED SEXUAL INTERCOURSE
LEADS TO DIRTY DIAPERS WAS TOO HARD FOR YOU?
"But I didn't want to get pregnant!"
DO YOU WANT TO HAVE AN AUTO ACCIDENT?
"No, of course not!"
DO YOU WEAR A SEATBELT?
"Ummm, (pause for furtive thinking 'cause the point is taken)
Yes."
NOW, IF YOU DIDN"T INTEND PREGNANCY, YOU WOULD
HAVE PLANNED ON PREVENTING IT, RIGHT?
"Yes, but I didn't want to get pregnant! I knew it might
happen, but I didn't think it would!"
WHAT PART OF UNPROTECTED SEX RESULTS IN DIRTY
DIAPERS DID YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?
"But, I didn't plan to get pregnant!"
YOU WISHED TO NOT GET PREGNANT, BUT YOU DID
NOTHING TO PREVENT IT. YOU KNEW THAT PREGNANCY
WAS POSSIBLE. YOU HAD UNPROTECTED SEX.
"Well, it really didn't matter if I did."
THEN YOU PLANNED TO GET PREGNANT BY NOT PREVENTING
IT.
"Uhh, I really didn't think I would get pregnant."
....
Now, loop back up to the initial question and repeat this circuit about 3 or 4 times.

That's what I had in mind. People who KNEW the risks and then come in to tell me that it wasn't intentional. What they mean is they wished for a negative outcome, knew the potentials, and engaged in the behaviour, then ACT like it was surprising to get pregnant. This is called pretending it won't happen.

The major variants of this theme all run to "my birth control failed". Closer questioning reveals that they failed to a) use a condom properly "just once",
b) failed to take their pills AND did not
use a backup technique,
c) left their OCPs, patch, NuvaRing,
diaphragm, condoms at home and
"didn't think one week would
matter", or
d) failed to get their DEPOProvera on
time (varies from weeks to months
late) with NO BACKUP.
In short, all knowingly and intentionally gambled, then act like it's a big surprise when they got pregnant! That's the knowledge I am referring to with Josh Billings' observation.

[Starr Polish]

Well, I'm also a huge advocate of using more than one method of birth control when having sex and not wanting pregnancy. I'm not active and I don't plan on being so until I'm married (note the "planned"...I've already done things I didn't plan to do, so abstinence fails as well), but I do'nt think I want kids, and even if I do not for a good twelve years or so, so I'm going to be utilizing two or three BCs.

And Rian, I'm not going to let this go until you tell me WHAT you mean by people being misinformed about what condoms protect against. You can't just leave it at "we'll agree to disagree" if you don't completely explain your side.

IR, I'm not going to respond because it's way OT.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Starr Polish

And Rian, I'm not going to let this go until you tell me WHAT you mean by people being misinformed about what condoms protect against.

I already did,and I'll repeat it yet again (bolding added for emphasis) : "From what I've seen and read, teens, esp., have a mindset that using a condom will protect them more than it actually does (both from pregnancy and STDs), and I think the term "safe sex" helps to foster this false and very dangerous idea."

I am aware of what I have seen and read; you are NOT. And I stand by my statement, which you are unable to refute because you are NOT aware of what I have seen and read.

You can't just leave it at "we'll agree to disagree" if you don't completely explain your side.

I can and will do what I darn well please and I did explain my side to a level that IMO was sufficient. If you disagree, that's your prerogative. I don't like being told what to do in this manner, and will not comply if I don't think it's necessary. I do what I think is right; I don't feel compelled to do something in response to a request worded like yours. I do a LOT, however, when I think that the person that is asking is considerate, as well as genuinely interested.

Would you like to share what YOU have seen and read and heard to support your (apparent) opinion that teens are entirely aware of the failure rate of condoms with respect to the various STDs, as well as pregnancy?

[EDIT - pulled to PM]

[Starr Polish]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

I already did,and I'll repeat it yet again (bolding added for emphasis) : "From what I've seen and read, teens, esp., have a mindset that using a condom will protect them more than it actually does (both from pregnancy and STDs), and I think the term "safe sex" helps to foster this false and very dangerous idea."

And I still don't understand what exactly you mean by this. Do you mean that they do not protect against pregnancy and/or STDs at all, because that's what it sounds like when I read it.

I am aware of what I have seen and read; you are NOT. And I stand by my statement, which you are unable to refute because you are NOT aware of what I have seen and read.

And I can say the exact same thing to you.

Would you like to share what YOU have seen and read and heard to support your (apparent) opinion that teens are entirely aware of the failure rate of condoms with respect to the various STDs, as well as pregnancy?

When did I ever say all teens know about the failure rate of condoms? This is why I support truthful and accurate sex education, not ones that lie. When used correctly, a condom has a 3% failure rate when it comes to avoiding pregnancy. I believe it is around 3% for STDs as well, probably with the exception of herpes (condoms do not cover the entire area that one may come in contact with when concerning herpes). Not once have I said they are 100% effective or that all teenagers know these percentages.

[edit: Pulled to PM]

[Snowdog]

I've already done things I didn't plan to do, so abstinence fails as well)

It comes down to personal responsibility to make Abstinince work. And Abstinince has prevented pregnancy 100% of the time. To slap on a rubber and fill up with spermicide and having sex and say it is "safe" is ignorant at best.

[Starr Polish]

And most teens have very little self responsibility. I AGREE with teaching and discussing how abstinence is the only 100% effective way to not get pregnant (and I mean full abstinence) or STDs. But to assume that teaching abstinence is actually going to keep kids from having sex is ignorant. While I encourage abstinence, I think that teens should be given ACCURATE information about birth control and avoiding STDS should they choose to be sexually active (which many, and probably a majority, will).

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by Snowdog

It comes down to personal responsibility to make Abstinince work. And Abstinince has prevented pregnancy 100% of the time. To slap on a rubber and fill up with spermicide and having sex and say it is "safe" is ignorant at best.

A lot of people are killed in car accidents every year. It is ignorant at best to slap on a seatbelt, drive responsibly, and call it safe driving.

Or is it?

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Starr Polish

And I still don't understand what exactly you mean by this. Do you mean that they do not protect against pregnancy and/or STDs at all, because that's what it sounds like when I read it.

The pertinent part is "more than it actually DOES". And the word "does" means exactly that - it does protect at some level.

If I thought it didn't protect at ALL, I would say something like this: "From what I've seen and read, teens, esp., have a mindset that using a condom will protect them, when actually it does NOT."

I guess I don't see the confusion - to me, it seems plain that I thought a condom DOES protect at some level. But if you don't understand it that way, then I'm glad you asked for clarification. How would you suggest that I rewrite it so it is clearer?

When did I ever say all teens know about the failure rate of condoms?

You didn't, and I didn't say you did. However, if you disagreed with my statement, which was that teens think a condom protects more than it does, then the only alternative is that teens do NOT think that a condom protects more than it does. And that's why I said "apparent". But since you misunderstood my original statement, which I thought was really clear but apparently wasn't, then none of this stands.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

A lot of people are killed in car accidents every year. It is ignorant at best to slap on a seatbelt, drive responsibly, and call it safe driving.

Or is it?

What IS right, IMHO , is to tell people this : "I wish that driving was always safe, but it's not. However, there are ways to increase your safety while driving, and I'll tell you about them. But you must know that if you choose to drive, even if you follow all the best rules, you could still be seriously harmed, or even killed. Because I think the truth is important, and you're important, I'm telling you this."

[Starr Polish]

And I agree with that, Rian. That's HOW sex ed was taught in my school.

[Rían]

Good for your school! *cheers for Starr's school*

[Nurvingiel]

Yeah, mine too. (And that's how I learned to drive too. But enough with that analogy.) I'm only cheering for our sports teams though.

[Falagar]

Hehe, deleted. *Grumbles about doing research before posting*

[Nurvingiel]

Is anyone else disturbed by this article? I know I am...

Abstinence-Only Education Teaches Blatant Lies

December 17, 2004
by Kourtney Stamps, Communications Intern

A report released on Dec. 1 by Rep. Henry A. Waxman, D-Calif., found that abstinence-only education programs supported by George W. Bush, and carried out with federal funding by a variety of right-wing organizations, contain outrageously false information about reproductive health issues.

Rep. Waxman's report examines the scientific and medical accuracy of the most popular abstinence-only curricula used by grantees of the largest federal abstinence initiative, SPRANS (Special Programs of Regional and National Significance Community-Based Abstinence Education). Through SPRANS, the Department of Health and Human Services provides grants to community organizations that teach abstinence-only curricula to youth. These curricula are not reviewed for accuracy by the federal government, nor are grantees required to have any expertise in the area.

The report finds that over 80 percent of the abstinence-only curricula, used by over two-thirds of SPRANS grantees in 2003, contain false, misleading or distorted information. This information distorts data about the effectiveness of contraceptives, misrepresents the risks associated with abortion, blurs religion and science, treats stereotypes about girls and boys as scientific fact, and contains basic scientific errors.

Among these inaccuracies are reports that a pregnancy occurs one out of every seven times that couples use condoms. One curriculum states that 5 to 10 percent of women who have legal abortions will become sterile. Many of the curricula present as scientific fact the religious view that life begins at conception — one calls a 43-day-old fetus a "thinking person" and another describes a fetus as "snuggling into the soft nest in the lining of the mother's uterus." Some of the curricula erroneously state that touching another person's genitals "can result in pregnancy," and others claim that the HIV virus can be spread through contact with another person's sweat or tears.

Perhaps the most disturbing information being disseminated through these programs is the reinforcement of gender stereotypes about differences between women and men. One curriculum instructs, "Women gauge their happiness and judge their success by their relationships. Men's happiness and success hinge on their accomplishments." Another lists "Financial Support" as one of the "5 Major Needs of Women," and "Domestic Support" as one of the "5 Major Needs of Men." This same curriculum encourages girls to show their admiration of boys by "regard[ing] him with wonder, delight, and approval."

Under the Bush administration, federal funding for such programs has grown rapidly. In fiscal year 2005, the federal government will spend $170 million on abstinence-only education. This is twice the amount spent on such programs in fiscal year 2001.

Unlike comprehensive sex education, abstinence-only programs have not been shown to decrease rates of teen pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases. In fact, a recent study found that youth who pledge abstinence are significantly less likely to make informed choices about precautions when they do have sex. This $170 million would be better used for accurate sex education and family planning information that includes abstinence among the options.

Download and read Rep. Waxman's complete report.

from National Organization for Women

Does anyone take an abstinance-only sex-ed class? What's it like? All thoughts are appreciated.

[Insidious Rex]

um...

[Nurvingiel]

Heh... well maybe not all thoughts...