Search forums

Forums

Export thread

Abstinence totally works guys, no matter what the pregnancy rate say...

Jul 22, 2011#1

@Li3n

http://www.justin.tv/texastribune/b...hive_embed_click&utm_source=www-cdn.justin.tv

Ah Texas...

Jul 22, 2011#2

bhamv3

So... basically he spent the interview saying, "It works. It just does, okay? Evidence and statistics be damned, I know it works!"

Jul 22, 2011#3

MindDetective

Here's where I think the disconnect might be: Abstinence CLEARLY prevents unwanted pregnancies and the transmission of STDs. If you don't have sex those things won't happen. Abstinence education is about trying to control other people so that they won't engage in sex. Perhaps "control" is too strong of a word, but the point is that abstinence education does not equal abstinence. Abstinence will obviously work. Getting horny homo sapiens to commit to abstinence is something else entirely.

Jul 22, 2011#4

@Li3n

Not having been dropped on my head repeatedly as a child i actually got that the first time i watched the video...

He was dodging the question at first, and then made some weak excuses about it not being taught right... which showed he did understand the difference, unless he was thinking they're not teaching them how to not put the penis into the vagina the right way...

Jul 22, 2011#5

Chibibar

You can teach anyone anything, but will they do or understand it is a whole different ball game.

Jul 22, 2011#6

Shegokigo

Being gay works better for avoiding unwanted pregnancies.

Needless to say, my school didn't offer Sex Ed till last Middle School and I was not amused.

Jul 22, 2011#7

strawman

If parents decide to let other people teach their own children about sex, and don't address the topic with their own children themselves, they may have sub-optimal results.

I laugh at people that complain about abstinence only education. They aren't your children, and if they are, surely you're having discussions with them about your expectations for them regarding sex, right? The other parents who also disagree with this form of education will also address the problem with their own children.

The school merely builds a foundation on which anyone's belief's can be added. The school should not be putting a building on that foundation, though. In the same way that they build a foundation of math, but let the kids decide if they are going to go into engineering, science, or leave that foundation empty and go into a non-math career, they should be teaching reproductive health in a way that allows children to build on it according to their own and their family's beliefs.

Abstinence only education is merely the beginning of one's sexual health.

I imagine it could be taught better in many places. But those specific concerns should be addressed - there is little point in attacking the whole idea of abstinence.

Jul 22, 2011#8

Ravenpoe

stienman said:
If parents decide to let other people teach their own children about sex, and don't address the topic with their own children themselves, they may have sub-optimal results.

I laugh at people that complain about abstinence only education. They aren't your children, and if they are, surely you're having discussions with them about your expectations for them regarding sex, right? The other parents who also disagree with this form of education will also address the problem with their own children.

The school merely builds a foundation on which anyone's belief's can be added. The school should not be putting a building on that foundation, though. In the same way that they build a foundation of math, but let the kids decide if they are going to go into engineering, science, or leave that foundation empty and go into a non-math career, they should be teaching reproductive health in a way that allows children to build on it according to their own and their family's beliefs.

Abstinence only education is merely the beginning of one's sexual health.

I imagine it could be taught better in many places. But those specific concerns should be addressed - there is little point in attacking the whole idea of abstinence.

I don't think most people against it are against it because of abstinence. Abstinence really is the only certain way to avoid pregnancy and stds. Rather, it's the "only" part of abstinence only. It's teaching important health information and leaving out a significant portion of the material on the idea that such information will lead children down an immoral path.

Teen pregnancy also has a social impact, so allowing the absence of such education on the idea that it's not your kid isn't really valid. Who cares if they're not teaching kids how to read, you can read to your child and ignore the rest.

Jul 22, 2011#9

strawman

Hm. I guess it's only a problem in certain states? We were taught contraceptive methods. Whether you wait until you're married, or you have sex early, you should still understand these things. What do they expect, people who chose to wait for marraige are going to go to some sort of sex finishing school where they'll learn the rest of the story?

Our society is buyilt on information and information technology.

Hiding information is almost never the correct answer.

I didn't realize that some places still taught, "This is how sex works, how babies are made, and how diseases are transmitted. There's nothing you can do except wait until you're married - if you have sex before then you're going to get pregnant and die of aids. Good luck!"

There's no palm large enough for that face.

Jul 22, 2011#10

AshburnerX

stienman said:
I didn't realize that some places still taught, "This is how sex works, how babies are made, and how diseases are transmitted. There's nothing you can do except wait until you're married - if you have sex before then you're going to get pregnant and die of aids. Good luck!"

That's essentially how they taught it back when I had Sex Ed for the first time, but then again my area of Ohio was fairly Red back then. I literally didn't know what a condom was until Trojan started showing commercials for them back in late 90's and even then I had to look online to find out. It's just not the sort of things conservative Catholic parents tell their kids about I guess...

Jul 22, 2011#11

Ravenpoe

stienman said:
Hm. I guess it's only a problem in certain states? We were taught contraceptive methods. Whether you wait until you're married, or you have sex early, you should still understand these things. What do they expect, people who chose to wait for marraige are going to go to some sort of sex finishing school where they'll learn the rest of the story?

Our society is buyilt on information and information technology.

Hiding information is almost never the correct answer.

I didn't realize that some places still taught, "This is how sex works, how babies are made, and how diseases are transmitted. There's nothing you can do except wait until you're married - if you have sex before then you're going to get pregnant and die of aids. Good luck!"

There's no palm large enough for that face.

Seems we agree then, you just assumed people were being rational human beings. Always a dangerous assumption.

Unfortunately, when people (read: politicians) talk about abstinence education, they're taking about abstinence ONLY education. Because if you teach kids about safe sex practices, they're all going to have sex with each other, all the time, usually while blaspheming the Lord.

Jul 22, 2011#12

@Li3n

Shegokigo said:
Being gay works better for avoiding unwanted pregnancies.

Gay only sex education, IT WORKS!

stienman said:
But those specific concerns should be addressed - there is little point in attacking the whole idea of abstinence.

Teaching abstinence is to sex education like teaching that numbers are magic is to math education... "don't do it" doesn't teach you anything about teh subject.

Including the advantages of abstinence while teaching sex education is a whole different thing, and i don't think anyone (well maybe NAMBLA) is against that...

Jul 22, 2011#13

Frankie Williamson

I learned what a condom was watching Degrassi with my parents when I was 8 when Spike got pregnant. My parents were honest about everything when I asked questions as parents should be, IN MY OPINION IDON'THAVEKIDSSOMYOPINIONDOESN'TMATTER.

Jul 22, 2011#14

@Li3n

Ravenpoe said:
Abstinence really is the only certain way to avoid pregnancy and stds.

Re-used needles and blood transfusions say hi on the STD front, and infertility on the pregnancy part... (what can i say, i'm a pedant).

Jul 22, 2011#15

GasBandit

I guess the proper terminology is abstinence WOULD work, if we didn't have a millions-of-years old evolution-instilled biological imperative to NOT be abstinent.

Jul 22, 2011#16

Denbrought

This always seem so foreign to me. Learnt about human reproduction in elementary school, put condoms on dildos when I was 12-13, and my school had no unwanted pregnancies that were acknowledged (for all I know, someone might've gotten an abortion, but no idea).

Then I come to the states and my best friend regales me with stories of constant pregnancies in his high school, in the county with the highest teen pregnancy rate in Georgia. Then he talked about the sex-ed he recieved, and I was all "wait wut."

Jul 22, 2011#17

@Li3n

GasBandit said:
I guess the proper terminology is abstinence WOULD work, if we didn't have a millions-of-years old evolution-instilled biological imperative to NOT be abstinent.

Having a sex drive is a choice...

Jul 22, 2011#18

GasBandit

@Li3n said:
Having a sex drive is a choice...

See, and when I make the argument that human beings are little better than impulsive beasts, and that eons of evolutionary programming trumps a couple thousand years of so-called "civilization" when it comes to behavior, people usually call me names.

Jul 22, 2011#19

Adammon

@Li3n said:
Re-used needles and blood transfusions say hi on the STD front, and infertility on the pregnancy part... (what can i say, i'm a pedant).

Pedantically speaking, an STD is an infection that has a negligible probability of transmission by means other than sexual contact. It just so happens that the mechanism for infection for blood is similar enough to the mechanism for semen and vaginal fluids that the two get confused.

Jul 22, 2011#20

@Li3n

When someone refers to getting an STD i assume they mean the actual virus, and thus the method of transmission is less important...

Jul 22, 2011#21

Ravenpoe

@Li3n said:
When someone refers to getting an STD i assume they mean the actual virus, and thus the method of transmission is less important...

NOTHING IS LESS IMPORTANT WITH PEDANTICS!

Did I even use that word correctly? Fuck it. Post!

Jul 22, 2011#22

Hailey Knight

Denbrought said:
This always seem so foreign to me. Learnt about human reproduction in elementary school, put condoms on dildos when I was 12-13, and my school had no unwanted pregnancies that were acknowledged (for all I know, someone might've gotten an abortion, but no idea).

Then I come to the states and my best friend regales me with stories of constant pregnancies in his high school, in the county with the highest teen pregnancy rate in Georgia. Then he talked about the sex-ed he recieved, and I was all "wait wut."

That's because we're stupid as fuck here and aim to keep it that way. If we don't tell kids that sex exists, they'll never do it. See?

Jul 22, 2011#23

@Li3n

Ravenpoe said:
NOTHING IS LESS IMPORTANT WITH PEDANTICS!

But i'm assuming none of the other ppl i'm talking to are pedants...

Jul 22, 2011#24

MindDetective

@Li3n said:
But i'm assuming none of the other ppl i'm talking to are pedants...

you must be new here

Jul 22, 2011#25

sixpackshaker

Abstinence by definition works. Abstinence Education and Pledges fail.

Jul 23, 2011#26

@Li3n

MindDetective said:
you must be new here

Nah, i'm just comparing you guys to me... and you all fail at it...

Jul 24, 2011#27

Silver Jelly

Denbrought said:
This always seem so foreign to me. Learnt about human reproduction in elementary school, put condoms on dildos when I was 12-13, and my school had no unwanted pregnancies that were acknowledged (for all I know, someone might've gotten an abortion, but no idea).

I studied in a catholic nun school and, while I never put condoms on dildos, even my backwards sex education was better than just "don't do it". Of course, it depended on the year, but we even got solid advice once or twice...

But it seems it got worse as time passed: my younger brother didn't learn in class about the physical differences in men and women's genitalia until much later than I did... And my little sister is getting teached all kinds of stuff about ecology and some organs, but no reproduction.

Jul 24, 2011#28

Espy

I went to a private christian school until I was about 12 or 13 and I got a very thorough sex education, even though abstinence was a part of it.

Jul 24, 2011#29

Cajungal

My sex education was extremely lacking. It was pretty much all abstinence and "freshness" talk. We talked a lot about families and the role of people in that family. To be fair, the P.E. teacher who taught it opened the floor for questions, and we all clammed up. I learned a lot with books... and my awesome mom bought us a Mayo Clinic CD-Rom tutorial thing when I was a kid, and she took me on a computer tour of my lady parts. That was actually fun... we made jokes about how our insides look like an inside-out deer.

Jul 24, 2011#30

Shegokigo

Um, "Mayo Clinic"?

That just has WRONG written all over it.
:awesome:

Jul 24, 2011#31

Cajungal

Harrrrrr.

Jul 24, 2011#32

SpecialKO

I must be tired, because I found that funny.

Jul 24, 2011#33

ThatNickGuy

Shegokigo said:
Being gay works better for avoiding unwanted pregnancies.

That's a damn lie and you know it!

Everybody knows gay babies are totally why we've having an overpopulation problem!

Wait, hang on...

Jul 24, 2011#34

blotsfan

My school didn't have sex ed so I ended up learning it from south park. Probably didn't warp me any.

Jul 25, 2011#35

Ravenpoe

I learned about sex the old fashioned way. Squinting really hard at scrambled porn.

Jul 25, 2011#36

@Li3n

blotsfan said:
My school didn't have sex ed so I ended up learning it from south park. Probably didn't warp me any.

That explains all the radio dishes you keep ordering...

Jul 25, 2011#37

Denbrought

Silver Jelly said:
But it seems it got worse as time passed: my younger brother didn't learn in class about the physical differences in men and women's genitalia until much later than I did... And my little sister is getting teached all kinds of stuff about ecology and some organs, but no reproduction.

D: That doesn't sound very good, is she at least learning about reproduction of other animals? Like chickens, cows, ... I'd say you should get or buy her one of those "where babies come from" book for kids or something. I think I have an old one from when I was 5-6 lying around the house somewhere, I can look for it.

Jul 25, 2011#38

Silver Jelly

Denbrought said:
D: That doesn't sound very good, is she at least learning about reproduction of other animals? Like chickens, cows, ... I'd say you should get or buy her one of those "where babies come from" book for kids or something. I think I have an old one from when I was 5-6 lying around the house somewhere, I can look for it.

Don't worry, I'm his older brother, but I'm also a personal encyclopedia for her. What she isn't learning at shcool, she'll learn it at home.

From me, because if she has to get the same kind of sex talk I got from my parents, she'll just be warned against pedophiles...

(as a Side note, when I was told that older people may be interested in me, I couldn't see what the problem was in being found attractive by a 20 /30 years old ("older" is such a relative term!) girl. )

Jul 25, 2011#39

Denbrought

Silver Jelly said:
From me, because if she has to get the same kind of sex talk I got from my parents, she'll just be warned against pedophiles...

(as a Side note, when I was told that older people may be interested in me, I couldn't see what the problem was in being found attractive by a 20 /30 years old ("older" is such a relative term!) girl. )

Hah. My parents never warned me about that, didn't learn about paedophilia being a thing until I got unmonitored access to the internet at age 11 (protip: bad idea). Didn't pay attention to the news at that age, so I never heard about police CP busts and stuff like that.

Jul 25, 2011#40

Chibibar

It is human nature to reproduce (hence why it feels good doing it IMO) I would teach my kids about sex cause I wouldn't want to be a grandfather unexpectedly. It is quite difficult to control some urges. And we all know that some people have no control of themselves at all

Jul 26, 2011#41

Norris

Let's see, in fifth grade, we had discussions of puberty. In sixth grade, more puberty with some light STD and pregnancy talk. Seventh grade, we got light puberty with lots of graphic STD talk. The teachers were officially not allowed to talk about condoms (divided up by gender to this point) or any form of birth control other than abstinence. Nothing eighth or ninth grade (traditionally). Tenth grade (high school sophomore), you got a full run down on the various methods of birth control and their success rates when used correctly. No hands on (dildos) practice, but it was emphasized that we should read any instructions given with whatever method we chose to use and made reasonably sure to follow them. However, technically, you could take health class in high school whenever you wanted. Most people took it in sophomore year, but the classes would undoubtedly include everything freshies to seniors. Seeing as I knew people who were becoming sexually active in eighth grade, perhaps that's a little late to be effective.

Jul 27, 2011#42

David

I never had sex ed. My class was pretty much just thrown into a lecture from a feminist on No Means No. Basically "don't play that game, you horny brats know what we're talking about."

Jul 27, 2011#43

Chibibar

I personally never understood the idea of "don't teach them and they won't do it" when it comes to sex. When puberty hits, you get all kinds of emotions and physical changes. The internet is not really being secret about it, so the parents should at least teach their children the basics IMO, cause they are going to learn it from somewhere (The internet, their friends, porn mags. Yea I had access since I was 12 and that is nothing new)

Maybe ignoring the fact 20 years ago works (i.e. don't talk about it) but with information FLYING around in the speed of tweet/facebook status, it is hard to "keep this under wraps"
Kids will discover sex early and will participate cause you got to admit, sex does feel good. (when done right)

Jul 27, 2011#44

@Li3n

Chibibar said:
Maybe ignoring the fact 20 years ago works (i.e. don't talk about it)

No, i'm pretty sure we did fine in finding out ourselves (of course no parents i heard of found that unusual, so there might be some cultural bias in ym assessment).

And haven't any of you guys done the "show em yours and i'll show you mine" as a little kid?

Jul 27, 2011#45

Chibibar

@Li3n said:
No, i'm pretty sure we did fine in finding out ourselves (of course no parents i heard of found that unusual, so there might be some cultural bias in ym assessment).

And haven't any of you guys done the "show em yours and i'll show you mine" as a little kid?

You are right, but then what is causing the right rate of pregnancy? more reporting?

A friend of mine told me that "bad stuff" around the world have always happen in the past and present, it is just that in the world of internet, such news get around faster so we now know more.

But some of the teen pregnancy report shows differently in terms of rise BUT is that percentage rise or just pure number? There are MORE people now than say 20 years ago so in pure number of course it is going to rise (if thing always have been that way) but if it is a percentage ratio rise, that is a different story)

I think that made sense

Jul 27, 2011#46

Cajungal

I thought I saw on the news that teen pregnancy was actually going down a little bit. I could be wrong. Can anyone confirm? If it is true, I guess it seems like it happens more often today because we don't send pregnant girls off to "live with an aunt" for a year while she has the baby and then ditches him/her.

Jul 27, 2011#47

Piotyr

Actually, teen pregnancy is at the lowest rate it's been in 70 years...

Jul 27, 2011#48

Chibibar

Piotyr said:
Actually, teen pregnancy is at the lowest rate it's been in 70 years...

What about 2010 and 2011?
I am glad it is lowered (thank for the correction) so I guess it is more of "news on the internet" that more people know about it thus think it is 'higher'

Jul 27, 2011#49

Piotyr

Chibibar said:
What about 2010 and 2011?
I am glad it is lowered (thank for the correction) so I guess it is more of "news on the internet" that more people know about it thus think it is 'higher'

Don't think they've finished collecting/analyzing 2010 data yet, which is why they've just recently (as of April) reported on the 2009 data.

As for the actual reason, that's anyone's guess. The teen pregnancy rate is still higher in the US than most other countries, but it's been trending significantly downward the past 20 years. Some people even credit reality TV shows that teens watch that show them how much it sucks to be a teen making a living with a baby.

Jul 27, 2011#50

Cajungal

Aha, thank you, Piotyr.

Jul 27, 2011#51

strawman

Piotyr said:
Actually, teen pregnancy is at the lowest rate it's been in 70 years...

Does the teen pregnancy rate include pregnancies terminated by abortion, or just pregnancies carried full term? Wikipedia's definition isn't clear on this, and the article you link to suggests to me that it's only counting those that are carried full term.

In a conversation on contraception, unless we accept abortion as a form of contraception, we have to make sure we understand how they measured "teen pregnancy is at it's lowest" ...

Jul 27, 2011#52

@Li3n

stienman said:
Does the teen pregnancy rate include pregnancies terminated by abortion, or just pregnancies carried full term?

Well according to the article they certainly take it into account: Blacks and Hispanic teen girls are two to three times more likely to give birth than white teens.

Jul 27, 2011#53

Piotyr

Here is the original CDC report on the issue: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6013a5.htm?s_cid=mm6013a5_w

The word abortion isn't used once in the article, so perhaps the CDC simply considers it a form of contraception.

EDIT: Another option to consider is the confidentiality of abortions preventing the CDC from being able to actually collect that kind of data.

Jul 27, 2011#54

Chibibar

Piotyr said:
Here is the original CDC report on the issue: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6013a5.htm?s_cid=mm6013a5_w

The word abortion isn't used once in the article, so perhaps the CDC simply considers it a form of contraception.

EDIT: Another option to consider is the confidentiality of abortions preventing the CDC from being able to actually collect that kind of data.

I am all about pro-choice but I cringe each time when people use abortion as a form of contraception.

Jul 27, 2011#55

@Li3n

Piotyr said:
EDIT: Another option to consider is the confidentiality of abortions preventing the CDC from being able to actually collect that kind of data.

They should still have the number of abortions... they should just not be able to tie it to race or social status...

Jul 27, 2011#56

Piotyr

@Li3n said:
They should still have the number of abortions... they should just not be able to tie it to race or social status...

...or age.

Jul 28, 2011#57

@Li3n

Or hair colour...

Jul 28, 2011#58

Norris

@Li3n said:
Or hair colour...

Since the question was whether or not abortions would be included in the teen pregnancy rate, the agencies tabulating that rate being legally prohibited from getting figures on the ages of women who've had abortions is somewhat relevant.

Jul 28, 2011#59

strawman

I'm quite certain that anonymous statistics are required and gathered from abortion providers. Very general numbers, such as number of abortions this month, number of abortions in each age group, number of abortions in each ethnic/racial group, etc.

Jul 29, 2011#60

@Li3n

Norris said:
Since the question was whether or not abortions would be included in the teen pregnancy rate, the agencies tabulating that rate being legally prohibited from getting figures on the ages of women who've had abortions is somewhat relevant.

Right, i kinda just posted that out of reflex...

But i'm guessing that they don't need the exact ages to be recorded, as minors are likely treated differently when it comes to getting an abortion.

Aug 5, 2011#61

Adammon

Shit, I need MORE teenage girls to get knocked up so I can adopt. The waiting lines are HUGE.

Aug 5, 2011#62

GasBandit

Adammon said:
Shit, I need MORE teenage girls to get knocked up so I can adopt. The waiting lines are HUGE.

I'll get right on it.

(muffled) What? No I... It's a j... Hey! No! Y... No. Alright! Sheesh!

Never mind. Spousal Veto.

Aug 5, 2011#63

Hailey Knight

Adammon said:
Shit, I need MORE teenage girls to get knocked up so I can adopt. The waiting lines are HUGE.

It's mind-boggling to me how there can be such an outcry over teen pregnancy and yet such enormous adoption waiting lines.

Aug 5, 2011#64

blotsfan

Theres more demand than supply for adoption? Why do we still have foster care then?

Aug 5, 2011#65

Frankie Williamson

Adopters only want babies. Once they reach a certain age, well, they're after the best before.

Aug 5, 2011#66

strawman

blotsfan said:
Theres more demand than supply for adoption? Why do we still have foster care then?

A lot of foster care are for children removed from homes whose parents still have rights to the children, and thus are in the foster care system and cannot be adopted out.

Further, many adoptive couples choose to wait until they get the child they want - and typicially that child has no significant medical problems, is not a member of a minority group, and was born to a mother who actually took care of herself during her pregnancy.

Adoption is expensive, and they would rather wait 5-10 years, and pay their $10k or more once for what they perceive will be a better fit for them.

If, however, you want a black child, or a baby who was born addicted to cocaine, or suffers from fetal alcohol syndrome, you don't have to wait nearly as long. You will also have an easier time adopting an older child than a newborn, but that too has its own set of challenges.

Aug 5, 2011#67

AshburnerX

Frankie Williamson said:
Adopters only want babies. Once they reach a certain age, well, they're after the best before.

Basically this. People know how awful the foster care systems can be so they try to get kids that haven't been in them long, so older kids (teenagers especially) tend to have a "damaged goods" stigma attached to them. There is also the fact that many parents want the "complete experience" of raising a child... or more to the point, to have a child that they KNOW will think of them as their only parents.

So yeah... the further you get past the young child stage (basically, once they kids are old enough to be attending school), the less likely they are to be adopted.

However, a lot of the problem is also that adoption agencies have some VERY strict standards for parents. Many organizations are faith based. Virtually all of them require you to be married and/or a college graduate. It is also quite hard to adopt outside your race and many agencies won't consider same-sex couples. That's not even getting into the housing situation and income requirements, let alone the huge fees you have to pay the agency.

Aug 5, 2011#68

blotsfan

Oh. I didn't even know adoption was handled by outside organizations. I thought it was something the government took care of.

Aug 5, 2011#69

AshburnerX

blotsfan said:
Oh. I didn't even know adoption was handled by outside organizations. I thought it was something the government took care of.

I can't really speak for places outside the US, but in the US, states usually pay outside organizations to take care of kids. Because no single organization has the manpower to cover all the wards (and because many have philosophical differences on what constitutes a fit parent), this means that you might have dozens of groups working in a single city or state.

Aug 5, 2011#70

Hailey Knight

So self-fucked like every other government institution.

Understood.

Aug 5, 2011#71

Adammon

Adoption in Canada is done by private agencies with a very strict structure from the government. It will cost us upwards of $25,000 once completed. We just finished our home study with alone cost us $6000.

Aug 10, 2011#72

@Li3n

Adammon said:
Shit, I need MORE teenage girls to get knocked up so I can adopt. The waiting lines are HUGE.

Have you though about moving to Texas?

Forums