Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Yes, but realize that those are brand-new regulations and guidelines, and will still run into the face of local, district and state education budgets.
One of the reasons our education system is in such a sorry state is because schools get the best deal on textbooks based on what Texas is buying... and the textbooks Texas is buying are horrifically inaccurate, and often written with a religiously-revisionist bias to them.
This is how Moses and Abraham are now getting listed as "Founding Fathers" of the country and such, as an example. The texts on sex ed are in a similar, dismal state. Fortunately, several communities have started a backlash against this (really, no one likes living in a country filled with stupid people). Wasn't too long ago that a similar measure was on the ballot here in Seattle... but, problem is, no one wants to pay for it.
When you can get enough books from Texas for X-dollars to supply every student in your system, versus getting them from Somewhere Else for X-times-five-dollars, and even then only cover 75% of your students... well, budgetary realities generally go with Option A.
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised.
The school I attend has ~6 year old textbooks in all of the classrooms. Last year, my sex ed (or Reproductive Health and Safety because NC) basically covered the following. The entire course was one hour long. (Warning: Abstinence bs)
•STDs exist. Most of them incurable and untreatable and will ruin your life. (No information on transmission rates or transmission type)
•Contraceptives exist. (No information on where to get them, no information on how to use them, just failure rates and that's all. Abortion was not discussed or brought up in any way.)
And that's basically it. My sex ed was basically "don't have sex, you'll get herpegonorreyphilegnency and die!" There was also a lot of stuff about marriage and some stuff about monogamy being the only way of life. Surprisingly, there was info on how to recognize an abusive relationship, but nothing on building relationships.
Here's what wasn't taught.
•Consent.
•What actually happens during sex (this is a direct quote from my 8th grade health teacher(Currently Sophomore in HS)) "I'm not allowed to tell you, but it involves something going into something else."
•Building healthy relationships.
•Anything else at all.
Consent and what happens during sex not being taught is definitely a big fething deal. I bet at least one person came out of that class not knowing that mutual consent was necessary.
Peregrine - If you like the army buy it, and don't worry about what one random person on the internet thinks.
hotsauceman1 wrote: If pregnancy is considered a disease, Kronk might have skewed the results.
But no, this is why RAs hand out free condoms. In my opinion, high schools should start doing that.
I spent a few months as an exchange student in the 80s in Long Beach, California. The High School I attended had condom vending machines in the boys AND girl's toilets, and one of the lowest student pregnancy rates in the country (also low STD rates). The first in Cali to have done so, I believe, too.
Somehow ignorance of sex-ed became a "virtue" over knowledge - like somehow KNOWING what not to do automatically outed you as an "immoral wretch" or something.
I'm OVER 50 (and so far over everyone's BS, too).
Old enough to know better, young enough to not give a ****.
That is not dead which can eternal lie ...
... and yet, with strange aeons, even death may die.
Verviedi wrote: The school I attend has ~6 year old textbooks in all of the classrooms. Last year, my sex ed (or Reproductive Health and Safety because NC) basically covered the following. The entire course was one hour long. (Warning: Abstinence bs)
•STDs exist. Most of them incurable and untreatable and will ruin your life. (No information on transmission rates or transmission type)
•Contraceptives exist. (No information on where to get them, no information on how to use them, just failure rates and that's all. Abortion was not discussed or brought up in any way.)
And that's basically it. My sex ed was basically "don't have sex, you'll get herpegonorreyphilegnency and die!" There was also a lot of stuff about marriage and some stuff about monogamy being the only way of life. Surprisingly, there was info on how to recognize an abusive relationship, but nothing on building relationships.
Here's what wasn't taught.
•Consent.
•What actually happens during sex (this is a direct quote from my 8th grade health teacher(Currently Sophomore in HS)) "I'm not allowed to tell you, but it involves something going into something else."
•Building healthy relationships.
•Anything else at all.
Consent and what happens during sex not being taught is definitely a big fething deal. I bet at least one person came out of that class not knowing that mutual consent was necessary.
I actually got pretty good sex ed in school (go Army ?). We covered the mechanics, the biology, STDs and stuff, and we did actually acknowledge that condoms and birth control exist. Probably the one thing my school actually did right in those years.
Consent and what happens during sex not being taught is definitely a big fething deal. I bet at least one person came out of that class not knowing that mutual consent was necessary.
What did I just read? Are you saying that there were people in your class willing to hump-jump the first female in sight...and you didn't immediately call the police informing them about such people?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/21 13:26:08
djones520 wrote: Are you disagreeing with the notion that an increase in casual sex is directly tied to an increase in STD's?
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Casual sex alone isn't that dangerous, if you make use of the available options for reducing the risk. The real danger is when people are having casual sex without using those options, and abstinence-only "education" is a huge part of that. So if you want to keep STD rates down the place you need to be focusing is teaching people to have sex as safely as possible.
Well... Isn't it common sense ?
Not in the US, where our schools are so riddled with religious-based ignorance that the only sex ed a lot of students get is based on the idea that they won't have sex, at all, ever, until they are married.
Some reading on sexual education legislation across the country this year. Almost all of it requires sexual education to be scientifically/medically sound.
Well that isn't true everywhere. Also, what they're talking about is abstinence-only. That is classrooms where they teach "The only way to have a 100% chance of not getting pregnant or getting and STD is to not have sex". That is a true statement. It is a scientifically and medically sound statement. It is also a useless statement, especially in isolation. "Don't you be having any of that sex of now, kiddos" teaches zero about what to do when you've actually decided to have sex because you're 16 and you're hornier than you'll ever be for the rest of your entire life.
That's what a lot of these schools teach: "Don't have sex" and nothing else, that's one and only thing they teach on the matter. Along with a lot of scare material on just how bad pregnancy and STDs are.
"Medically Sound" is not the same as"Useful" nor is it mutually exclusive with leaving kids ignorant, nor is it exclusive with the motivation for the policies stemming from religiously/conservative/"Family Values" inspired pearl-clutching. Also such standards aren't even universal.
Watch this funny-man tell you all about it.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/11/21 13:33:09
Oh god. That sock demonstration. That guy deserves an award for creativity and hilariousness.
That No Screwing around video is... bizarre to watch. I really want to see the whole thing. The "run away from that girl" bit is really really bizarre. What does the video tell girls? Do they do the "look to your left. Now to your right. Both of those men will rape you" line? Granted every one of those videos was wacky, and more than a few disgusting. Not John's though. His was pure win.
But yeah. Glad I didn't have to deal with any of that crap. My bs-o-meter would have had my head doing a live action reenactment of Scanners.
Consent and what happens during sex not being taught is definitely a big fething deal. I bet at least one person came out of that class not knowing that mutual consent was necessary.
What did I just read? Are you saying that there were people in your class willing to hump-jump the first female in sight...and you didn't immediately call the police informing them about such people?
Hindsight's a bitch. Also probably due to the fact that the incident occured before I realised that conservatism was not the ideology for me, so I was part of the problem at the time (and a bigoted asshat who alienated friends).
Peregrine - If you like the army buy it, and don't worry about what one random person on the internet thinks.
Consent and what happens during sex not being taught is definitely a big fething deal. I bet at least one person came out of that class not knowing that mutual consent was necessary.
What did I just read? Are you saying that there were people in your class willing to hump-jump the first female in sight...and you didn't immediately call the police informing them about such people?
Hindsight's a bitch. Also probably due to the fact that the incident occured before I realised that conservatism was not the ideology for me, so I was part of the problem at the time (and a bigoted asshat who alienated friends).
I'm sorry... did you just equate being conservative to being a rapist?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/21 16:45:28
I hope that anyone with STDs is disclosing it on their affirmative consent forms prior to engaging in coitus, otherwise concealing a material fact could pose some problems
BlaxicanX wrote: Ironically, I learned more about algebra in his class than I did in any of the following three. The only math class I ever got an "A" in.
Gay algebra is like regular algebra, but with more non-discriminating formulas... if you catch my meaning.
And all the variables are living in the sine function...
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
Chongara wrote: That is classrooms where they teach "The only way to have a 100% chance of not getting pregnant or getting and STD is to not have sex". That is a true statement. It is a scientifically and medically sound statement.
Incorrect on all three counts about both STD's and pregnancy I'm afraid.
Chongara wrote: That is classrooms where they teach "The only way to have a 100% chance of not getting pregnant or getting and STD is to not have sex". That is a true statement. It is a scientifically and medically sound statement.
Incorrect on all three counts about both STD's and pregnancy I'm afraid.
Well it is true. The problem is it ignore the basic prinicble. That people like to bone.
Chongara wrote: That is classrooms where they teach "The only way to have a 100% chance of not getting pregnant or getting and STD is to not have sex". That is a true statement. It is a scientifically and medically sound statement.
Incorrect on all three counts about both STD's and pregnancy I'm afraid.
Well it is true. The problem is it ignore the basic prinicble. That people like to bone.
Well, it is incorrect when it comes to infections commonly which commonly fall under the STD banner.
You can contract herpes by just kissing someone who is having a flare up, for example. Then there's sharing needles etc.
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
Chongara wrote: That is classrooms where they teach "The only way to have a 100% chance of not getting pregnant or getting and STD is to not have sex". That is a true statement. It is a scientifically and medically sound statement.
Incorrect on all three counts about both STD's and pregnancy I'm afraid.
Well it is true. The problem is it ignore the basic prinicble. That people like to bone.
Well, it is incorrect when it comes to infections commonly which commonly fall under the STD banner.
You can contract herpes by just kissing someone who is having a flare up, for example. Then there's sharing needles etc.
Or being bitten. Which is a good way to end up with hepatitis. Which is why babies need the hepatitis jab, in case a nazi with hepatitis bites them.....
It's actually transmitted by blood, so I'm being serious.
DS:90-S+G+++M++B-IPw40k03+D+A++/fWD-R++T(T)DM+ Warmachine MKIII record 39W/0D/6L
Chongara wrote: That is classrooms where they teach "The only way to have a 100% chance of not getting pregnant or getting and STD is to not have sex". That is a true statement. It is a scientifically and medically sound statement.
Incorrect on all three counts about both STD's and pregnancy I'm afraid.
Well I suppose a hysterectomy would also fall under "100% chance of not getting pregnant", as would having homosexual sex and being generally sterile otherwise.
However I think there is obviously something of an implied caveat that risk of pregnancy is really only relevant to folks engaging in the kind of sex that could result in pregnancy in the first place. It's plainly silly to call out two dudes boning as having no chance of resulting in pregnancy, because obviously it's an irrelevant non-concern to them in the first place. That there other vectors for things that can be called STDs is also sort of missing the point, again the implied statement here is "and getting a disease via sexual transmission". The fact that there are risks associated with having sex: Pregnancy, sexual transmission of infections is true. The statement that not having sex will preclude you from getting pregnant or having diseases sexually transmitted to you is also true. The statement that other methods of mitigating these risks have non-zero failure rates is also true.
Obviously I'm not advocating for abstinence-only education but let's not get caught up in coming up with scenarios where folks are going to get knocked up without taking their pants off.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/22 02:55:16
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
Indeed. All methods need to be taught, including abstinence as an option(and the only 100% safe option).
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
And again, one does not have to have intercourse to get pregnant or catch an STD. Non-penatrive sexual acts, lack of awareness of safe sexual acts (in terms of preventing pregnancy and what "sex" actually is... such as some people believing that if you do it standing up, or wash straight afterwards, etc it is not actually sex (you really can't make this stuff up...)).
Abstinance in the eye of the beholder and all that...
Besides, I'm sure there is at least one quite well known urban myth of a lady who got pregnant without having sex
The point being that abstinance does not protect you, even from the "sexually" part of STD. Witholding information on sex, safe sex, and relationships and just saying "don't have sex and loom at all these diseases!" is lretty much the worst way to keep young people safe.
Abstinace education should be 2 minutes tops before actually getting on to the useful and demonstratably safer sexual education material...
Grey Templar wrote: All methods need to be taught, including abstinence as an option(and the only 100% safe option).
Here's my question. Why? Why even mention the word Abstinence at all? Sex isn't a bad thing. it's part of life and human relationships and most people want to have it eventually, right? Talking about it by focusing on the negatives, which is all abstinence education really is, is counter productive and potentially damaging. It's just a subtle form of fear mongering on the part of adults who have some irrational fear that their kids will do something. Do we have classes telling kids how they shouldn't go outside, because bad stuff can happen out there?
If we're actually teaching teens what sex is, consent, what contraceptives do, the risks of STDs, it should go without saying that not having sex results in no pregnancy and near no STD transmission (to be fair, we should mention in classes that some STDs can be transferred by other means than sex acts). Unless we're teaching some special ed kids, why bother? I know we expect little of teenagers but I don't think they're so stupid they can't figure that effects won't happen if the cause never occurs.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/22 05:17:17
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
I think that has more to do with people incorrectly defining Abstinence and/or the kiddos being total idiots than it does with Abstinence being bad.
Abstinence would be total refrain from any sexual act with another person, until you are both willing to commit to each other, and should be taught as such.
Naturally it won't require as much time to teach, but it absolutely must be taught as the information about it is no less vital.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/22 05:24:31
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
LordofHats wrote: I actually got pretty good sex ed in school (go Army ?). We covered the mechanics, the biology, STDs and stuff, and we did actually acknowledge that condoms and birth control exist. Probably the one thing my school actually did right in those years.
Funny, growing up in the town I did, I went to the oldest most "ghetto" high school in the city, and we got the mechanics, biology, STDs and all the "fun" stuff like that... but we ALSO got the ultimate scare that should form the backbone of any program: what happens to your life if you get pregnant/when you have a kid... the health teacher gave nice little anecdotes about the psi of human milk production when it's "feeding time", the fact that there's dozens/hundreds of milk holes, etc.
Seriously, we spent nearly an entire 80 minute class just on the sleep alterations, and breast feeding issues/public embarrassments, etc. the rest of the Sex Ed part was spread out over 3-4 days or so.
Edit: from the sounds of some of our "Southern" American users.... I could probably pass for a gynecologist in those states
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/22 05:20:09
5000pts 
6000pts 
3000pts
