What do you think about sex ed?

[Fatality]

They'll start with talking about the joys of fisting and the right lube to use during anal sex.

of course two girls one cup will be mandantory viewing

 

[joeyc]

How could it not?! We're talking about comprehensive sex ed, right? Leaving anything out is nothing more than bigotry and discrimination.

 

[Old Rocks]

I thought this was going to be a really fun thread... Then I saw that last word, "ed". Darn it. Well, seeing as how you asked. I'm a bit old fashioned when it comes to sex ed. Both of my kids are grown and left the nest long ago and are parents on their own. I would not have wanted some school teacher giving them the low down on sex. Sex ed, if the parents are responsible like they should be, is something that should be taught in the home. I think it should be a private matter so the morals and ethics that go along with sex could be taught by the parents along their own religious guidelines (if that would apply) or according to the values the parents want the kids to learn. This is just my opinion, but the school system has no business teaching kids this stuff.

Yessirreee Bob! Damned school sytem should not be teaching kids anything about sex. The local Red Necks will gladly supply that education.

Did you not read the post? Your stupid thoughts have been followed and now we have a much higher incidence of teenage pregnancy and sexually related diseases among teenagers than we had. In other words, that policy is a proven failure.

 

[Old Rocks]

There is nothing wrong with teaching abstinence as long as other forms of birth control are taught.

Exactly, because there is a percentage of more adventurous teens that will try out their new sexuality.

 

[Old Rocks]

Back when I was in school, the very basics were taught, and that's it. There was no "If you're going to do this, then you should do that." It was more "This is what happens when two people do this."

The very basics should be taught in school. All the "extras" should be taught at home by parents, and they should start teaching around the same time, IMO.

However, as we can see by the results, they are not teaching those extras at home. Repeating the same action, time after time, and expecting a differant result from that that you have been getting time after time, is insanity.

 

[Old Rocks]

I think its important informatuon but I don't think too many kids are ignorant about what causes pregnancy. I think the statistics have less to do with the actual curriculum but more to do with more liberal attitudes toward sex in general. Are teenagers going to listen to their parents and their teachers during the heat of the moment? Of course not.And there is no shame anymore when it comes to teen pregnancy. Unwed motherhood in my district is celebrated like someone getting into Harvard. What an accomplishment!

I do like the fake screaming babies though. I'd like to see some stats on the effectiveness of those programs.

Study Casts Doubt on Abstinence-Only Programs - washingtonpost.com

Study Casts Doubt on Abstinence-Only Programs

By Laura Sessions Stepp
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, April 14, 2007; Page A02

A long-awaited national study has concluded that abstinence-only sex education, a cornerstone of the Bush administration's social agenda, does not keep teenagers from having sex. Neither does it increase or decrease the likelihood that if they do have sex, they will use a condom.

Authorized by Congress in 1997, the study followed 2000 children from elementary or middle school into high school. The children lived in four communities -- two urban, two rural. All of the children received the family life services available in their community, in addition, slightly more than half of them also received abstinence-only education.


By the end of the study, when the average child was just shy of 17, half of both groups had remained abstinent. The sexually active teenagers had sex the first time at about age 15. Less than a quarter of them, in both groups, reported using a condom every time they had sex. More than a third of both groups had two or more partners.

"There's not a lot of good news here for people who pin their hopes on abstinence-only education," said Sarah Brown, executive director of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, a privately funded organization that monitors sex education programs. "This is the first study with a solid, experimental design, the first with adequate numbers and long-term follow-up, the first to measure behavior and not just intent. On every measure, the effectiveness of the programs was flat."

 

[AllieBaba]

So abstinence only is just as effective as education only.

 

[Old Rocks]

To be perfectly honest I think sex ed is a huge waste of everyone's time.

It should be taught the old fashioned way all morality issues are taught to Americans

Incipiently, via situation comedies aimed at children and people with very low IQs.

If they want to start teaching it earlier than early teens, then I suggest we add characters like Oscar the Herpes Simplex Monster, and Bert and Ernie Tertiary Siphilis Patients to Sesame Street cast personae

But the ussual suspects here still would not get it.

 

[Old Rocks]

So abstinence only is just as effective as education only.

Well, just as effective in preventing them from expermenting with sex. The ones that have the knowledge to protect themselves from the results of early and indiscriminant sex will suffer less for their foolishness.

Of course, I realize that you would rather see them get STDs, pregnant, or both for their sins.

 

[alan1]

Back when I was in school, the very basics were taught, and that's it. There was no "If you're going to do this, then you should do that." It was more "This is what happens when two people do this."

The very basics should be taught in school. All the "extras" should be taught at home by parents, and they should start teaching around the same time, IMO.

However, as we can see by the results, they are not teaching those extras at home. Repeating the same action, time after time, and expecting a differant result from that that you have been getting time after time, is insanity.

You do understand that the current results include the current educational systems of sex ed, don't you?
I made the point earlier, and I'll make it again-----
Parents are failing to parent, because they believe the school is teaching sex ed, and that is where the problem lies.

 

[Arawyn]

Back when I was in school, the very basics were taught, and that's it. There was no "If you're going to do this, then you should do that." It was more "This is what happens when two people do this."

The very basics should be taught in school. All the "extras" should be taught at home by parents, and they should start teaching around the same time, IMO.

However, as we can see by the results, they are not teaching those extras at home. Repeating the same action, time after time, and expecting a differant result from that that you have been getting time after time, is insanity.

You do understand that the current results include the current educational systems of sex ed, don't you?
I made the point earlier, and I'll make it again-----
Parents are failing to parent, because they believe the school is teaching sex ed, and that is where the problem lies.

No kidding. I can't recall the number of irresponsible parents I've met that let the boy/girlfriend spend the night......and expect nothing to happen.

Not to mention, letting their children date extremely early. Because it's easier to be their friend than their parent.

 

[AllieBaba]

Bingo.
You teach your kids all about sex, you let the schools tell them any sex is A-ok, you tell them the consequences can be dealt with, and you live a promiscuous life in front of them, focusing on your own gratification.

A recipe for teen pregnancy and STDs.

 

[Caligirl]

New question.

What do you all think about STD ed? Just the facts, like that condoms reduce transmission of most all STDs by close to 100%.

 

[KittenKoder]

New question.

What do you all think about STD ed? Just the facts, like that condoms reduce transmission of most all STDs by close to 100%.

First, that is sex ed, at least that's what it was when I was in school. Secondly, it's more like 80% ... there are some STDs that condoms do not protect against now because they only protect the mucus membranes, and some STDs can be transmitted by any form of touch.

 

[Caligirl]

New question.

What do you all think about STD ed? Just the facts, like that condoms reduce transmission of most all STDs by close to 100%.

First, that is sex ed, at least that's what it was when I was in school. Secondly, it's more like 80% ... there are some STDs that condoms do not protect against now because they only protect the mucus membranes, and some STDs can be transmitted by any form of touch.

Which all seems like a good thing to include in education, TY for it.

Some studies report >95% effectiveness in preventing STD transmission, others report less, and they all talk about difficulties in methodology. Some STDs are very small and can pass through natural condoms but not latex. All good stuff for education. I don't care if the "morality" is left to parents, but it seems like a public health hazard to not educate young people about ways to reduce disease transmission. Heck, handwashing is instilled in the kids when they are 3. Lice outbreaks involves an entire classroom check and notes home to the parents. Swine flu threat shuts down entire schools. But STDs? Well, that's between the kids and their parents, and no one else's business!

!!

 

[KittenKoder]

New question.

What do you all think about STD ed? Just the facts, like that condoms reduce transmission of most all STDs by close to 100%.

First, that is sex ed, at least that's what it was when I was in school. Secondly, it's more like 80% ... there are some STDs that condoms do not protect against now because they only protect the mucus membranes, and some STDs can be transmitted by any form of touch.

Which all seems like a good thing to include in education, TY for it.

Some studies report >95% effectiveness in preventing STD transmission, others report less, and they all talk about difficulties in methodology. Some STDs are very small and can pass through natural condoms but not latex. All good stuff for education. I don't care if the "morality" is left to parents, but it seems like a public health hazard to not educate young people about ways to reduce disease transmission. Heck, handwashing is instilled in the kids when they are 3. Lice outbreaks involves an entire classroom check and notes home to the parents. Swine flu threat shuts down entire schools. But STDs? Well, that's between the kids and their parents, and no one else's business!

!!

Exactly my stance. Good health practices are important and from what I know, that's all sex ed is. Those who rant and rave about how it's "teaching sex to kids" are really full of shit, they are trying to find excuses for their own lousy parenting really. Kids who know nothing about sexual health are more likely to get pregnant or get an STD in their teen years, so silence or just saying "don't do it" is not an option, but show them the possible drawbacks, diseases primarily, that will stop them more than anything.

 

[The Illusion]

First, that is sex ed, at least that's what it was when I was in school. Secondly, it's more like 80% ... there are some STDs that condoms do not protect against now because they only protect the mucus membranes, and some STDs can be transmitted by any form of touch.

Which all seems like a good thing to include in education, TY for it.

Some studies report >95% effectiveness in preventing STD transmission, others report less, and they all talk about difficulties in methodology. Some STDs are very small and can pass through natural condoms but not latex. All good stuff for education. I don't care if the "morality" is left to parents, but it seems like a public health hazard to not educate young people about ways to reduce disease transmission. Heck, handwashing is instilled in the kids when they are 3. Lice outbreaks involves an entire classroom check and notes home to the parents. Swine flu threat shuts down entire schools. But STDs? Well, that's between the kids and their parents, and no one else's business!

!!

Exactly my stance. Good health practices are important and from what I know, that's all sex ed is. Those who rant and rave about how it's "teaching sex to kids" are really full of shit, they are trying to find excuses for their own lousy parenting really. Kids who know nothing about sexual health are more likely to get pregnant or get an STD in their teen years, so silence or just saying "don't do it" is not an option, but show them the possible drawbacks, diseases primarily, that will stop them more than anything.

I posted a topic once on another forum regarding "Teaching masturbation in schools" as some schools in the north are using this technique. What do you think about that?

Jamie

 

[manu1959]

What do you think about sex ed?

i like the lab work with my partner.....

 

[Cecilie1200]

sorry, but i think home schooling is the absolute worst thing u can do for ur kid-- most kids need the discipline of a school based environment and unless u'r home all the time u just can't make sure the kid keeps up with what he/she has to learn-- quote me stats. all u want but later in life when that child has to interact with others they won't have the foundation of socialization with their peers-- i think it stunts their development honestly-- to think that abstinence works is tough to believe as well-- young budding kids are "hard pressed to keep it in their pants" so to speak-- parents should start very early making sure that kids are not ashamed of their bodies and make sure they know how to respect one another-- i also don't see a lot wrong with making a child wait until say 17 or so to "date"-- it's when they have no guidence and discipline that they stray-- keep them away from all the biblical crap if u can as that will just make them want to rebel against those fairy tales when they are able-- nothing wrong with instilling a healthy fear of STD's either-- it still boggles my mind to hear of ANY unwanted pregnancies anymore in this nation-- there is simply no excuse for it other than a poor upbringing-- just my two cents-- Regards, probus

Excuse me, but was this post supposed to convince people what a great idea public school is, or what a terrible idea it is? I ask, because if I didn't already homeschool, your English skills would have convinced me to.

 

[Cecilie1200]

It is nothing more and nothing less than indoctrination

How is teaching kids how the reproductive system works an indoctrination? And into what, exactly?

they teach em about gay sex, an anus is not part of the reproductive system

Many programs also teach them about practices I would likely get banned for naming. It's always amused me that the same things that are considered unacceptable obscenity among adults is considered acceptable school curriculum for children.