Poetry is more embarrassing than vegan porn.
Let me get this right - you are saying that actually engaging in oral sex with other teens is less damaging to a teen (everyone did it!) than looking at pictures/movies of adults engaging in oral sex?
I think
is referring to teens posting their own homemade porn - and the distribution of it might in fact cause more damage than the actual sexual activity.
How about vegan porn poetry?
The things I have done with zucchini
On camera in a bikini…
No leather is used
When I’m being abused—
Do you think that the students have seen me?
For real.
Yes. Consentual sexual activity between two teenagers (or two adults for that matter) is less damaging than porn consumption is. I’m not advocating for teens to be having lots of sex activity; yet in compative terms, participation in normal teen sexual activity is less damaging than pornography is.
You have got to be kidding. No one ever got pregnant or caught an STD from watching porn.
I thought it was sarcastic, but reading the previous posts it seems it may not be! Wow!
It’s impossible to say categorically that one of these is always less damaging than the other; there are too many possible factors and manifestations. There’s certainly a lot of potential for damage from even “normal” teen sexual activity. But I think I see where @eyeamnicegirl is coming from: pornography can warp one’s view of sexuality in a way that a bit of teenage fooling-around won’t.
Certainly pornography is a lot easier to access these days than it was when I was growing up. As a kid, the best I could hope for was to find somone’s stash in the woods or an unmarked VHS at someone’s house when their parents weren’t home, and most of what I would have had access to was rather tame compared to what’s easily available online. Bill Mahr made a joke about how young men have a warped perception because of porn and think anal is second base. (I know, we don’t like Mahr here, but I thought it was good joke.)
Warp? Or expand?
I don’t want to get into a whole debate about the merits or evils of porn*, and I certainly agree that kids can get unrealistic ideas about sex from porn, but I think there’s also value in a 15-year-old being able to see something they might want to try when they’re older.
(*And it’s my OP, so 
)
Porn badness:
(1) exploitation, particularly of women
(2) unrealistic standards and expectations
(3) extreme porn probably has stuff one should never actually do, even with consenting adults
Actual sex badness:
(1) risk of disease
(2) risk of pregnancy (esp. in some states post-Roe)
(3) physical desires outpace emotional maturity
(4) physical desires cause conflict with religion / morality of upbringing
For teens, there’s some pretty major downsides to both. Since humanity’s track record of cutting off access to either is pretty poor, I vote we just destigmatize the whole mess so that we can prepare the teens for where their hormones lead them.
But the majority are pretty clearly going to go with “pretend it’s not a thing” until that works, so…
I am of very mixed mind here but greater concern about much of what is immediately available on line over typical teen aged hijinks is very reasonable to me.
FWIW teenagers are having LESS sex now than in decades past. They are waiting longer. And they are more likely to use birth control. Unfortunately they are confident in hormonal birth control so STDs, especially chlamydia, is increasing even with less activity.
The waiting longer is fine as it goes but I fear that some of that is the result of less in person social interaction and less skill in doing so. That I do not think is good. Covid didn’t cause such but it worsened it.
With less in person skill development I worry that exposure to the sorts of porn that is prevalent (not the chancellor’s healthy sexy couple cooking and sex show) has more distortion risk for all genders and orientations. Exposure is unavoidable and has become normative but yeah long term I am I think more worried about it than teen sexual activity going back to the rates of a few decades past.
Amen to that. Good analysis.
IIRC Clinton kept his job despite being a role-model. In fact, many on SD (and I suspect some in this thread that want the teacher fired) were mortally offended with the mere thought that Clinton was impeached (not convicted) for “just a blowjob”.
Again there’s porn and there’s porn. Sex body positive realistic stuff would be one thing. What most see when streaming is not though where most of them will have their hormones take them. I don’t know if or how harmful early exposure to that is but the experiment of high volume exposure is in progress?
Golf clap. I’ll share this (with proper attribution) with SOME of my colleagues. (And, I like your analysis a couple posts ago. It will help guide my conversations with my tweener).
Billie Eilish, for example, has spoken about how exposure to porn has (she says) been harmful to her.
There are things that are true about her case that don’t apply to others, such as how young she was when she was first exposed to it (11), what kind of porn she was watching (“violent” and “abusive”), and probably other factors, so this is not just a matter of “Porn is bad, mmkay?” But I take it as one example (and there are probably many others, among people who are significantly less famous) of how exposure to porn can (not inevitably will, but can) be harmful.
He was impeached for committing perjury – lying under oath on the witness stand during a trial. Which is a felony in every state.
The number of standards used in the US is mind boggling.
You’re ok with having your president semi-publicly cheating with an actual porn actress, a FLOTUS that used to be a sex worker.
Yet you demand your teachers to be nuns.
Good luck with that.