Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 17:21:40
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
The Conquerer
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
|
I think you misunderstand. This is the case where 2 people go into a relationship wanting it to be casual, but there is a good chance that one of them might develop some emotional attachment. If the emotional attachment isn't mutual than that person ends up getting hurt.
Engaging in casual relationships is playing with fire. People should be informed about the consequences, which can be severe as Relapse mentioned.
It gets even worse if the two individuals didn't define the relationship upfront. One person was just looking for casual and other was looking for something serious, and there was no communication of this. Then you definitely end up with people getting hurt.
That is the danger of having casual relationships. This isn't communicated to people, and absolutely needs to be.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/22 17:22:08
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.
MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 17:22:51
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
Sheffield, City of University and Northern-ness
|
Grey Templar wrote:Indeed. All methods need to be taught, including abstinence as an option(and the only 100% safe option).
Pfft, tell that to the Virgin Mary.
On a serious note: I feel that whilst abstinence may have a small place (a very small place), teaching it during Sex Ed seems counter productive.
'Heres how humans reproduce or have fun. Here's how to keep safe doing it, and prevent any accidental reproduction. Now never ever do it ever or you're going to burn in hell' seems like it would cause more harm than good. For one because the idea of abstinence only shames people for their own biological urges.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/22 17:23:16
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 17:27:30
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
Proud Triarch Praetorian
|
Grey Templar wrote:I think you misunderstand. This is the case where 2 people go into a relationship wanting it to be casual, but there is a good chance that one of them might develop some emotional attachment. If the emotional attachment isn't mutual than that person ends up getting hurt.
Engaging in casual relationships is playing with fire. People should be informed about the consequences, which can be severe as Relapse mentioned.
It gets even worse if the two individuals didn't define the relationship upfront. One person was just looking for casual and other was looking for something serious, and there was no communication of this. Then you definitely end up with people getting hurt.
That is the danger of having casual relationships. This isn't communicated to people, and absolutely needs to be.
As for the first, then there is nothing you can ever do to deal with that issue. The person clearly did not understand that the other person wanted it to be casual, despite the other person telling them that. That is their problem and should not be something we use as an excuse to shun those people who do have casual sexual relationships. That would be absurd.
As for the second, I already explained how that problem could be solved.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 17:27:44
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
Tzeentch Veteran Marine with Psychic Potential
|
Let me correct that for you :
Better.
|
Scientia potentia est.
In girum imus nocte ecce et consumimur igni. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 17:31:21
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
The Conquerer
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
|
Goliath wrote: Grey Templar wrote:Indeed. All methods need to be taught, including abstinence as an option(and the only 100% safe option).
Pfft, tell that to the Virgin Mary.
On a serious note: I feel that whilst abstinence may have a small place (a very small place), teaching it during Sex Ed seems counter productive.
'Heres how humans reproduce or have fun. Here's how to keep safe doing it, and prevent any accidental reproduction. Now never ever do it ever or you're going to burn in hell' seems like it would cause more harm than good. For one because the idea of abstinence only shames people for their own biological urges.
Its not shaming, its telling people the honest truth that by not only seeking sex in healthy monogamous relationships you are exposing yourself to physical and emotional danger. The physical dangers can be mitigated, the emotional dangers not so much.
Sex is a beautiful thing, until you contaminate it with emotional injury(which can be far far worse than any STD). Automatically Appended Next Post:
True enough I suppose, but there is way way less danger if both people are treating the relationship as a serious one and trying to make it work long term.
Don't make it seem like they are equally dangerous.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/22 17:32:39
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.
MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 17:41:06
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan
|
It's interesting how much more people are willing to agree with "parents aren't teaching their kids about sex, so lets make the government do it instead" versus... say... "parents aren't getting health insurance for their kids, so lets make the government do it instead".
Sometimes government is the best answer to personal failings, looks like. I mean at this point we seem to be willing to have schools mandate discussion the dangers of casual sex rejection butthurt.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/22 17:41:50
lord_blackfang wrote:Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote:The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 17:41:38
Subject: STD's on the increase
|
 |
Proud Triarch Praetorian
|
Alright Grey Templar, I am calling you out. I need you to provide some facts for your "honest truth" sex ed.
It really just sounds like some sort of way to limit personal freedom for young people.....
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 17:43:13
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
The Conquerer
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
|
I still think Sex Education should be something parents have control over when/if their children receive it. Maybe schools should provide a Sex Education kit for parents who want to teach their children themselves.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dreadwinter wrote:Alright Grey Templar, I am calling you out. I need you to provide some facts for your "honest truth" sex ed.
It really just sounds like some sort of way to limit personal freedom for young people.....
I am talking about an ideal sex education program. Not the stuff which happens currently.
I think both Abstinence only programs and other "normal" programs are all doing it wrong.
Or are you disagreeing that emotional harm can occur from lack of communication and people having different expectations?
And nobody is trying to limit personal freedoms. Thats not possible actually. We can't prevent people from screwing around. We can tell them about the dangers of screwing around.
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/11/22 17:46:03
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.
MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 17:45:52
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
Tzeentch Veteran Marine with Psychic Potential
|
Grey Templar wrote:I still think Sex Education should be something parents have control over when/if their children receive it. Maybe schools should provide a Sex Education kit for parents who want to teach their children themselves.
I have soooo many hilariously creepy pictures in my mind, now
|
Scientia potentia est.
In girum imus nocte ecce et consumimur igni. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 17:47:38
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
The Conquerer
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
|
LethalShade wrote: Grey Templar wrote:I still think Sex Education should be something parents have control over when/if their children receive it. Maybe schools should provide a Sex Education kit for parents who want to teach their children themselves.
I have soooo many hilariously creepy pictures in my mind, now 
Yeah yeah.
But really its less creepy than the idea of kids learning about it in a classroom setting.
|
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.
MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 17:59:43
Subject: STD's on the increase
|
 |
Member of the Ethereal Council
|
I think one thing people need to do is also tell kids porn isnt reality. I have heared a cew stories where the guy hurts the women because he trys something he saw on porntub
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 18:00:24
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
The Conquerer
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
|
^100% agree
|
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.
MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 18:01:24
Subject: STD's on the increase
|
 |
Tzeentch Veteran Marine with Psychic Potential
|
hotsauceman1 wrote:I think one thing people need to do is also tell kids porn isnt reality. I have heared a cew stories where the guy hurts the women because he trys something he saw on porntub
This.
|
Scientia potentia est.
In girum imus nocte ecce et consumimur igni. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 18:11:53
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
Avatar of the Bloody-Handed God
Inside your mind, corrupting the pathways
|
Grey Templar wrote:But really its less creepy than the idea of kids learning about it in a classroom setting.
How is that in any way creepy?
Speaking as someone who was taught biology (including large parts of the sex ed course) by his mum and who's wife also teaches biology, I'm really struggling to see why this is any more creepy than any other fact based discussion and group learning and development course.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 18:19:43
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
Sheffield, City of University and Northern-ness
|
Grey Templar wrote: Goliath wrote: Grey Templar wrote:Indeed. All methods need to be taught, including abstinence as an option(and the only 100% safe option).
Pfft, tell that to the Virgin Mary.
On a serious note: I feel that whilst abstinence may have a small place (a very small place), teaching it during Sex Ed seems counter productive.
'Heres how humans reproduce or have fun. Here's how to keep safe doing it, and prevent any accidental reproduction. Now never ever do it ever or you're going to burn in hell' seems like it would cause more harm than good. For one because the idea of abstinence only shames people for their own biological urges.
Its not shaming, its telling people the honest truth that by not only seeking sex in healthy monogamous relationships you are exposing yourself to physical and emotional danger. The physical dangers can be mitigated, the emotional dangers not so much.
Sex is a beautiful thing, until you contaminate it with emotional injury(which can be far far worse than any STD).
Because no one has ever been emotionally hurt by a 'healthy monogamous relationship'? I mean, you're holding up a long term relationship as the ultimate happy ever after, where you've gotten married and so nothing will ever go wrong again, and frankly that's ridiculous.
Even if you *are* seeking 'healthy monogamous relationships' without sex involved at all, you're still opening yourself up to emotional danger; the involvement of sex has no bearing in that whatsoever. And the point of sex ed should be to educate people on how to limit the risk of any of the physical danger you mentioned.
Honest question: How, in your view, does the addition of sex to a relationship make it any more emotionally dangerous than a relationship without sex?
From the way you're wording it, it comes across as the whole 'losing your virginity is a magical moment with rainbows and dreams' schtick; that sex suddenly makes any relationship all the more meaningful and soul-matey. That strikes me as far more dangerous than the possibility of casual sex.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Grey Templar wrote:But really its less creepy than the idea of kids learning about it in a classroom setting.
I'd have much preferred to have learnt about what sex was in school. As it was, in year six we learnt about genitals and sperm/eggs, and that was it. No information on how sperm comes into contact with eggs, no safety precautions gak, nothing. We only got taught what the actual act of sex was when I was fifteen, almost five years later, and then safety precautions such as contraception/condoms/STIs was a year later during a special education morning (no normal lessons, huge varied classes made up of the entire year) where I happened to be helping with a different year's classes, so I missed out on the safety precautions.
I found out what sex was by thinking I'd made a logical connection, not knowing that it was an awkward topic, and blurting out and asking my mother 'is sex when a penis goes in a vagina?' on the way home from school one Saturday morning when I was about 12.
That was far more awkward than any school class could be, in my opinion.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/11/22 18:27:34
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 18:27:48
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
Dreadwinter wrote: Grey Templar wrote:Not at all. I don't really have a choice to not drive. Its not an option. I do have a choice to not engage in casual sex with short term relationships that has a good chance of causing emotional harm.
Remember kids, before you engage in casual sex with another person, make sure they know it is casual. You do not want to hurt their feelings, how would you feel if you were having sex with a person and they just up and left. Said they had no feelings for you. It would hurt. You do not want to do that to another person, just let them know first. It is the right thing to do. Now lets talk about the intracacies of relationships and what it means to devote your life to one other person. - Teacher
Some people make different choices than you do Grey Templar, but they should not be ostracized or looked down upon for it. Instead, we should prepare them for many different paths in life by giving them a full, comprehensive education where they can make well educated decisions. Instead of the "Do not have sex until you are in a committed relationship and everything will be A OK" one lane highway everybody seems to be so backed up on.
As for the argument of having parents do this vs the government. Most parents are fething idiots. They have no clue what they are doing. Why entrust everything to them when you have a public school system where you can have a class based 100% on scientific fact that will teach them about the realities of the world?
All we have to do is fund it!
On the other hand,from the posts I'm seeing, the school system isn't doing that hot a job.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Grey Templar wrote:I think you misunderstand. This is the case where 2 people go into a relationship wanting it to be casual, but there is a good chance that one of them might develop some emotional attachment. If the emotional attachment isn't mutual than that person ends up getting hurt.
Engaging in casual relationships is playing with fire. People should be informed about the consequences, which can be severe as Relapse mentioned.
It gets even worse if the two individuals didn't define the relationship upfront. One person was just looking for casual and other was looking for something serious, and there was no communication of this. Then you definitely end up with people getting hurt.
That is the danger of having casual relationships. This isn't communicated to people, and absolutely needs to be.
More antecdotes from my experience. We had a couple of suicides in my high school class that I know of from people that got into these kinds of relationships where their partner didn't take it nearly as seriously and went on to other people. One of them murdered the partner before killing himself. The other shot himself in the chest with a .22, in his bedroom, and his mom found him sitting in his bed.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/11/22 18:34:31
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 18:35:31
Subject: STD's on the increase
|
 |
Proud Triarch Praetorian
|
They are not doing that hot of a job at all. I mean that for pretty much everything they teach. Because our funding of education is hilariously low.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 18:43:07
Subject: STD's on the increase
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
Dreadwinter wrote:They are not doing that hot of a job at all. I mean that for pretty much everything they teach. Because our funding of education is hilariously low.
I agree with you about leaving everything in the hands of the parents, though. I wonder if having medical and psychiatric specialists in this travel to the different schools teaching sex Ed classes, making it less of a patchwork than it seems at the moment.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/22 18:43:36
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 19:08:16
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
Lieutenant Colonel
|
Ouze wrote:It's interesting how much more people are willing to agree with "parents aren't teaching their kids about sex, so lets make the government do it instead" versus... say... "parents aren't getting health insurance for their kids, so lets make the government do it instead".
Sometimes government is the best answer to personal failings, looks like. I mean at this point we seem to be willing to have schools mandate discussion the dangers of casual sex rejection butthurt.
Kids get taught all about stds and sex at school and have been since I was a kid. Its basically a free love fest out there right now and STD #'s are going up despite school led sex education. This generation is very much into drugs and casual unprotected sex.
Id say schools are as ineffective as parents if not more so.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/11/22 19:10:36
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 19:38:05
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
Assassin with Black Lotus Poison
|
easysauce wrote: Ouze wrote:It's interesting how much more people are willing to agree with "parents aren't teaching their kids about sex, so lets make the government do it instead" versus... say... "parents aren't getting health insurance for their kids, so lets make the government do it instead".
Sometimes government is the best answer to personal failings, looks like. I mean at this point we seem to be willing to have schools mandate discussion the dangers of casual sex rejection butthurt.
Kids get taught all about stds and sex at school and have been since I was a kid. Its basically a free love fest out there right now and STD #'s are going up despite school led sex education. This generation is very much into drugs and casual unprotected sex.
Id say schools are as ineffective as parents if not more so.
Citation needed.
National rates may be increasing but that could be due to states/counties with abstinence-heavy programs dragging the rates up by not providing free contraception or instructions on use. Lumping all sex-ed in together and saying that it doesn't work to reduce STD rates when the approach is so wildly different between types of sex-ed makes the statement that sex-ed doesn't work completely meaningless.
|
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. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 19:47:10
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
The Conquerer
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
|
Goliath wrote: Grey Templar wrote: Goliath wrote: Grey Templar wrote:Indeed. All methods need to be taught, including abstinence as an option(and the only 100% safe option).
Pfft, tell that to the Virgin Mary.
On a serious note: I feel that whilst abstinence may have a small place (a very small place), teaching it during Sex Ed seems counter productive.
'Heres how humans reproduce or have fun. Here's how to keep safe doing it, and prevent any accidental reproduction. Now never ever do it ever or you're going to burn in hell' seems like it would cause more harm than good. For one because the idea of abstinence only shames people for their own biological urges.
Its not shaming, its telling people the honest truth that by not only seeking sex in healthy monogamous relationships you are exposing yourself to physical and emotional danger. The physical dangers can be mitigated, the emotional dangers not so much.
Sex is a beautiful thing, until you contaminate it with emotional injury(which can be far far worse than any STD).
Because no one has ever been emotionally hurt by a 'healthy monogamous relationship'? I mean, you're holding up a long term relationship as the ultimate happy ever after, where you've gotten married and so nothing will ever go wrong again, and frankly that's ridiculous.
Even if you *are* seeking 'healthy monogamous relationships' without sex involved at all, you're still opening yourself up to emotional danger; the involvement of sex has no bearing in that whatsoever. And the point of sex ed should be to educate people on how to limit the risk of any of the physical danger you mentioned.
Honest question: How, in your view, does the addition of sex to a relationship make it any more emotionally dangerous than a relationship without sex?
From the way you're wording it, it comes across as the whole 'losing your virginity is a magical moment with rainbows and dreams' schtick; that sex suddenly makes any relationship all the more meaningful and soul-matey. That strikes me as far more dangerous than the possibility of casual sex.
I'm not saying a monogamous relationship cannot have issues. They can. I am saying its less likely to have problems than having a bunch of casual relationships, where its not really just two people that are potentially at stake here. It could be a series of partners who get emotionally hurt, or one person getting repeatedly emotionally injured by one sour relationship after the other.
As for your question, its because Sex is an extremely intimate and emotional thing. Adding it to a relationship is raising the emotional stakes to very high levels. And no, I don't think this is specifically tied to virginity or that losing it to someone special automatically makes the relationship special, that is absolutely not true.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dreadwinter wrote:They are not doing that hot of a job at all. I mean that for pretty much everything they teach. Because our funding of education is hilariously low.
That is actually incorrect. The US spends more per student than most other countries. Funding isn't the problem. Its that the education system itself squanders the money.
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cmd.asp
As you can see the US ranks pretty high on that list.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/11/22 19:52:02
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.
MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 19:53:26
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
Assassin with Black Lotus Poison
|
Grey Templar wrote:
As for your question, its because Sex is an extremely intimate and emotional thing. Adding it to a relationship is raising the emotional stakes to very high levels. And no, I don't think this is specifically tied to virginity or that losing it to someone special automatically makes the relationship special, that is absolutely not true.
That depends entirely on the person. Sex can be very intimate and emotional. It can also just be a bit of fun. It can be both things for the same person, depending on the partner at the time.
Both are equally valid. Automatically Appended Next Post:
That will include the amount the US spends on abstinence programs which have, time and again, been found to have no effect on reducing STD or pregnancy rates. And the money spent on those programs has been increasing.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/22 19:55:08
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. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 19:55:39
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
Ferocious Black Templar Castellan
|
Grey Templar wrote: Goliath wrote: Grey Templar wrote: Goliath wrote: Grey Templar wrote:Indeed. All methods need to be taught, including abstinence as an option(and the only 100% safe option).
Pfft, tell that to the Virgin Mary.
On a serious note: I feel that whilst abstinence may have a small place (a very small place), teaching it during Sex Ed seems counter productive.
'Heres how humans reproduce or have fun. Here's how to keep safe doing it, and prevent any accidental reproduction. Now never ever do it ever or you're going to burn in hell' seems like it would cause more harm than good. For one because the idea of abstinence only shames people for their own biological urges.
Its not shaming, its telling people the honest truth that by not only seeking sex in healthy monogamous relationships you are exposing yourself to physical and emotional danger. The physical dangers can be mitigated, the emotional dangers not so much.
Sex is a beautiful thing, until you contaminate it with emotional injury(which can be far far worse than any STD).
Because no one has ever been emotionally hurt by a 'healthy monogamous relationship'? I mean, you're holding up a long term relationship as the ultimate happy ever after, where you've gotten married and so nothing will ever go wrong again, and frankly that's ridiculous.
Even if you *are* seeking 'healthy monogamous relationships' without sex involved at all, you're still opening yourself up to emotional danger; the involvement of sex has no bearing in that whatsoever. And the point of sex ed should be to educate people on how to limit the risk of any of the physical danger you mentioned.
Honest question: How, in your view, does the addition of sex to a relationship make it any more emotionally dangerous than a relationship without sex?
From the way you're wording it, it comes across as the whole 'losing your virginity is a magical moment with rainbows and dreams' schtick; that sex suddenly makes any relationship all the more meaningful and soul-matey. That strikes me as far more dangerous than the possibility of casual sex.
I'm not saying a monogamous relationship cannot have issues. They can. I am saying its less likely to have problems than having a bunch of casual relationships, where its not really just two people that are potentially at stake here.
Citation needed. Considering this is the linchpin of your argument, I'm sure you can back it up.
|
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 19:57:10
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
The Conquerer
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
|
A Town Called Malus wrote: Grey Templar wrote:
As for your question, its because Sex is an extremely intimate and emotional thing. Adding it to a relationship is raising the emotional stakes to very high levels. And no, I don't think this is specifically tied to virginity or that losing it to someone special automatically makes the relationship special, that is absolutely not true.
That depends entirely on the person. Sex can be very intimate and emotional. It can also just be a bit of fun. It can be both things for the same person, depending on the partner at the time.
Both are equally valid.
Which is the problem. When people have different expectations, or changing expectations. Ok, you and this other person are going to be involved in a casual relationship just for fun, and you have stated it as such. You are taking the risk of one of you developing an emotional attachment, which will lead to hurt feelings if you both don't develop them.
|
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.
MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 20:00:56
Subject: STD's on the increase
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Relapse wrote: Dreadwinter wrote:They are not doing that hot of a job at all. I mean that for pretty much everything they teach. Because our funding of education is hilariously low.
I agree with you about leaving everything in the hands of the parents, though. I wonder if having medical and psychiatric specialists in this travel to the different schools teaching sex Ed classes, making it less of a patchwork than it seems at the moment.
Big enough school districts might be able to come up with a good program where a set of people covering all the areas might be able to do a comprehensive class. Maybe a combo of school nurse for the health and biology aspects, an actual licensed therapist for the relationship and mental health aspect, and an actual teacher for the "how to teach it" aspect. Have them come up with a program that maybe covers a total of 4 hours, they can travel to all the schools and take an afternoon to teach, and then be available to the kids for all follow up: the nurse if you have medical questions about STDs, safer sex, pregnancy. The therapist if you have problems with relationships, abuse, forced to do something, etc.
On a state level it could maybe be a program by the health department that travels to schools?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 20:04:11
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
The Conquerer
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
|
AlmightyWalrus wrote: Grey Templar wrote: Goliath wrote: Grey Templar wrote: Goliath wrote: Grey Templar wrote:Indeed. All methods need to be taught, including abstinence as an option(and the only 100% safe option).
Pfft, tell that to the Virgin Mary.
On a serious note: I feel that whilst abstinence may have a small place (a very small place), teaching it during Sex Ed seems counter productive.
'Heres how humans reproduce or have fun. Here's how to keep safe doing it, and prevent any accidental reproduction. Now never ever do it ever or you're going to burn in hell' seems like it would cause more harm than good. For one because the idea of abstinence only shames people for their own biological urges.
Its not shaming, its telling people the honest truth that by not only seeking sex in healthy monogamous relationships you are exposing yourself to physical and emotional danger. The physical dangers can be mitigated, the emotional dangers not so much.
Sex is a beautiful thing, until you contaminate it with emotional injury(which can be far far worse than any STD).
Because no one has ever been emotionally hurt by a 'healthy monogamous relationship'? I mean, you're holding up a long term relationship as the ultimate happy ever after, where you've gotten married and so nothing will ever go wrong again, and frankly that's ridiculous.
Even if you *are* seeking 'healthy monogamous relationships' without sex involved at all, you're still opening yourself up to emotional danger; the involvement of sex has no bearing in that whatsoever. And the point of sex ed should be to educate people on how to limit the risk of any of the physical danger you mentioned.
Honest question: How, in your view, does the addition of sex to a relationship make it any more emotionally dangerous than a relationship without sex?
From the way you're wording it, it comes across as the whole 'losing your virginity is a magical moment with rainbows and dreams' schtick; that sex suddenly makes any relationship all the more meaningful and soul-matey. That strikes me as far more dangerous than the possibility of casual sex.
I'm not saying a monogamous relationship cannot have issues. They can. I am saying its less likely to have problems than having a bunch of casual relationships, where its not really just two people that are potentially at stake here.
Citation needed. Considering this is the linchpin of your argument, I'm sure you can back it up.
There are a lot of benefits to being monogamous.
http://greatist.com/happiness/why-monogamy-might-be-good-your-health
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3012750/
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/18/magazine/18marriage-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
|
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.
MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 20:07:06
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
Assassin with Black Lotus Poison
|
Grey Templar wrote: A Town Called Malus wrote: Grey Templar wrote:
As for your question, its because Sex is an extremely intimate and emotional thing. Adding it to a relationship is raising the emotional stakes to very high levels. And no, I don't think this is specifically tied to virginity or that losing it to someone special automatically makes the relationship special, that is absolutely not true.
That depends entirely on the person. Sex can be very intimate and emotional. It can also just be a bit of fun. It can be both things for the same person, depending on the partner at the time.
Both are equally valid.
Which is the problem. When people have different expectations, or changing expectations. Ok, you and this other person are going to be involved in a casual relationship just for fun, and you have stated it as such. You are taking the risk of one of you developing an emotional attachment, which will lead to hurt feelings if you both don't develop them.
That can happen even when sex is not involved.
Also, you keep referring to casual relationships. What about just one night stands? Not all casual sex is with the same person each time. And with proper care (condoms, IUD/injection/implant/pill, don't get with somebody with a cold sore etc.) the risks of many partners can be lessened greatly.
|
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. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 20:11:45
Subject: Re:STD's on the increase
|
 |
The Conquerer
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
|
A Town Called Malus wrote: Grey Templar wrote: A Town Called Malus wrote: Grey Templar wrote:
As for your question, its because Sex is an extremely intimate and emotional thing. Adding it to a relationship is raising the emotional stakes to very high levels. And no, I don't think this is specifically tied to virginity or that losing it to someone special automatically makes the relationship special, that is absolutely not true.
That depends entirely on the person. Sex can be very intimate and emotional. It can also just be a bit of fun. It can be both things for the same person, depending on the partner at the time.
Both are equally valid.
Which is the problem. When people have different expectations, or changing expectations. Ok, you and this other person are going to be involved in a casual relationship just for fun, and you have stated it as such. You are taking the risk of one of you developing an emotional attachment, which will lead to hurt feelings if you both don't develop them.
That can happen even when sex is not involved.
Also, you keep referring to casual relationships. What about just one night stands? Not all casual sex is with the same person each time. And with proper care (condoms, IUD/injection/implant/pill, don't get with somebody with a cold sore etc.) the risks of many partners can be lessened greatly.
True, but sex raises the emotional stakes. A relationship which doesn't involve sex isn't going to be on the same level as one which doesn't.
As for one night stands, those just seem to be extra extra risky. You don't even have the possibility of clarifying beyond their word that they aren't infected with an STD, and just looking for Cold Sores is a terrible method of staying safe. And I've never heard of a one night stand that didn't involve alcohol in some fashion, which adds impaired judgement into the mix.
|
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.
MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 20:29:09
Subject: STD's on the increase
|
 |
Secret Force Behind the Rise of the Tau
USA
|
I went to sleep for like, 7 hours. What happened XD
People are over thinking this. Over thinking this is how we ended up where we are in the first place. Schools should be teaching as much fact and as little ideology as possible. It's not the government's job to espouse Judeo-Christian values (seriously who does this need to even be explained?). The goal isn't to provide them a flawless lesson plan on how to get laid and enjoy life, it's giving them the tools too reach that end on their own and NOT loading them up with a bunch of bs and false expectations. We don't need some complicated course explaining "this is what serial monogamy is" once armed with adequate knowledge about sex kids will venture into the world and they'll figure it out like everyone else hurt and all.
Because that's life.
You're born. You live a little. Hurt a little. Be happy a little. Then you die. It's too short to shoehorn yourself with "but what if I'm not with this person in 30 years" or "what if this ends up hurting mah feels in 6 months?"
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/22 20:32:22
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/11/22 20:33:38
Subject: STD's on the increase
|
 |
The Conquerer
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
|
Odd, to me it seems like underthinking and just being all apathetic is how we got in this situation.
|
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.
MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! |
|
 |
 |
|