Underage Sex and how it's being dealt with/treated.

have something I´d like to ask you all.

Why do we hide sex, and sexual activites to such extent as we do from our children/teenagers?

What is so terrible about sex and sexual actions?

Ok … what do we know about sex?

Sex is something that we humans do, both for pleasure and to have children.

Sex is a VERY big part of human relations and all in all is a very “positive” thing when both of the indviduals participating really know what they are doing.
When things are done “correctly” we have a very small chance of conception and that makes sex a truly good “hobby” since it´s not something that damages your body (drugs) or hurts you in any other way, yet still gives an immence satisfaction and well being, same effect as drugs … but totally harmless and nice, therefore making drugs a lot less “appealing”.

Sex gives immence pleasure and satisfaction … makes emotional bonds very strong and is all in all a very good thing.

Sex can also bring "undecired babies and sex deceases … but that happens mostly because of “ignorane” concerning sex.

The main problem we have with “underage sex” is that children really don´t know what they are dealing with.

They rush into sex because sex is looked apon as “taboo” and therefore is very exiting and fun to do. Everything that is"naughty" and “forbidden” is truly an exciting thing at this age, so by hiding sex from children/teenagers, we are making it very exiting for them, and something they “must!” try out.

Nowadays, it´s really common to see a movie with lots and lots of killing, but very mild sex scenes, cause somehow the sex scenes are considered a lot more “taboo” then to see people ripping heads of each other.

In most cases, sex is a really beutiful thing, but we strife to hide it as much as possible.

If we would stop treating sex as a “bad” thing and instead educate and encourage children/teenagers to watch “sex scenes” which are “tasteful”, then I think this would be a lot less exiting thing for our young ones… and instead a lot more of a thing they would try to “make perfect” instead of going out and trying to experience this as soon as possible, with almost anyone … so they wouldn´t have to be the only one who hasn´t “done” it yet.

Most kids and teenagers hurry so much … cause this is such a big thing in their eyes since it’s so “taboo”, that they try to get it over with so they are “grown up” in the eyes of their friends.

This all happens because of how we make childen precieve sex.

If we would change the atmosphere and stop treating sex as something “forbidden” or “something that shouln´t be talked about - experienced until a certain age” … and started treating it like "something we encourage, but put strong emphasis on that they do it “correctly” with someone they really want to make “strong emotional ties” with, then I would think that the “underage sex” problem would cut down severly.

Remember … nothing is more exiting at this age then something “only grown-ups” do and is “forbidden” for those who are younger.

And remember … sex deseases are so common since young people rush into having sex, with anyone … cause in their eyes … sex is a thing they “should not be doing” and then it´s something “naughty” and they would really like to do it with someone “naughty” … or it has a certain charm for them … specially young girls (the known “bab boy” appeal).

So all in all … I think if would really try to percieve sex in a different matter … It could really make a difference for our young ones.

I apologize if there are a lot of grammatical/spelling errors … I’m not from an english speaking country.
Pleace tell me your views on this subject.
Cohesion.

Well, personally, I think that sex is just fine and dandy. I also think that, when pursued in a proper fashion, it’s much less physically damaging than, say, inhaling airplane glue. I do not think, however, that underage sex should be encouraged as somehow positive or right.

See, I’ve been a teenager before. I’ve also slept with a teenager. Physically, it was “all systems go!” and no pregnancy (though it did get very close). The act, in and of itself was not a negative experience. It probably would’ve remained a postive experience if not for one crucial factor: teenagers, by and large, are not ready for serious emotional committment.

“No way,” sez you, “teenagers were having committed sex back in prehistoric times/medieval Europe/whatever! They were even having babies! Obviously, since the species didn’t die out, this wasn’t a bad thing! Why aren’t we doing it anymore?”

First off, to quote one of our great thespians in one of his finest roles, “That’s called progress.”

Secondly, back in those days, children “grew up” faster. They were expected to at least start providing for themselves at an earlier age. They were, in other words, self-sufficient, and, given the life expectency of the time, were for all intents and purposes adults. This is not the case with teenagers today, at least not in the demographic you are likely concerned with. They’re still mostly kids; they’re not ready for these ties.

If they realized that they weren’t ready, that’d be one thing. However, they don’t. Remember your first boyfriend/girlfriend that you really, truly cared about (or your first obsessive crush, if nothing else)? You probably thought you were ready, that you were going to stay with this person forever and ever. You probably weren’t. Until a certain level of emotional security and maturity is developed, sex is just Not A Good Idea; and, as many mature Dopers and Children Of Dopers as there are, I highly doubt that there’s any significant number of 13-14 year olds out there who’re ready for sex, even though a significant number of them think that they are.

Because of this, your method of telling them to wait until they’re in a “serious” or “committed” or “have strong emotional ties with” isn’t going to fly. To a 14 year old, what to the rest of the world seems like a mild infatuation or liking feels like the real thing. It’s only later that they realize it isn’t.

Additionally, underage sex laws are meant more to protect children and teenagers from being coerced by someone older. No matter what you say, an experienced 25 year-old can usually easily manipulate a naive 14 year old into having sex–or even worse–simply by virtue of their age.

I agree with you that sex is given a too-intense taboo status. We would do well to discuss it in class (though teaching it or showing it in class* would be a bit much). Birth control pills/patches/shots and condoms (or other forms of barrier protections, though condoms are by far the most effective) should be provided cheaply and anonymously to underage sexually active teenagers, as should–I hate to say it–abortion services. After all, there are teenagers out there that’re going to have sex no matter what you do, and those teenagers should be medically protected in a way that isn’t going to turn them off to the idea of protection.

Sex should still remain, however, something that shouldn’t be experienced (or talked about in great detail) until a “certain age.” What that age should be is, of course, open to interpretation. I will say this, however–you suggest anything under 16, and I will openly laugh in your face.

[sub]I would be all for, however, showing sex depressive-realistically to teenagers. This would include a bored look in one party’s eyes as the other pursues his/her own pleasure, the stopping to put the condom on, the checking to see if the condom’s still on, the trying to dampen the headboard so the neighbors in the next apartment/roommates don’t hear, the leg cramps mid-coitus, the phone ringing right in the middle of it, the climax of only one partner (if we’re talking man/woman, which is the only kind I know and can therefore describe), the woman asking now if the guy would like to get her off TYVM, and then the phone ringing again with a call by a mutual friend who is “standing outside the door” and wants to be let in before she freezes her ass off, leading to one party answering the door in his boxers while the other party hastily dresses. That’d put them off sex for at least the next five years.[/sub]

Big difference–the movies with scenes of people ripping the heads off each other are fake. And everybody knows it.

And apparently the reason why teen pregnancy rates in countries like Sweden are lower than in the U.S. has nothing to do with a society’s openness about sex, but with the availability of birth control to under-18 girls.

First of all, Cohesion, I would like to say that you did an excellent job writing in English, especially considering that it is not your native language.

Now, as for the OP: I’m a little more than a month away from my sixteenth birthday. When the OP refers to children, I’m wondering this is talking about people my age or those younger than I. Personally, I know that some of my peers engage in sexual activity, but not as many as most people think. Personally, I go by what I feel comfortable with. I don’t set boundaries beforehand, but if something makes me feel uncomfortable, I tell the guy to stop. Some advice I gave my friend pretty much sums up my view on the issue: “Wait until you’re completely comfortable with the idea.” Do I feel that I’m ready for sex? To be perfectly honest, I’m not sure. I’ll just continue to go by the idea I hold now, and stop when things start to make me feel uncomfortable.

What I feel is one of the most important issues dealing with this topic today is proper education about birth control. In my state, we’re taught that abstinance is the only good method, and they don’t even explain the other methods. This ends in many teen pregnancies. I heard (from a very reliable source) about a girl my age that has had several pregnancies, all of which have miscarried due to her throwing herself down the stairs or ODing on stuff to abort. Just last year, a dead baby was found in one of the toilets in my school. If kids and teens are going to have sex, they will, whether you lecture them or not. What really needs to be focused on is proper education to avoid some of the more avoidable ramifications of sex, such as pregnancies and STDs.

Our current prohibition against teenage sex began in the Victorian age when “childhood” suddenly emerged. For the first time in history, children were seen as, well, children, not just tiny adults. Women were also infantalized, seen as fragile, delicate creatures, needing shelter from the cruel realities of this world. Suddenly, sexual purity, and more importantly, sexual ignorance were seen as vitally important in becoming a decent, moral adult. (Women never quite achieved this stautus, even when fully grown, remaining quasi-children even after having children of their own. Distaste for sexual knowledge was “proper” for a lady.)

Before the Victorian era, sex was literally right in front of a child. In a time when privacy was impossible to achieve (whole families often slept in the same room) a child would be certain to witness Mom and Dad making them a little sibling. Daughter helped Mother give birth. Barnyard animals cheerfully copulated in front of God and everybody. It would be impossible for a child not to know the mechanics, and consequences, of sex at an early age. Death in childbirth was common, and contraceptives only vaguely effective at best, so pregnancy had a very good chance of resulting from a roll in the hay outside of wedlock. Not to mention the social ramifications of un-wed pregnancy-- so it was best to marry young.

The advent of the Victorian era created the “sanctity of home,” in which marriage and family were idealized. Privacy became important, especially since sex took on a “dirty” aspect, something to be hidden, especially from children. In some areas, women actually went into hiding as soon as pregnancy was suspected, only emerging from seclusion after the birth. It gave childbirth a pseudo-Immaculate Conception aspect. Mrs. Smith retires from public events, and lo and behold returns 9 months later with a child. No bulging stomach to advertise publicly that she had sex.

We still have hold-overs from the Victorian in the way we wish to keep young children ignorant of sex, and older children from doing it, until safely in their twenties. A person from the past would see this as a bizzarre extention of childhood. Whereas they would have married off their child when hormones started raging, we ask our children to supress their natural urges, and to delay marriage until “they’re ready.” A person form the past would have seen readiness in puberty, where we ask for complete maturity, finishing their education and hopefully ensconced in a career before walking down the aisle.

But why are teenagers today so different than those of a few hundred years ago? A person from the past might say that we handicap our children by insisting on an artificially long childhood, not allowing children to become adults by keeping them from all but the most rudimentary forms of responsibility.

Another problem lies in the fact that we do not have a clear line of demarcation in which a child passes into definate adulthood. Where some tribes have rites of passage, we have nothing in our culture to take their place-- a final and definate moment in which we can say, “Now you are a woman/man.” Turning 18 may be a milestone, but many young people are still fully dependant on their parents at that age, both financially, and emotionally. Unlike any creature on earth, we are loath to shove our young from the nest, and thus, in a way, encourage dependancy in a way which would seem astounding to our ancestors.

Video games are clearly fake and sex (let alone nudity) can barely make its way onto the market in them. The most recent game to push the envelope was BMX XXX. BMX XXX even made its way onto CNN and a good number of people were shocked beyond belief that this was being released. So, for the most part, I think the difference between sex and violence, is still an issue of taboo, nothing else.

It’s a little silly our sex taboo. At least in my mind.

As for asking people from hundreds of years ago their thoughts on this sort of subject, I’m inclined to say we pass on that. Adults in that day and age were drowning women to see if they were witches. I think that there’s a DEFINITIVE correlation between this sort of behavior and maturity. We are able to operate on a much more congnizant level just because we are given more time to mature. This age increases all the time. People moving out of the house at 25 or later is increasingly more common. However, I do think there is a point where one must be pushed to mature.

I believe that sex should be taught to children at whatever age they start asking questions. If they are old enough to ask about it, they are old enough to learn about it, and barring asking, they should be taught just prior to puberty regardless.

My sister says she was legally unable to purchase condoms in the state of New Mexico prior to 18. I never tried when I was under 18, except from a machine, so I wouldn’t know, but my friends got them from the courthouse, so I don’t know the veracity of her claim. However she said that the pharmacy wouldn’t sell them to her under 18 there.

Sex is a natural part of life and should be treated as such. In fact I am all for full disclosure with children in general. Once they start asking questions it’s only going to cause problems if you’re dishonest with them.

As for the BMX XXX game, it’s so ridiculous that ANYONE cares.

Erek

The point I was trying to make is that it’s all a matter of perception. We tend to see things only through the narrowed eyes and experience of our generation, whereas an understanding of where we came from, and earlier points of view gives a much broader picture, and helps puts things in perspective. For example, a hundred years ago, birth control was considered immoral and sinful, but today is accepted as a matter of course. (Except by those whose religious beliefs forbid it.) Fifty years ago, the Kinsey report caused a major scandal, whereas today it wouldn’t even make a ripple. We see sexual information in a different light today. Perhaps in the future we will see teenage sex much differently as well.

When it comes to issues of morality, which teenage sex undoubtably is, I like to take a moment to see how attitudes toward the issue have changed over the years. Times may change, but people never do. Opinions on what is moral change dramatically over the years.

I was referring to the late 1700’s, and Victorian period by which time witch hunts were very much a thing of the past.

I am all for open, honest discussion with our under-agers on the subject of sex. The problem is:

If anyone’s children are anything like my daughter, the LAST person they are going to approach about any of that is the parent. It has been my experience (both in adolescence and in raising an adolescent) that if anything is worth knowing, it’s worth hearing from friends at school.

So, the responsibility to discuss these issues lies with me? Yeah right. I bring up the subject (which doesn’t lend itself to a subtle introduction), my daughter leaves skid marks.

Teenagers today, like ALL teenagers before, will have sex when they want to. There is nothing we can do about it. Most will have unprotected sex. Most will believe that the “pull-out” method of birth control really works. Most will have sex to “keep” a boyfriend or girlfriend or to be “cool”.

Even if you were completely open and “cool” and took your daughter down to the health clinic and set her up with the Pill, how are you going to be sure that she doesn’t forget to take it EVERY DAY? What about when she spends the night with friends?

I do not believe that children (and that is what they are until at least 18, even though I hated that when I was underaged) should be exposed to anything and everything. These times that we live in are different than the times before, during, or after the Victorian era. Hell, they are vastly different than the '60s and '70s.

There are diseases now. That alone greatly enhances my efforts to keep my daughter safe. How often do you see a sex scene in a movie where the characters discuss the pros and cons of sex with one another? With what frequency is the protection offered by condoms taken advantage of by these characters? If a character ends up pregnant, is there ever anything but a happy ending? What about when one of them discovers he/she has AIDS?

Hollywood and the mass media are probably the worst source of information available for our children to glean any knowledge from. The best source would be those who have gone before.
…but then again, we that have gone before know nothing about how life is now. We are not cool enough to discuss sex with. Don’t believe me? Just ask a teenager.

Monica (many happy returns for your up-coming birthday!), what a reassuringly mature post from someone of your age. Or any age for that matter.

Teenagers pretty much start having sex when they start desiring it (of course also over-coming the associated hurdles of nervousness, inhibition, finding a consenting partner, somewhere to do it, etc.) and I find it hard to see this changing.

Laws will not prevent or even discourage young people from having sex and I’m not even sure that it being a taboo is an issue. As a society it’s probably about time we accepted that telling people under a certain age to abstain is not viable. Neither are regulations or censorship that attempt to conceal the fascination/obsession that older people have with the subject.

As Monica quite rightly says, we would be better off concentrating on limiting the unwanted side-effects of sexual activity (pregnancy, STDs, emotional stress) that occur primarily through ignorance.

what i dislike about this whole busieness is that we were made to feel ashamed of something that we should not have had to be ashamed of.

i feel that church has had its part in this matter at some point, its just the church’s trademark. church is all about making people feel like sh*t about things they do. it creates an immense sense of guilt and then it grants forgiveness for your sins - truly a devil’s work.

all those people who perpetuate this attitude must be shot. it is a crime to make people feel bad about doing something which does not hurt anybody.

anything can be made to appear a sin, and in fact everything HAS been made by church to be a sin, especially everything that gives pleasure. yet PLEASURE IS THE ONLY REAL REASON TO LIVE.

i would say this - educate yourself about the quantitative effectiveness of various preventive measures, educate yourself about various associated statistics. think of how you can minimize the risks. for example in relation to STDs having sex with 10 different people that you don’t know is clearly more dangerous than 10 times with same person who you know well :slight_smile: as far as pregnancy, no one method is bulletproof so its good to use two different ones at same time, all the time :slight_smile: … this is all just common sense but you need to do some reading to put it all into perspective :slight_smile:

girls keep in mind that you will not look very attractive after 35 years of age or so (imho), and you look your best perhaps between 16-30 or so (imho), do not think that you will live forever. the older you get the faster time goes by.

also, as far as i know, after 20 years old, it becomes less and less safe (although slowly) to give birth :slight_smile: so nature intended you to have sex before 20 rather than after …

monica, about aging, as a child you always wish you were older and then as adult you wish you were younger, THE SCARY PART IS you only have a year or a few years in between when you’re really happy with your age. and if you keep thinking that you’re not mature enough and not ready and other such cr*p you will have LESS of that time in between.

i am 21 years old, in good health and i already wish i was younger :frowning:

that is just another crime against the children - we tell them they will live forever, and by the time they open their eyes its time for them to die too.

Disease is hardly a new phenomenon. Didn’t Al Capone die of syphilis?

I know you weren’t addressing this to me, and I’m sorry, but…what if you’re really not mature enough? What if you really aren’t? ‘Cause, I’m tellin’ you something, I sure as heck wasn’t ready for sex until I was 18. I’d wager I wasn’t even really ready until after the first time I had it (at age 18 1/2).

Now, first of all, hon, your statement of “pleasure is the only real reason to live” is, putting it mildly, a matter of opinion. :slight_smile:

Now let’s assume that this statement is true. Say that I, personally, do not enjoy sex; instead, I enjoy making love. What’s the difference, besides the near-puritanical term substitution? I enjoy the feelings that go along with sex. The love. The mutual consideration. The knowledge that this will happen again, and again. The fact that I am loved, and that I love him, and that we’re happy. This gives me much more pleasure than a random encounter of smooshing bits and orgasm.

This is not to say that sex alone would give me no pleasure whatsoever; I’m sure I’d get some out of it. However, doing so without the committment and love would, to some extent, decrease my ability to find that love in the future (by marring my reputation/scaring away people who want the same kind of committment I do). Moreover, it would decrease the “specialness” and exclusivity of sex. In short, it would vastly decrease the pleasure I get from committed-relationship sex. Also, it would present a greater risk of disease, which is something that would inhibit my pleasure in a multitude of ways.

Masturbation, on the other hand, would provide just about as much “pleasure” as hooking up, without any of the side effects listed above. Hence, when given the choice between a random hookup/one night deal and my hand, I’ll choose my hand. I did that when I was younger because I knew that any relationship that I entered into would be temporary, uncommitted, and not-fun. It was not a religiously principled decision–it was completely hedonistic and based around obtaining the maximum amount of pleasure.

And, btw–not everyone thinks that sex is sinful.

I think I’m the best judge of whether I’m ready or not. When I feel comfortable with it, I will do it. However, I’m not going to rush into it or anything.

Kids start early these days but we keep holding on to our puritan roots. It’s a bunch of BS as far as I am concerned. If it was up to me I would lower the age of consent to 16 as well like most of the rest of the world.

I am not a puritan, I had (safe) sex as a teenager and never regretted it, and I believe that option should be open to all. Pretending to kids that sex does not exist until marriage, and that to be curious or interested in it before that happens is disgusting or ‘sinful’, is destructive and dangerous. Having grown up in a liberal middle-class area, with condom machines in the high-school bathrooms and anonymous birth control clinics aplenty, I am still amazed that people still insist that keeping information like ‘how to prevent pregnancy/diseases’ is seen as dangerous.

However … has anyone noticed how much sex is in the TV shows that kids (I mean, under-10) watch? I’m thinking in particular of the ‘presenters’ on English television - the perky-breasted, scantily-clad, glossy-lipped, nubile young women - but I’m sure there are other examples - start with Britney and Christina. Sex is not just for grown-ups, if you believe the media. But it’s a strange kind of sex - it seems to be showing us (little girls, teenagers, women of all ages) how to be physically attractive to men, which is but a narrow (and inaccurate!) slice of female sexuality.

On another note: I have a friend who is a religious Jew, she and her husband waited until marriage and went through the whole counselling thing that is part and parcel of a Jewish wedding. She explained the attitude to me (and please correct me if I’m wrong: this is partly a solicitation of opinion from those who know better than me!): sex is a very powerful thing, so take it seriously and don’t muck about until you’re sure you know what you’re doing (i.e. with a loving and respectful partner who is committed to your best interests). Once married, though, the teachings are basically, within certain constraints, ‘anything goes’. Her experience is in stark contrast to the people I know who were raised in another one of the N America’s major religions (which shall remain nameless), who are taught that sex is evil and nasty, until married, at which point it becomes acceptable. Their experiences were characterized by confusion and guilt. Not a healthy sexuality !

Mr2001, syphilis, in our time is treatable. AIDS is not. Al Capone (or George Washington or whichever historical figure you want to insert here) died because of lack of treatment or lack of treatment options.

People who are diagnosed HIV+, then go on to develop full-blown AIDS, will not survive merely because the disease itself can’t be cured.

Then there’s HPV (human papilloma-virus). Men show no obvious symptoms, but in women, it can lead to cervical CANCER. (I know this because I had to have a biopsy then an excision of the cancerous cells at 26 years of age.)

Nowadays, we have diseases that are impervious to the previously all-powerful penicillin because as we humans have evolved, so has disease. We have viruses now that cannot be cured or vaccinated against. To me, that is a greater threat than mere pregnancy could ever be.

And the truth is, no matter how “careful” you are with your sexuality, you are ALWAYS susceptible to disease and/or pregnancy. There is no guarantee. There is no real “safe” sex. I will stand by the concept of abstinence, not because of some deep religious backgroud or brainwashing, but because one’s life is a high price to pay for casual experimentation.

Sex can be a serious problem for some teenagers, but the fact is that most of our socities policies towards teenage sex is basically assuming that everyone is at the same level of maturity.

For the most part, sex education is made up of scare tactics – last ditch efforts to stop the kids who are already screwing left and right from getting sick of pregnant. However, they never seem to address the rest of the teens.

They never talk about how incrediably normal it is to think about sex all the time when you’re that age. They don’t discuss masturbation. They never really come out and say “These feelings are normal and you shouldn’t feel guilty for them”. They never say that a teenager might be able to make a responsible desicion to begin a sexual relationship.

Oh, yeah, and there is something seriously wrong with their take of oral sex, because a disturbing amount of teens feel that oral “doesn’t count” and is completely safe.

Angel of the Lord, gotta commend you for your on-point, extremely witty answers! If you are not already a professional writer, do consider it!

Folks:

Don’t neglect to consider the possibility that there might be some characteristic differences between boys and girls regarding how they typically think about, experience, and react to “having sex.”

It’s commonly believed that most boys, even in early adolescence, can accept the offgetting of one’s rocks as sufficient justification for engaging in the act, whereas most girls require a good deal more than mere orgasm (certainly a good deal more than those merest of orgasms they receive from adolescent boys).

There might be reason to argue against any one-gender-fits-all approach to this issue.

After this statement are we still supposed to believe you are being open-minded and reasonable? :confused:

Is this your opinion or a fact? If it is a fact, please cite.

You mean it is really that simple? :eek:

At what age did you develop these rules? I doubt that it was at the age of 16 and yet you criticize Monica for being mature beyond the point most of us were at that age.

I wish that somehow I could save that statement and check every 5 years with you and those around you to see what the reaction would be. The only part I would agree to is about time passing by faster.

A cite is definitely needed for this. Here is my cite.

[sup]The other 9 reasons maybe open to debate, but the above quote directly opposes your contention.[/sup]

To put this in perspective I’d like to say that I am 64 and really happy with my age. My wife always wanted to be a flight attendant and she became one at age 58, after we raised 5 children. Neither of us want to go back to “another age”. We’ve been there and know the joys and problems. We’re now looking forward to new joys and problems. :stuck_out_tongue:

I think I remember using that line myself (way-back-when). About the same time as “How do you know you like bourbon, if you’ve never tasted scotch?” I think I was 19/21 at the time.

How much younger? Say about Monica’s age?

So there’s no pleasure in life after the age of 20 and all there is to look forward to is dying*?* :rolleyes: