So I heard it today on the TV (sorry, no cite but I bet someone will find it) that our president wants to double the budget for teaching young people abstinence.
And, specifically, this would not include any sex ed or prevention of STD/HIV.
I am not trying to start a debate. Just curious what other parents think about this kind of education. I know how I feel. Sigh.
Should more money be spent on teaching: A)abstinence
B) sex ed/prevention of disease
A well-rounded sex ed program should include abstinence, as it’s certainly a valid sexual choice and method of bc/STD prevention.
Teaching about abstinence is great. But it is nowhere near enough. In order for sex-ed to be effective, you must teach the values of abstinence, and you must also teach about contraception, STDs, reproductive biology, and so on.
I have no evidence, that’s just common sense.
I’ve very mixed feelings on this issue. One the one hand, I think abstinance is the best method of birth control/STD prevention going. On the other hand, failing to educate students about all the options is a BAD thing. I’d be far more comfortable with a program that emphasized the benefits of abstinance (Not least of which is simple nervous energy - if’n you ain’t humping you have all sorts of frustration to work out by doing homework and the like. 
) but it has to be honest, and complete about all the other options available. The purpose of education in my opinion is to give students the tools to be functional adults, so how does avoiding part of the situation help?
I was speaking with an 18 yo female friend who’d had ‘regular’ sex-ed in school, and was shocked by the level of ignorace she had about her own bodily functions, and how ‘the pill’ worked, and how conception occured. And, frankly, it was a scary revelation. Now this girl is not stupid - when I explained my own limited understanding she got it. So, I really do think it was never brought up. And she lives in the Northeast, in an area that I’d consider fairly liberal.
Abstinence is a form of prohobition. It should be noted that prohibition doesn’t work. If you can’t stop people from selling drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, porn, kiddie porn, slaves, prostitutes, stolen goods, secret documents, etc., there ain’t no way you’ll stop people from having sex. We should tell our children everything that is known about sex, including how to do it, how to avoid STIs and pregnancy, how not to do it (e.g. rape), how to maximise pleasure, etc. Every time you withhold information from someone their decision-making process becomes flawed. There are also psychological health issues to consider as some people simply aren’t built to be celebate and trying to be so drives them nuts.
Sex is natural, sex is good; not everybody does it but everybody should.
In my version of an ideal sex-ed program, abstinence would be spoken of (in fact, it would be praised), but more time and more resources would need to go to basic education about reproduction and the biology behind it, STD prevention, and pregnancy prevention for the simple fact that saying “Don’t have sex” takes approximately 5 seconds to say and is free. (And truly comprehensive sex-ed takes time, creativity, planning, and materials.)
In my experience it was the people who had abstinence only (or less) sex-ed that made stupid, dangerous choices about sex. I truly believe that people (including teenagers) make better decisions when they have more facts and more information.
Abstinence in the face of a reckless sexual encounter is a good option to promote, as bad reckless sexual encounters can easily a.) kill you or b.) really fuck up lives. Recognizing a reckless sexual encounter requires sexual education. I don’t see why the two would be mutually exclusive.
Now, what is sex education? Are we going to tell all those randy young’uns that it’s all OK if you use a condom? Would you have sex with somebody you knew positively to be an AIDS sufferer with a condom?
I suppose your answer to that might determine your feelings about condom distribution programs. Frankly, I think the most +/-5 years 20 year olds will interpret “Don’t have reckless sex; here’s a condom” as “Greenlight!”
There are sound reasons to talk about, even to promote, abstinence - as part of a more general sex education program.
You’ve got to make clear what they’re abstaining from - and how to behave responsibly if they don’t choose to abstain. (Bluntly, as a matter of practical realism - sex education should be predicated on the idea that teenagers are going to have sex. Because a lot of them are, whether you like it or not.)
I think it should be included as a part of the overall teaching of sex education. I don’t know why anyone would have an objection to that. I don’t know why some people think that not informing kids of the dangers , the physical reproduction system and how to protect yourself is harmful. Is it not better that they get accurate information rather than gathering it from their peers. Here is one link to the story. Thats a lot of money.
Some people aren’t built to be celibate?
What a bunch of crap!
Everyone can be celibate, unless you are a nympho or such?
Yes, I agree it should be taught, and they should bring in speakers, girls who’ve ogtten pregnant at 13 or 14 (2 of my schoolmates did) they cna explain about dropping out of school etc.
I don’t see why there is any debate at all, is is that hard to teach both? I got taught both in my sex-ed class. They said that abstinance is the only surefire way to ensure no pregnancy or STD’s. They also realized that we were teenagers, and just them telling us not to have sex ain’t gonna stop some of us, so you might as well tell them how to use a freakin’ condom while you’re at it.
It’s not like telling teenagers how to use a condom is promoting or encouraging tem to have sex. And why tell them not to have sex, anyways? Eventually, if the human race is to, you know, stay on this planet and all, sex is going to have to be had by someone somewhere. Preferably lots of people lots of places.
I have recieved a combination since middle school. Abstinence was always spoken of as “the surefire way to safety.” I also remember my teachers discussing the difference between love and infatuation (love at first sight isn’t love, it’s infatuation. Love takes time and understanding that doesn’t manifest itself in a short period of time, no matter how wonderful you think so and so is).
During my freshman year of high school, my teacher brought in some twenty-somethings that were hired out to talk to us about mistakes that they made relating to their sexual pasts (peer pressure problems, dating violence, etc.) and how those mistakes could have been prevented.
But, there was tons of information on birth control. Effectiveness of various methods, ability of different forms to prevent disease, and side effects were discussed. Myths were dispelled regarding birth control methods and anatomy. In groups of four, my teacher gave each group a large piece of paper that we were supposed to draw male and female sexual anatomy. She gave us a list (vas difrens, ovaries, urethra, etc). I don’t know how we were mature enough to do this, but it worked.
I can’t think of a better way to teach sex ed, other than to have the parents make sure that they talk to their children about values, expectations, and safety.
Through a wierd moving fluke, I recieved high school sex ed in Texas and then again in Florida. Texas, it was slides of what STD’s do to your body, and abstinence.
Florida, however, was much better. We had a young woman come in (early twenties) who explained why abstinence is wonderful. She even promoted waiting until you are married (my mom had already by this point told me not to wait until marriage to have sex with someone, so I slightly ignored it, but that’s a different story). That was 5 years ago, and I still remember her talk.
Than, the woman basically said, if you are going to have sex, this is how you can do it safely. She explained birth control, back up birth control, using a few forms at once, and what you can do in a pinch. I moved back to Texas a year later, and the information I had received in that talk kept me and several of my female friends out of trouble.
Teaching strictly abstinence is foolish, if for no other reason than it appears that future generations are being exposed to content of a more and more sexual nature. It doesn’t make sense to teach adolescents that you should not have sex, and then glorify it in every available medium. It’s been my experience that people a couple years below my age group (the 13-17 crowd) believe that condoms are infallible as far as preventing STDs are concerned. Similarly, they believe that the pill/patch will absolutely protect one from pregnancy. A crucial part of sex education is to explain that these options, while effective, are far from infallible. Demonstrate the repercussions (STDs, pregnancy, etc). You can’t hide sex, you damn sure can’t stop people from having sex, so the next best thing is to make sure they don’t kill each other doing it.
That’s my point, some people ARE nymphos. Some people have such a high sex drive that they have it several times a day (partner optional). It’s often hormonal, just like frigidity.
A point which everyone seems to have missed… what’s so good about abstinence? Sure, it’s a good contraceptive with almost 100% prevention, but you can catch STIs without having sex (no, not the toilet seat thing). Abstinence is unnatural, BTW, so encouraging teens to do it is bad. We should be teaching them Masturbation 101.
No, that’s not what sex ed is. Although in point of fact condoms do a good job of preventing the transmission of AIDS. That’s not something you’d recommend to anybody and I doubt it would be part of any sex ed program. Some people who have partners with AIDS do precisely this.
Do you honestly think most kids WON’T have sex just because a condom isn’t around? “Greenlight!” my ass. They/ we (I’m 21) aren’t waiting for someone’s approval to have sex. It’s gonna happen anyway, so you might as well educate people about the options and let them make the safer choices.
Boof, you might want to have your sarcasm detector serviced. Vanilla was being facetious. Also, clinical nymphomania isn’t a matter of high sex drive, nor is clinical frigidity a simple matter of low sex drive. They’re sexual disorders that need medical and psychological treatment. Also, abstinence doesn’t just mean refraining from intercourse; it’s refraining from all types of sex.
As for what’s good about abstinence, lots of things. Being abstinent through high school meant that when my period was late, or I just flat-out skipped a month (teenage girls often have much more menstrual irregularity than adults), I wasn’t freaking out about the possibility of pregnancy. Never a second’s worry about that one (stress and worry about being late can make your period even later, so it’s kind of a vicious cycle), so I got used to peculiarities like that and didn’t flip out when stuff like that happened after I started having sex. It also meant that I never had a second’s worry that a sore throat meant I’d gotten throat-clap from blowing somebody. My sexually active friends didn’t have that kind of peace of mind.
Waiting until I was mentally and psychologically ready to have sex with someone (saying all teenagers can handle sex is just as ridiculous as saying none can) helped me develop a healthy sense of my own sexuality years before most of my peers. I was comfortable with masturbation, both male and female, at an age when all my friends thought it was too gross for words. I knew my body, inside and out, what I liked, what turned me on, so I was having mind-blowing orgasms while my sexually active friends debated the reality of the female orgasm. I learned to look at sex as something that enhances an existing relationship, not as the relationship itself, or something you had to do to get or keep a boyfriend. All this enabled me to skip the six of seven years my friends spent wondering what all the fuss was about, and go straight to the screaming when I did start having sex. My friends have all been having sex longer than I have, but I’ve been having good sex longer than any of them.
In short, kids need to know about ALL their options in order to make an informed decision about what’s right for them. Teaching them that abstinence is unhealthy or unnatural is just as harmful as telling them that sex is dirty and bad, or that masturbation causes blindness and hairy palms. Good sex ed teaches kids that it’s okay to say, “No, I don’t want to do that,” as well as, “Hell, yeah, let’s do that.” It teaches them about the biology and psychology of sex, and touches on homosexuality, bisexuality, and gender identity issues. It goes whole hog on reproductive physiology of both sexes. It goes through the good, the bad, and the ugly of all the forms of birth control and STD prevention, and paints a realistic picture of how effective each is. It teaches that masturbation is a good and healthy thing, even for folks who are sexually active, and that it’s far preferable to having partner sex you don’t really want to have or don’t feel you’re ready for.
While abstinence is a viable option, for a lot of kids, the sex drive is overwhelming, so they should be taught what happens/what you should do if you don’t abstain from sex. Having knowledge is never a bad thing. I’m slightly annoyed at the idea that teaching kids about sexual matters somehow condones bad behaviour.
After all, my parents told me what would happen if I drank the cleaning products under the sink- they didn’t pretend they weren’t there and hope I didn’t find them.
When I went through sex-ed (mid 1990s), abstinence was definitely promoted as the only way to be completely safe. But we also learned about different BC methods, including the failure rate for those methods. It was all frank and on the level. Sexually mature people (including teenagers) need to be aware of these things.
What I object to in sex ed is the “Sex will ruin your life!” attitude. Sure, sex can have devestating consequences, and teenagers should be aware of those consequences. However, sex can also be part of a healthy, respectful, loving relationship. I had sex as a teenager with someone I’d been involved with for over a year. It wasn’t traumatic; I didn’t get pregnant; we didn’t get STDs; it was a normal, healthy, loving experience. It’s like the anti-drug programs that try to convince kids that equate smoking the occasional joint with being a heroin junkie. Teenagers have great bullshit detectors. Don’t try to convince them that it’s either celibacy until marriage or an early grave.
I favor both methods. Drill it into the kids’ heads that they are TOO YOUNG to be having sex, getting pregnant/an STD can ruin their lives/reputations, and that they should wait until they are older before having sex. This will sink in with the kids who have some sense.
Then teach 'em all about birth control, how it works, failure rates, and the lovely STDs you can pick up if you do start sleeping around indiscriminately. (I think the STD thing should be complete with pictures.) They also need to know about pregnancy from conception to birth: fetal development, signs of pregnancy, all about labor, etc.
Give my kid a condom, though, and there’s going to be trouble. That’s MY job.