Professor Orangey's Health Class

[Orangey]

Hah, I can't wait to see what Chris calls the splinter-thread this is eventually going to end up as.

[Silfedac]

Silf, he's implying that it's pre-teen pregnancy is the real problem, not teen pregnancy.

Oh. Then EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!

Also, is your view about teen sex religiously or morally based?

I'm not sure. I just don't think it's right.

[Orangey]

I'm not sure. I just don't think it's right.

Hmm. That's an odd viewpoint for someone your age in this society, especially if it doesn't stem from religious dogma. You're certainly in the minority; is it possible you inherited this opinion from your parents, or did you come to that conclusion on your own?

Chris, you're hilarious.

[Pieman]

He probably doesn't like it because people underage are generally underdeveloped.

[Orangey]

Man, this has been a perfectly tasteful conversation until now. Why you gotta be that way?

Unless you meant mentally, in which case, disregard this post.

[Silfedac]

He probably doesn't like it because people underage are generally underdeveloped.

Huh! You should see some of the girls at my school. Trust me, many words come to mind, but "underdeveloped" isn't one of them.

Hmm. That's an odd viewpoint for someone your age in this society, especially if it doesn't stem from religious dogma. You're certainly in the minority; is it possible you inherited this opinion from your parents, or did you come to that conclusion on your own?

I just don't see how the appeal outweighs the risks. I mean, it's only going to be a few minutes at our age, and you could get saddled with STDs or kids. It just doesn't seem like it would be worth it to take the chance.

[Orangey]

I just don't see how the appeal outweighs the risks. I mean, it's only going to be a few minutes at our age, and you could get saddled with STDs or kids. It just doesn't seem like it would be worth it to take the chance.

Huh. As mechanically inaccurate as that may or may not be, that's a reasonable viewpoint; I'm sorry for prying, but I admit: I'm a closet sexologist. I've always found psychology fascinating, and a variety of factors make sexual psychology some of the most complicated and interesting psychology out there. in addition, I have a group of friends who largely adhere to the school of thought that if you're responsible, you'll probably be fine, so I don't really have the opportunity to pick the brains of someone anti-sex.

[Pieman]

Freud.

[Silfedac]

Oh, don't get me wrong. I'm not anti-sex. I guess that all those Health Class videos and slideshows got to me, and I really believe that if you do go all the way with someone, you should be willing to commit to that person.

[Orangey]

I didn't mean anti-sex so much as anti-sex-before-marriage/commitment. You know what I mean.

[Silfedac]

Yeah, I guess.

[Torg]

I really believe that if you do go all the way with someone, you should be willing to commit to that person.

Sounds like it's at least partially religion-based, then. Maybe not directly, but if you trace that idea to its source, I'd bet that some church was involved.

sex-ed is widespread and generally teaches good habits.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Wait, you're serious?
Really, the only person who pays attention in those classes is Silf. Everyone else wastes no time in forgetting everything taught.

I have no intention of having sex before I'm out of college, but I had decided that before I had even known my school had mandatory sex-ed classes. It's just not financially a smart move. Plenty of other people have, to my knowledge, not had sex yet, but very few of them seem concerned about sexually transmitted diseases.

Besides, the way of teaching those classes is logically flawed. "Don't have sex until you get married, or you could get sick." The entire premise of those classes seems to be that you become immune to STD's during the marriage ceremony.

[the Scarf]

It's not the physical problems (Pregnancies, STDs) that I worry about so much in this society as it is about the mental things. Sex is (believe it or not) an emotional thing as well as a physical, and it can cause lots of issues for people who aren't ready. Many people think that they are, but in truth, only THINK that they are. It has effects, and other things happen. It doesn't make you more 'mature' or anything, really...

What I find the worst, however, is what media has done to the subject. Not only does it glorify sex overall, it encourages underage sex, unprotected sex, sex as a casual thing. There is also the issue of double standards. A guy who has lots of sex is a 'playa' or other positive connotation, a girl who does the same is a 'slut' or something else negative. Then there are the girls (or guys) who are too young, but feel like it's an obligation to give it to their girl/boyfriend. At that age, it's nearly impossible to be ready for something that big.

There is a lot around this issue, but all in all, it's better just to wait.


(Silf: Haha I don't have to watch those videos because I took health online!)

[Orangey]

Sounds like it's at least partially religion-based, then. Maybe not directly, but if you trace that idea to its source, I'd bet that some church was involved.

That's not necessarily a reasonable assumption; plenty of people (especially those who attach an emotional or personal context to sex) feel that way, regardless of religion or lack thereof.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Wait, you're serious?
Really, the only person who pays attention in those classes is Silf. Everyone else wastes no time in forgetting everything taught.

The statistics would beg to differ.

Besides, the way of teaching those classes is logically flawed. "Don't have sex until you get married, or you could get sick."

Fewer schools offer abstinence-only sex education than do comprehensive. There are still a good few who offer only abstinence-only and make it hard for sexually active teens to obtain birth control, and that's regrettable; hopefully the system will become more centralized and standardized in the near future.

As to Scarf's points, I feel the most important one she brought up was the media's role in the changing attitude towards sex; I would argue that the media reflects the predominant views, rather than influences them. I feel that the real reason for the 'sexual revolution' was the taboos we attached to sex in our puritan through victorian era history; were sex not so forbidden, it wouldn't have become a attractive as it is, especially to those who may be emotionally or physically unprepared. If more parents were wiling to talk to their children about sex, and if there weren't so many factions demonizing it, I feel things would be very different. Unfortunately, there's no exam to qualify for parenthood, besides the practical.

[Drakey]

Okay. While that is all well and good, it's not what I was talking about. I'm talking about how girls below a certain age shouldn't begetting pregnant.

...sluts...

I'd just like to point out that if this is a typo, it is... HI-FREAKIN'-LARIOUS!

Now, on to sex.

Personally, I rather suspect that my views on the subject are deeply distorted. While I believe that in an ideal world, premarital sex wouldn't be an issue because it just wouldn't happen, I also believe that marriage is not a prerequisite, morally, spiritually, or emotionally, to sex.
Responsibility, on hte other hand....

It gets even crazier when you take my sexuality into account. While, given the chance, there are some girls I'd probably jump into bed with without a preexisting relationship, a couple that I know well and would jump at the chance, and many that I would have to know, I would try to at least see, in most cases, if she wanted to wait for a more serious comittment.
But the problem there is that I live in a place where, let's face it, the scenario I find myself most enamored with is severely unlikely.  Any sex that I would have with another guy would be premarital, because marital sex would require a preexisting illegal situation unless I were to go to great expense to correct that situation, and even then I'm not entirely sure what the laws are about crossing state lines and the like.
As I've said, I don't think that marriage is a prerequisite for sex, but then, I don't think that sex is a prerequisite for a healthy relationship if you do it right any more than I think that you absosmurfly must see a movie together once a month.
Incidentally, if seeing a movie together once a month is, in fact, a prerequisite, I have a very healthy relationship with my brother, his wife, and their two children.

I also wish that just once, Nemo would actually die in that stupid baggie.

[Silfedac]

Really, the only person who pays attention in those classes is Silf. Everyone else wastes no time in forgetting everything taught.

Wrong. Many other students still speak with horror of the "STD aftereffects" slides.

Besides, the way of teaching those classes is logically flawed. "Don't have sex until you get married, or you could get sick." The entire premise of those classes seems to be that you become immune to STD's during the marriage ceremony.

Wrong again. The classes teach that if you don't have sex until after you're married, you drastically reduce the chance of getting an STD, because you're only having sex with one person.

Sounds like it's at least partially religion-based, then. Maybe not directly, but if you trace that idea to its source, I'd bet that some church was involved.

Not necessarily wrong, but probably inaccurate. I didn't go to church until I was 12, and formed my opinions back at age 9 when we had our first health class in the fourth grade.

[the Scarf]

What annoys me is the schools that push abstinence and only abstinence. Ignorance is not bliss, people! ARG. *frustrated.*

[Orangey]

Approximately 70% of schools offer sex-ed that includes contraception in addition to abstinence; abstinence-only is well in the minority.

[Pieman]

Q: Which is better - ignorance or abstinence?

A: I neither know nor care.

[Orangey]

For the person who started this discussion with his mention of his legality, you sure haven't said much about your views.

[Pieman]

I'm not too bothered really; If someone wants to ruin their life, it's their choice.

[the Scarf]

Really, now....most people don't know what they're getting themselves into.

I like the %70, I wish it was more...The people who need to know it the most are the ones who live in areas where it's not taught.

[Pieman]

That's because people who are taught know about it.

[Silfedac]

My class mostly promoted abstinence, but encouraged that if we didn't abstain, that we use protection. And both my Junior High and High School have had programs to help teen mothers.

[the Scarf]

My class mostly promoted abstinence, but encouraged that if we didn't abstain, that we use protection. And both my Junior High and High School have had programs to help teen mothers.

Optimal program, right there.

The problem is the people who live in areas where it's never talked about, or even acknowledged! The schools don't help them, the parents don't help them. When they actually get to it they don't know what to do....

[juneloveslotr]

I just don't see how the appeal outweighs the risks. I mean, it's only going to be a few minutes at our age, and you could get saddled with STDs or kids. It just doesn't seem like it would be worth it to take the chance.

The appeal can be much more then physical. In granted rare cases (but they do happen, PP and I are proof), a sexual, emotional, and lasting relationship can develop at a young age. The appeal of sex then becomes the intimacy you can develop through the use of it. Plus, if you and your partner are monogamy, risk of STDs is minimal, and protecting from pregnancy is pretty trivial.

And about the "it's only going to be a few minutes at our age" comment, men hit their sexual peak at between 18 and 22, but the years before that the sex drive is still very high. Plus, men are more willing to learn how to please a women when they're younger and less experienced because they realize that don't know everything yet.
If a young couple is only lasting a few minutes, it's more likely due to a lack of time and place then the longevity of the people involved.

[Silfedac]

June, you're poking holes in completely rational and widely accepted theories again.

[juneloveslotr]

I'm not so sure it's as rational as anyone believes it is. It has a lot of base in the Christian view that premarital sex in a sin.

[Silfedac]

Not necessarily, as I have said. I formed this view before I ever went to a church.

[Torg]

As she said, if you're monogamous, it doesn't really matter whether or not you've walked down the aisle.