abstinence only education works?

[Hayabusa Rider]

wut?

Statutory rape is an arbitrary limit based on societal norms, and therefore passe.

or-


Wut?

 

[sandorski]

Statutory rape is an arbitrary limit based on societal norms, and therefore passe.

or-


Wut?

Wow, total Fail. Where the fuck did I even hint at that?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Wow, total Fail. Where the fuck did I even hint at that?

My comment was to "clarify" what you quoted. It wasn't directed at you.

Make more sense now?

 

[Kirby]

Condoms for 9 year olds?

 

[Carmen813]

Well, just reading that summary article I can already see one problem with this study. Anyone care to guess what it is?

If anyone finds the actual research article please make a post.

 

[sandmanwake]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiR73C_xFO8

 

[Atreus21]

wut?

I asked what standards you have for when kids should either abstain from or engage in sex.

 

[lothar]

No way. Abstinence is what religious people preach and by definition that's wrong. Give kids condoms, tell them experimentation is ok, tell them that 1/4 of all boys and 1/6 of all girls (I remember this stat well) have a homosexual experience, open the gates, and let them have at it.

Absolute nonsense.

 

[daishi5]

glad there's a lot of responses about the program in the link and the results of the study

I don't want to jump in, but is it just me or are we in some bizzaro world where the proponents of abstinence education are using evidence and research to verify their claims and everyone else just has faith that what they believe in will work?

Beyond that, I don't know enough to really comment.

 

[HumblePie]

All I have to say is this abstinence only teaching and religious only teaching in relation to sex is terrible.

As others have pointed out, it does "delay" the initial pump and dump by a year or two, but once it happens, there are way more problems. Not only that, but it breeds idiocy on a Sara Palin scale!

Here's my anecdotal story in relation to someone I knew who received sex ed through this method. At my last work place there was a guy in his early twenties that had said the most inane thing I have heard in a long time. I didn't think I would run into someone with a college education could have said what he did but he did. Here's how the story ran out.

I was sitting in the dining room of our work cafeteria with a bunch of people on our company sports team eating lunch. Most of the guys being young and fresh out of college bring the topic around to girls and sex. Being guys, they were talking about who they would "do" while looking at some of the females from the company eating in the dining room. I made this comment about a particular girl I knew to be "loose" when one guy said he would like to get her.

I said, "Just make sure you wrap it up when it comes to her, as frisky as she is, you'll likely catch an STD."

At which point another guy I was talking about before says, "Why? Only fags get STDs"
I was like WTF? I said, "Uhh you can get an STD from anyone." To which he responded, "No, you can't get STDs from vaginal intercourse." I was literally struck dumbfounded. I could go into more detail, but I'll will just say this guy knew practically nothing about sex-ed. All the wrong information he did have he said was all "scientifically certified fact" such as not needing any form a birth control to prevent pregnancy so long as you "pull out" in time.

 

[sandorski]

I asked what standards you have for when kids should either abstain from or engage in sex.

Statutory Rape Laws are basically fine, in fact the Law as it stands is more or less fine. Education as it is is also basically fine. We need to ensure that Teens have the Knowledge of the issues so that If/When they become Sexually Active they can make good choices.

Trying to keep Teens in the dark about Sex is just setting them up to Fail.

 

[ElFenix]

All I have to say is this abstinence only teaching and religious only teaching in relation to sex is terrible.

As others have pointed out, it does "delay" the initial pump and dump by a year or two, but once it happens, there are way more problems. Not only that, but it breeds idiocy on a Sara Palin scale!

thanks for reading the article before jumping in

 

[ElFenix]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiR73C_xFO8

appears that they didn't notice that there was a 'comprehensive' program as well, and that came in at 42%.

the guy complaining about the ages is kinda ridiculous. sex ed has to be taught at a young age, otherwise it's pointless.

Well, just reading that summary article I can already see one problem with this study. Anyone care to guess what it is?

If anyone finds the actual research article please make a post.

what's that problem?


we know where the research article is, but you have to subscribe to a medical journal or pay a fee to get a copy.

 

[daishi5]

appears that they didn't notice that there was a 'comprehensive' program as well, and that came in at 42%.

the guy complaining about the ages is kinda ridiculous. sex ed has to be taught at a young age, otherwise it's pointless.




what's that problem?


we know where the research article is, but you have to subscribe to a medical journal or pay a fee to get a copy.

I went looking, and I can't find the journal that both articles cite. I have never looked for medical journals before, so maybe I missed it, do you know where I could see the study?

 

[sandmanwake]

appears that they didn't notice that there was a 'comprehensive' program as well, and that came in at 42%.

the guy complaining about the ages is kinda ridiculous. sex ed has to be taught at a young age, otherwise it's pointless.




what's that problem?


we know where the research article is, but you have to subscribe to a medical journal or pay a fee to get a copy.

Hmm, nice catch. Really need access to the actual article itself.

 

[ElFenix]

http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/164/2/152?home


i'll note right now that the journal article's title and summary both use 'abstinence-only' rather than the more diffuse 'abstinence-focused' that the people in the video were stating. but without access to the full article we can't examine it. $15 if anyone wants to buy.

 

[daishi5]

http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/164/2/152?home


i'll note right now that the journal article's title and summary both use 'abstinence-only' rather than the more diffuse 'abstinence-focused' that the people in the video were stating. but without access to the full article we can't examine it. $15 if anyone wants to buy.

I have access to JAMA, but not this journal. It looks like this journal currently allows access only to UK universities. I wonder what the long term affects of this will be.

 

[SirStev0]

The damning thing about the abstinence only group lies in two facts. The spirit may be initially willing but the flesh is almost always weak. And when that sad or happy day comes when they fall off the wagon, the damn fools don't know anything about birth control or safe sex. Making them sitting ducks for unwanted pregnancy or aids. And yes, many in that group think anal sex with a female is not really sex.

I was going to say ... they probably don't count butt sex in there. The whole anal sex phenomenon stems from the fact that these kids are put under tremendous pressure to uphold antiquated morals completely at odds with what nature and culture are tell them. They end up compromising their sphincter in order to maintain a false sense of purity.

 

[ElFenix]

I was going to say ... they probably don't count butt sex in there. The whole anal sex phenomenon stems from the fact that these kids are put under tremendous pressure to uphold antiquated morals completely at odds with what nature and culture are tell them. They end up compromising their sphincter in order to maintain a false sense of purity.

interesting assumption (hah, i make funny pun), but it seems to me this study is not set up in the bible-thumper model of abstinence-only education, so i'm going to assume (hah, i do it again) they asked about the butt sechs.

Theory-based abstinence-only interventions may have an important role in preventing adolescent sexual involvement.

(and i don't think there are that many technical virgins)

 

[jman19]

What this man just said.

Obvious sarcasm.

 

[werepossum]

I was going to say ... they probably don't count butt sex in there. The whole anal sex phenomenon stems from the fact that these kids are put under tremendous pressure to uphold antiquated morals completely at odds with what nature and culture are tell them. They end up compromising their sphincter in order to maintain a false sense of purity.

Oddly enough I knew a girl like that in high school - "I'm saving myself for marriage, but you can do me in the butt." Um, no thank you ma'am. If you have an intact hymen but an anus that can pass a grapefruit, I'm pretty sure you've missed the intent of the whole virginity thing.

 

[ebaycj]

I asked what standards you have for when kids should either abstain from or engage in sex.

Why does it matter? His statement is true.

In the middle ages it was common for (young) teenagers to be married.

Partially because of hormones, partially because the average lifespan was so short.


Whether or not your God's modern version of "morals" agree with that, matters not.

 

[Patranus]

The only 100% foolproof method to ensure that you do not get somebody or yourself pregnant is abstinence.

 

[ElFenix]

The only 100% foolproof method to ensure that you do not get somebody or yourself pregnant is abstinence.

didn't work for mary, did it


:twisted:

 

[n yusef]

The only 100% foolproof method to ensure that you do not get somebody or yourself pregnant is abstinence.

And homosexuality.