| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/11/2008 04:02:13 PM · #26 |
i actually agree with this, Matthew. I'm just not sure we agree on WHO should be giving out the information. I think parents rely too heavily on the schools.
Originally posted by Matthew:
don't deny people the information on how to lead a healthy life when faced with the clinical dangers of modern society. |
|
|
|
|
03/11/2008 04:02:22 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by PapaBob:
My point is teaching it did not cause it....... |
Human nature is not something that needs to be taught! We apply certain moral codes, and those need to be taught. We also should protect our children against the risks of society (whether we like their existence or not) - and that also needs to be taught.
|
|
|
|
03/11/2008 04:02:41 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by hopper:
so instead we should embrace it?
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Hasn't worked, doesn't work ...it will never work. NEXT!!! |
|
Pawdrix is exactly right! Teaching abstinence will never work! Its like the D.A.R.E. program. It will help a few people but overall its worthless. For the most part everyone I know that is sexually active doesn't think it will happen to them. We need to spend the money on finding a cure for these diseases rather then spening useless money on abstinence programs. |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 04:07:38 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by hopper:
What if the topic were drug use and the dangers of sharing needles? Should the schools pass out clean needles and teach everyone how to properly shoot up?
we can't prevent them from doing it, so lets make it safe |
First, drugs don't carry the same biological imperative as sex for teenagers, so there are some differences.
However, schools should absolutely teach pupils of the dangers of drugs and the dangers associated with sharing needles. Pupils should be made aware that there are free needle programs available.
I am not promoting the distribution of needles in school in the same way that I don't promote the distribution of condoms - abut give people the information. I was certainly told about all these things in school.
|
|
|
|
03/11/2008 04:08:09 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by hopper:
so instead we should embrace it?
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Hasn't worked, doesn't work ...it will never work. NEXT!!! |
|
I dont think any kind of program will work. I do not think sex education does a whole lot of good no matter what is being taught. It comes down to the break down in families and the morals of our culture. I do not pretent to have the answers but to put blame on one program that teaches the only thing that could work if followed (thats the big if) is wrong in my opion. |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 04:11:40 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by slickchik:
What about having self-control. We are not animals and can control our behaviors. Just because I am angry with someone and want to punch them in the face or push them down and stomp on them doesn't mean that I have to do it. I have self-control. As a teenager, I had self-control. Using raging hormones as an excuse for not exercising self-control is ridiculous. |
Me too - lots of self control. But the reality is that not everyone has full self control in all situations (some more than others - we are all different. I certainly have encountered situations in which my normal judgement is severely impaired by my biological reaction.
Would you ignore the reality in favour of an ideal?
|
|
|
|
03/11/2008 04:15:07 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by PapaBob:
I dont think any kind of program will work. I do not think sex education does a whole lot of good no matter what is being taught. It comes down to the break down in families and the morals of our culture. I do not pretent to have the answers but to put blame on one program that teaches the only thing that could work if followed (thats the big if) is wrong in my opion. |
I would vehemently argue that teaching only one aspect of sex education is so very obviously going to be less effective than teaching multiple aspects of it.
|
|
|
|
03/11/2008 04:18:17 PM · #33 |
| I would like to meet somebody who really does know the true sense of self-control. I don't think it exists in many people. People are not perfect and have many flaws which is why we are always learning new things about ourselves. |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 04:21:43 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by hopper:
so instead we should embrace it?
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Hasn't worked, doesn't work ...it will never work. NEXT!!! |
|
Now, did I say that???
Have teenagers change a few hundred stinky diapers. Diaper Bootcamp! And when they're not changing diapers have them watch endless streams of Barney videos with a looping sountrack of a crying baby playing in the backgroud. Sleep deprivation would be a nice touch, too.
That might scare them away from unprotected sex.
That's the best I can come up with at the moment but I'll give it a little more thought...
ETA:
A. Hire Jill Greenburg to teach babies to barf all over the teenagers, on cue.
B. Have Jill Greenburg photograph the barfed on, doody intoxicated, sleep deprived, Barney saturated teenagers to show them the potential glory and consequences of UNPROTECTED SEXXxxxxxxx!!!
Message edited by author 2008-03-11 16:33:05. |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 04:29:49 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by Matthew:
Originally posted by PapaBob:
I dont think any kind of program will work. I do not think sex education does a whole lot of good no matter what is being taught. It comes down to the break down in families and the morals of our culture. I do not pretent to have the answers but to put blame on one program that teaches the only thing that could work if followed (thats the big if) is wrong in my opion. |
I would vehemently argue that teaching only one aspect of sex education is so very obviously going to be less effective than teaching multiple aspects of it. |
We really are in agreement other than I believe the effectiveness any of the programs is minimal no matter what is being taught. I knew all those things about abstinence and condoms and it did not help me, I still became a father at 18. I grew up in the generation of free love (I still like that term) and felt invincable like any other teenager. I had two working parents like so many kids today and had very little guidance from my parents. I take full responsibility, I was warned so how can I blame the teaching! |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 04:43:06 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by Matthew:
Originally posted by slickchik:
What about having self-control. We are not animals and can control our behaviors. Just because I am angry with someone and want to punch them in the face or push them down and stomp on them doesn't mean that I have to do it. I have self-control. As a teenager, I had self-control. Using raging hormones as an excuse for not exercising self-control is ridiculous. |
Me too - lots of self control. But the reality is that not everyone has full self control in all situations (some more than others - we are all different. I certainly have encountered situations in which my normal judgement is severely impaired by my biological reaction.
Would you ignore the reality in favour of an ideal? |
I am not ignoring reality. I am just sick of people saying they have no control over their sexual appetites, as if we are non-thinking animals. I know teens will have sex and they should be taught about the risks and taught about having responsible sex. I also think the parents should be responsible for instilling morals into their children and not rely on everyone else. |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 04:47:39 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by slickchik:
I am not ignoring reality. I am just sick of people saying they have no control over their sexual appetites, as if we are non-thinking animals. I know teens will have sex and they should be taught about the risks and taught about having responsible sex. I also think the parents should be responsible for instilling morals into their children and not rely on everyone else. |
We are thinking animals. So there's a conflict. From what little I know, kids around here are taught not to have sex. That's it. Nothing about how to be responsible or safe, other than don't do it. Helpful, to a point. It seems to be working 25% of cases or so. |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 04:50:44 PM · #38 |
For the people who argue that teens are gonna have sex no matter what, why is there a difference generationally? Fewer teens of the last generation had sex than our, fewer teens of the generation before that had sex than the last. STDs were less common. This isn't to say that there weren't teens having sex, but there were fewer.
Why the change? I'm interested in opinions here.
|
|
|
|
03/11/2008 04:58:07 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
For the people who argue that teens are gonna have sex no matter what, why is there a difference generationally? Fewer teens of the last generation had sex than our, fewer teens of the generation before that had sex than the last. STDs were less common. This isn't to say that there weren't teens having sex, but there were fewer.
Why the change? I'm interested in opinions here. |
I blame the parents. Too many donĂ¢€™t want to take the responsibility of raising their kids and too many donĂ¢€™t want to teach them accountability for their actions. I see it getting worse every time. Too many people want the freedom, but donĂ¢€™t want the responsibility that comes with it. I believe educating your kids about the consequences of irresponsible sex, would minimize some of this. |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 04:59:10 PM · #40 |
| parental involvement. true involvement. know your teens, know their friends. don't be their friend but be open to them. |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 05:34:43 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
For the people who argue that teens are gonna have sex no matter what, why is there a difference generationally? Fewer teens of the last generation had sex than our, fewer teens of the generation before that had sex than the last. STDs were less common. This isn't to say that there weren't teens having sex, but there were fewer.
Why the change? I'm interested in opinions here. |
I would be interested in seeing some stats on this. My guess is that the basic changes in society that have prompted the changes in attitude over the last few generations are:
1) the pill (now second to third generation acceptance)
2) female emancipation (gradual accumulation over five generations)
3) the two world wars (linked to emancipation, but these prompted female working and independence)
4) improvement of speed and scope of national and international communications, resulting in the increased familiarisation, spread, and speed of adoption of revised societal concepts (over the last four generations)
Linked to these are a number of factors that might be seen as causal, or linked, or consequences (and probably all three in a self reinforcing manner) such as:
a) increase in family breakdown/single parent families
b) normalisation and increasing acceptance of sexually provocative imagery
c) increasing pressure on children to grow up quickly
d) availability of instant access to porn through the internet
e) increasing secularism and growth in belief in "alternative" world theories.
One issue that I understand had a significant impact on the spread of STDs was AIDs when first understood and when it was the subject of massive publicity campaigns (though those were more than 20 years ago).
Oh - and video games and rap music (of course).
Message edited by author 2008-03-11 17:36:54.
|
|
|
|
03/11/2008 05:56:29 PM · #42 |
Those are likely great answers Matthew and I agree with you on almost all of them. The question I have is why do we accept this fact that more teens are having sex as something good? In other words, just because they can (because of the pill for example), should they? And what would we have to do to reverse this trend?
Abstinence teaching is like putting a band-aid on a severed artery. I think there have to be some societal changes, although I'm not holding my breath it will happen. I'll merely be working harder than ever to raise my children the way I think is best for them.
|
|
|
|
03/11/2008 06:10:27 PM · #43 |
| I don't think you can reverse the trend for all the reasons that Matthew stated. I believe that it can be accomplished on an individual family basis, such as you are doing DOC, but not as a society in whole. |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 06:21:05 PM · #44 |
Blame! Who is to blame? STD in UK was to do with phone numbers! It is so easy to say that parents/kids/school/government are to blame.
When I was a 'teenager' in the '60s' sex was taboo to all parents, but us kids, it was a great experiment. Youngsters in all generations have sex before oldies think they are ready, the real problem now is that they catch phone numbers, sorry, STDs.
Rather than fight against hormones, perhaps some gentle education would go a long way to helping this problem? I hated condoms when I was a youngster, smelt like retreaded rubber!! I had to get married.
Nowadays, there are more ways to be safe, so let's educate our kids sensibly? Without panic and meltdown. |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 06:21:20 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Abstinence and avoid condoms. I can't believe that doesn't work. |
How could that possibly not work... I just don't understand :shaking head:
|
|
|
|
03/11/2008 06:21:48 PM · #46 |
almost 9 billion people in the world.
More people alive now than have ever lived prior. |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 06:30:56 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
The question I have is why do we accept this fact that more teens are having sex as something good? In other words, just because they can (because of the pill for example), should they? And what would we have to do to reverse this trend?
|
I'm going to put in my two cents and then run out the door, but I'll check back later to see what responses this generates...
When could teens having sex be seen as a good thing? When it's responsible. There is nothing wrong with having sex. It is an enjoyable experience when done with someone you care about. Being married isn't a prerequisite to pleasure. I always used protection. I was not a teen pregnancy statistic. I became sexually active as a teen. In my mind I feel it was justified. I learned that just because I care deeply about someone, doesn't mean we will end up being sexually compatible. God forbid I had never had sex and married the guy who's penis was just too large! What then? Get a divorce or have painful sex for the rest of my life? Or, what about the one that was just way too small? Never have a pleasurable sexual experience? I test drive a car before I buy it, why not test drive the person you plan to spend the rest of your life with? |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 06:31:40 PM · #48 |
| What"s abstinence? ....am I missing something :) |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 07:00:17 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by keegbow:
What"s abstinence? ....am I missing something :) |
Abstinence is a voluntary restraint from indulging a desire or appetite for certain bodily activities that are widely experienced as giving pleasure. Most frequently, the term refers to abstention from sexual intercourse, alcohol or food. |
|
|
|
03/11/2008 07:10:31 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by Kelli:
When could teens having sex be seen as a good thing? When it's responsible. There is nothing wrong with having sex. It is an enjoyable experience when done with someone you care about. Being married isn't a prerequisite to pleasure. |
I guess I'd ask whether teens are EVER responsible enough to have sex? It gets grayer the older they get, but we don't even let people drive until they are 16 and drink until they are 21 (at least in this country). I agree there is nothing wrong with having sex, but if you think it's merely an "enjoyable experience", then I think you are missing the boat on the possible benefits (and drawbacks). Snorting cocaine is, likewise, pleasurable. Is anybody ever responsible enough to do that?
One problem is teens' brains are not wired to fully calculate short-term gain vs. long-term consequences. Some of the consequences may not come up until waaaay down the road. What if the person you wind up loving (well, not you. :)) has small breasts? While in college you were all over those big-breasted sorority girls and you loved it. Is it possible you have now damaged your marriage on some level because you are "disappointed" that you are stuck with small breasts? Don't think that's a silly example either. It's not an insurmountable problem, but it may not have been a problem to start with if your wife is all you knew to start with.
I'm just trying to have dialogue here. I will admit though that sometimes it seems people are speaking different languages.
Message edited by author 2008-03-11 19:12:01.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/10/2025 10:26:00 AM EDT.
