posted
Since society and parents exist, should students take sex education? At least they taught us teen pregnancy, rape, AIDS, sexually transmitted diseases, etc., but taught us about our own true hormones (or selves, probably).
If you read this the 1st time, I've edited this post. So read it again
posted
Yes they should! I read an article that said that these kids who take anti-sex vows end up having sexy anyway with no protection. That is rather alarming. It's better to teach sex like it's perfectly normal, naturally not a thing wrong with it and that it's not sinful, bad or evil... It's something people should be responsible about and they should wait until they are ready.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of course not. If we teach kids how to prevent pregnancy, then they'll find out what sex is and want to have it, and end up having kids because people like me fight against teaching them how to prevent pregnancy.
From a public school? I dunno, I just never trusted the schools that much, and don't plan to raise my children too. Though I do believe in teaching kids about periods and STDs, and to read the fine print on condom boxes. You know, the print that says "only abstinence is 100% effective."
Sure some folks break their vows, but birth rates and abortion rates for teens are both down. I think teaching abstinence is a good thing.
Though I think they need to teach folks that "sex" as defined by President Clinton is not the only way to contract an STD. This gets dodgy, but according to my sister it's a big problem among kids already.
posted
My parents did not speak to me at all about sex, or even female stuff. So yes, schools should have sex ed, if only for those kids who don't get the information they need at home.
Posts: 1805 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I learned about periods and STDs in school. Also, a girl was doing the standing broad jump in Gym and a condom fell out of her pocket (middle school). Though I had seen what they were before then.
Edit: So I don't think anyone here is going to say there should be no sex ed. But should the schools give it to the kids without the parents knowing (in case the parents keep the kid home from school). I know we always had a permission slip, and in 9th grade some of the Born Agains opted out. Are the schools justified in subversion?
posted
They should teach both. Parents should say to their kids, don't be ashamed of sex, but if you don't want to do it, don't do it. Boys, you don't have to have sex to prove you are a man... just dont' do it if you don't want to, girls, don't get pressured. But if you MUST do it use protection. It's that simple.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Absolutely. I don't know any teenagers who would abstain from sex just because a teacher tells them too. And only a few abstain because their parents tell them to. There's no way to stop teenagers from having sex (or oral sex, or any other ways to spread STDs), so they MUST know how to protect themselves.
Posts: 274 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
I think this is the article that Synesthesia was talking about.
quote: The study on Tuesday of a nationally representative sample of about 15,000 youths aged 12 to 18 found that 88 percent of teenagers who pledged to remain virgins until they are married ended up having sex before marriage.
They found that only 40% of males who had pledged to abstain from sex before marriage used a condom. People who vowed to abstain from sex contrated STDs at the same rate as non-pledgers, but were less likely to seek medical help if infected.
Edit: So, I believe comprehensive sex education is very important. I don't think that it something we should trust "society" and parents to take care of.
Edit again: In fact, I believe that sex ed. should go further than it does already. I think that teachers should tell students where they can get free condoms in the community and where they can go for confidential STD testing. Many already do this, but I guess the "If you are having sex, use protection" message still isn't strong enough. After all, if nearly everybody has sex before they're married, they need to know how to protect themselves, and they need to know that they must do it every time.
quote: The report stated that nearly half of all STD cases occur among young adults age 15 to 24, and nearly half of new HIV infections occur in that age group.
quote: The report stated that nearly half of U.S. high school students have sex and about 14 percent of them have had four or more partners. It also claimed that almost all young people will have had sex by the age of 25, which makes up a quarter of the country's sexually active population.
Scary.
[ March 10, 2004, 11:11 PM: Message edited by: Nato ]
Posts: 1592 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think that sex/health education is a good thing. As a parent, I would be very upset if they started teaching my kids that sex is Ok and not a sin.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is one area that I'm not so adamant about parents taking responsibility. Not that they shouldn't, but there are too many situations in which kids don't get the information they should have from their parents.
Do I think sex ed should start in middle school? Yes. Kids who are approaching puberty need to know what's going on with their bodies, what sex is, and the repercussions of having sex. "Skipped Parts" is a good example of what can happen when sexual discovery is left up to the kids.
I think it's important for parents to know that their kids are learning sex ed in school. I'm not sure I agree with the permission slip idea unless parents who say "no" accept the responsibility to educate their children themselves.
Basically, I think that kids need to learn from someone more responsible than TV or their peers, whether it be parents, school, or a combination of the two.
Posts: 1090 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think a neutral attitude toward sex on the teacher's part would be best. I also think that a lot of these STD cases come from kids who are too scared to be caught with condoms. They don't stop having sex, they just do it unprotected. My parents would probably have quite a fit if I were caught with a condom in my wallet. I don't think that is productive.
Most kids seem like they will have sex, no matter what their parents think of it, so I think they should at least not be afraid to have protection so they don't hurt themselves as much as possible. I think most people would agree that if somebody is going to be having premarital sex, it is better that they use a condom.
Posts: 1592 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Regardless of your political leanings, I believe you can all agree that we need to make all teenagers watch a 10.5 hour LOTR-scale video showing nothing but puss-filled, AIDS-patient-deathbed, weiner-falling-off type of images.
Posts: 1592 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
Like several people have said, not every parent is going to teach their children about sex, and not all of those who do are going to do it well. I think sex education in schools is very important, but I think the teacher's opinion needs to stay out of it. Just the facts.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
There is no way I could have watched a movie like that in high school. In fact, there is no way I could watch a movie like that today. I'm far too squemish. I would probably pass out if somebody *forced* me to watch it.
I remember a 1-hour film that we had to watch in '90 or '91 that described AIDS, how you can get it, and its effects. It made me feel so sick I could barely stand up afterwards.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:It's better to teach sex like it's perfectly normal, naturally not a thing wrong with it and that it's not sinful, bad or evil...
I hope you're suggesting that the teacher should take a neutral position on the morality of sex. Because if you're saying that a teacher should explicitly say that sex is not sinful, then you're dead wrong. The government and the educational establishment have no authority to attempt to rule on issues of sin and morality. That aspect of it really should be left up to the children's parents, no matter what.
Now, the informational side of sex (what goes where, why, and what can go wrong) is useful information for anybody, regardless of their religious background. Permission slips are still a good idea, but if you're teaching it at all, I suspect that there will be at least some trickle-down knowledge reaching the kids who opt out.
What I would like to see stressed much more is the ethical side of sex. Without bringing religion into it, I think it is possible to convey to kids that if all you are interested in is sex, you are demeaning and probably emotionally harming the person you are with. That treating yourself like a sex object is a really great route into serious shame and self-worth problems. That sex is more responsible and most rewarding when practiced within long-term committed relaitonships. That cheating and having illegitimate kids are harmful to your mate, your offspring, and to society as a whole. Etcetera.
Posts: 1907 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree with what appears to be the general consensus of the thread - Sex Education is not a bad thing if done properly and without bias from the teacher.
Fiasko also made a good point too - parents need to know what is being taught. I think this should be done more thoroughly with parents receiving details of exactly what is taught, how and when. This ensures that parents who want to discuss it with their children first can and if they know whats going on they're more prepared to answer questions if they arise.
I think its a good idea to teach sex ed. to boys and girls seperately. Its too embarrassing a subject for many kids to feel they can discuss or ask any questions about with members of the opposite sex in the room.
What age is sex ed. taught in schools in the US. When I was at school many years ago we were taught about periods etc. when we were 12ish and then sex ed. at about 14. Now this was over 20 years ago so I'm sure Sex Ed. is probably taught at 12ish now.
Posts: 394 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you must, think of it as damage control.
Coming from a student, realize that no amount of movies, scares, or anything of the like are going to stop students from having sex.
Trust me. It's impossible.
So, you examine it, and decide that since they will always have sex, you can teach them how to do it safely and right. There should be no "Oh my god, which [Edited because I fear moderators]??"
Condoms should be supplied for students, and perhaps a discount pass for STD testing, to encourage them to get it.
Posts: 515 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am cynical about condom distribution because once a person has embarked on the "if it feels good, do it" philosophy, then they would probably rather not use one. I hope these are in the minority.
I really do hope that the majority of teens want to have a caring relationship with a partner.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
HRE, while you're right that movies and scares are ineffective, and you're also right that it's impossible to ensure that no kid will ever have underage sex, you are wrong if you're asserting that adults can have no impact on the way their children choose to behave.
It isn't a lost cause. Among subcultures in the US where premarital sex still carries a healthy social stigma, kids don't do it near as often as they do outside of those subcultures. If there is anything in the world that makes a kid think twice, it's the fear of shame. Fear of disease won't do it. Fear of pregnancy won't do it. But the powerful desire that a young person has to belong to a community and live up to expectations of people he admires ... that can really work.
The problem that you've illustrated is the fact that we expect nothing of value from our youth. Through the rules, the media, and the everyday behavior of our culture, we reiterate again and again that we expect them to be nothing more than gigantic screwups. And then, not surprisingly, they live up precisely to our expectations.
The answer is not to simply give in to despair, as you advocate. On the contrary, we need to build back up up our society's ability to regulate the behavior of its members. Lately, it seems that we're all about tearing down powerful social standards and mores, and replacing them with flimsy legal replacements. The result is not so much increased freedom, but increased incidence of the consequences of stupid choices.
Hm. Here's the point I'm making. Right now, America, on the whole, believes that an individual should be able to do whatever he wants, and that government or society should protect him from consequences so that his choices become more free.
In my estimation, all that does is make morality meaningless to most people, promotes self-centered behavior, and fails to equip anyone to handle the responsibility of making real choices and living with consequences.
The America I wish I lived in would promote a strong ideal of honor, responsibility, and shame for making bad choices. Shame may be unpleasant, but it is not a bad thing. It is an extremely powerful corrective force, both in a individual's life, and in the life of a community. The more shameless we become, the less capable we are of acting like responsible adults. Childish shamelessness naturally ends at puberty, but our society has gone to great lengths to extend it beyond adolescence, far into adulthood.
So, my real response to you is that your attitude ("kids are gonna have sex, so get used to it") is a big part of the problem. We need to stop thinking that way, and start realizing the value of high expectations.
Posts: 1907 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
If it is true that the kids have no shame, then they should feel comfortable buying the condoms themselves.
Would you want even one dollar of your tax money to go toward a social agenda you disagree with? (I dunno, I always opt out of the Presidential election campaign fund on my taxes. I know that since it doesn't raise or lower my taxes, it must not matter.)
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Heh heh. Sorry about that, HRE I'm sure you weren't really after that kind of response. I just get really annoyed when I'm told that "your teenagers are going to have premature sex, get used to it" because dammit, people said that when I was a teen, but I didn't do it, and I know why I didn't do it, and I don't think I'm all that weird and unique. I just had the advantage of belonging to a family and a culture that strongly values chastity. So even when my pubescent horniness overcame my personal judgment, it never overcame my desire to remain an upstanding member of my community.
I believe that there are a lot of young guys out there who would behave just as I did if they had a reason to. But no one gives them any.
Posts: 1907 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think there should be comprehensive sex ed, that includes both abstinence and assertiveness training ( teaching girls to say no, and where to kick a guy if he doesn't respect that) and how to prevent STD's and pregnancy. Parents should be informed and have an opt out choice- I think many of the parents who would opt out do plan to touch on sex, even if they may approach in unrealisticly.
Posts: 2711 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
romanylass, if you do assertiveness training, be sure to also teach boys what to do when girls come onto them, and teach girls how to handle their OWN horniness. The assumption that the situation will always be "horny boy trying to get it on with nervous girl", we're going to miss half the situations that these kids end up in ...
Posts: 1907 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
When my little sister started going to kindergarten, I remember my mother was shocked to realize that they were reading the kids a book about sex. The whole process was being described in great detail to five-year-old children.
I don't think any kid needs to even know what sex is at that age. When I was that age, it didn't even occur to me to wonder. I somehow doubt that I was an exception to the rule, and that most kids start wondering about sex at kindergarten age. When you're five, you don't need to learn about pregnancy and contraception and abstinence. I find it shocking that kids are being made aware of these things way before they would be naturally curious. When I see seven and eight-year-old girls trying to dress up sexy, I think there's a problem. But that's just my opinion. I was perfectly happy not even being faintly curious about sex till I was twelve. Let them have their innocence.
Posts: 1996 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Most of my sex ed took place in a college level biology class. We did frog sex before human sex etc..
I think it can be taught biologically with no moral weight applied at all. In fact I think everyone would be better off taking a Human Biology course in high school that included the sexual reproductive system. The lack of knowledge on other stuff that many people have about their own body is staggering.
posted
Speaking as a none virgin 16 year old, I can say that sex e.d. is important. I mean it didn’t do anything for me, but it teaches those individuals that otherwise wouldn't use common sense. The main problem with our sex ed is that they teach abstinence as the only way. I can safely say that well over half of teens are not virgins by the end of high school. I believe that the schools need to remain neutral on the morality of sex but they should at least explain how a condom works, because condoms are 99.9% effective if used correctly. If teens aren't told how to use them, odds are they won't use them, or won't use them correctly. Teens also need to be taught how to think through their decision to have sex. They need to learn to make a conscience decision about whether to have sex or not. I know that I have no regrets for having sex in the past; I don't regret it because I used a condom and I used one because I knew how to use it. I know that some of you are thinking less of me right now, and all I have to say to you people is, when you catch your kids having sex, I bet you'll wish they were as open about it as I am.
Posts: 1094 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
One thing I found interesting is that the Human Rights Watch lists teaching abstinence-only sex ed as a human rights abuse. We're denying kids access to /knowledge of things that can prevent the spread of AIDS.
I guess the merits of this are debatable, but it's an interesting idea...
Posts: 1784 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm tired of that crap about abstinince being the only 100% effective way to prevent pregnancy. I mean just look at Mary!
Posts: 650 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
While I agree with Geoff that shame is a powerful corrective, the problem we have in this society is that shame is too often harnessed as a whip by people who seek to wield society's power. (We even see it today; in a society in which being a bigot is shameful, calling someone a bigot is a powerful thing.)
This leads to situations like the Magdalene laundries, back-alley abortions, and one-year "boarding schools" for girls with wealthy parents.
I'm not sure where -- or how -- we as a society can draw the line. Is it okay to refuse to rent an apartment to an unwed mother? Is it okay to walk up to an unwed mother you know only slightly and call her a harlot? What if you just tell her that you strongly disapprove of her choice, and expect her to deal with the consequences on her own?
At what point does the EXPRESSION of that shame become worthy of shame?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to agree with Geoff (A Rat Named Dog) on many points in his argument, but most specifically with teaching young men how to deal with aggressive young women (and how to teach young women self-control). I work with young people, and one of my good friends is having a bit of a crisis in this area (he is a young man). Women have strong sex drives, too!
I am in the camp of "teach them about STDs and teach them how to put a condom on". Young people, while hormone-crazed (and crazed in general, haha), can understand consequences if they are taught. I admit to many mistakes as a hormonal young person. Many, many mistakes. I think I would have made more mistakes had I not had a good sex-ed program (at nine: reproductive systems, and in tenth grade: sexual consequences) and a communicative family.
I support opt-outs for parents who want to approach sexual issues with their children without the help of the school district. IIRC, permission slips are a requirement of law in these matters, anyway.
I of course believe that abstinence is the only way to prevent STDs and pregnancy (Mary, Mother of God, notwithstanding), but I also know that for some teens, this is not going to happen.
Posts: 1545 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think shame will do much good. People have to learn to do the right thing when it comes to sex not because they'll get punished or have people call them names but because it's the right thing. Because it's responsible. In order to do that, you got to turn all of modern culture upside down. Right now you get something like someone baking a fresh batch of cookies, putting milk in the fridge, setting them in an open cookie jar and saying, don't eat the cookies until this or that time... Does no good. They'll eat them anyway, except for those for whom the opportunity to fool around doesn't present itself, or the types that have little interest. How many kids out there have no interest about sex but pretend to because they are afraid to be thought of as weird? Second graders now harp on crushes. It's because the US has a split personality when it comes to sex. Don't talk about it, don't teach it, but show a bunch of blurred half naked women and men all over primetime television. It's true that we need to learn to respect sex as something sacred and for that all of society has to work together. But shame in some cases just makes it worse.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
That is not what I meant. I'm a teenager, and I have no desire to go have sex, or rather, I can control that desire.
But many teenagers are not the same, and no measure of lectures can kill that desire or that curiosity.
Posts: 515 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
At my old high school, all the year 11s go on a "leadership" camp.
You go out to the bush, sleep in bunk beds, and hear motivational speakers. Then one night they tell you it's movie night.
They're lying.
You all get ushered into the hall - and teachers barricade the door. Then someone from a sexual health clinics shows lots and lots of slides of various STIs.
Lots of pus.
I don't think a single girl in my class would even still ever consider having unprotected sex: those are the kinds of images that stick with you. Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: Does no good. They'll eat them anyway, except for those for whom the opportunity to fool around doesn't present itself, or the types that have little interest.
I've got to disagree. I did not lack for opportunity or desire, but I did not have sex as a teen. I agree with Dog. We do teens a big disservice if we just assume that they are not capable of controlling themselves. They can. It will never be 100%, but but they can.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I didn't either, (still haven't )but I was a strange kid who didn't really get interested in all that until I was twenty. All kids are different. Some respond well to their respective church telling them not to do it. Some listen to their parents' warnings. Others will say, it won't happen to me and they'll do it anyway. Some are so firm in their convictions until some convincing person comes along all seductive and perfect, and next thing you know... It varies from person to person. The people who WILL stray need resources. The people who won't should be applauded and encorauged.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The thing is, there's a lot of uninformed teenagers out there. One of my mother's friends got pregnant at age sixteen, and she couldn't figure out why. She had no idea that sex had anything to do with pregnancy. There's also a lot of rumors out there-- "you can't get pregnant the first time," "oral sex can't give you AIDS," etc. If teenagers don't get information from parents/teachers, they'll get it from their friends.
Posts: 274 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:I've got to disagree. I did not lack for opportunity or desire, but I did not have sex as a teen. I agree with Dog. We do teens a big disservice if we just assume that they are not capable of controlling themselves. They can. It will never be 100%, but but they can.
I am in the same boat, but I chose to abstain because I firmly believed that sex led to babies and babies led to loss of freedom, choices and oportunities. For me,sex wasn't a moral issue but a life path issue.
Because this thinking was so powerful for me, I believe this is an excellent approach to take with teens. I appreciate the ads that show the teen dad being stuck at home while his friends go out; or the teen mom who is struggling to get by on her own or miserable because she married the guy who got her pregnant rather than waiting for prince charming. I'd like to see this approach used more often.
Posts: 2425 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
As a parent of three teenagers, I say YES - we need to keep sex ed.
Sex was not discussed at all in MY upbringing, and my lack of knowledge did hurt me when I became sexually active. I barely even knew about "female cycles" before I started my own period.
My kids have gone through Sex Ed in school - both middle school and high school. They used an abstinence-based curriculum (showing all the known consequences from choosing to have sex outside of marriage) but they also give information on different types of birth control.
I think making the kids sit down and BE an audience for this is necessary. It is hard, at this age, to get them to sit down and have this discussion with parents -- and some parents are unwilling to do it.
For my kids -- it actually opened communication between us on this subject (although I have tried to educate them all the way through school) -- when my daughter came home, I could ask her what they covered in that class on that day, and then we would discuss it more.
So I think it takes both -- Sex ed at the school level, and follow-up at the parent level (to interject any particular relationship to religious beliefs of the family).
posted
You can't have a complete basic understanding of biology unless you understand reproduction. Therefore, since we expect kids to learn biology, sex ed should be taught.
As for the morality of sex, I don't see why schools need to go one way or another about it. Just give them the facts.
Posts: 2432 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
If I had my way, sex ed would start out very young. There is no reason I can think of that the natural and readily observable act of mating in the animal kingdom shouldn't be addressed. Every class that has pets asks "What are they doing?" when the male starts riding the female! And nearly all young children want to know about where babies come from. You don't have to go into gory detail, but it makes sense to let children know what sexual reproduction is.
Unfortunately, kids are playacting sexual things in elementary school. You come across stories of kids copping feels when they are in single-digit ages. Sometimes you observe it! By middle school, most students know enough about sex to figure out how to do it if they haven't already become sexually active.
They need frank information, not beating-around-the-bush. And they need guidance, desperately. Many of them can't talk to their parents, for a variety of reasons. And teachers are too scared to talk about it. I try to be honest, if the topic gets close (in second grade it doesn't happen, but in 5th on up, it does). I let kids know that they need to make smart decisions, because what they choose to do with their bodies now affects the rest of their lives. I don't tell them what they should or shouldn't do, but I often join a conversation with the question, "Is that wise, do you think?" "Why would he/she/you do that?" or "What else could you do?"
Posts: 3141 | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Good points, Jenny. They should at least admit that sex is natural and that it's really something you can't understand from spending an evening watching lame television shows... Or worse... porn... Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jenny, you are a VERY good teacher. Personally, that's precisely how I think you should handle those situations.
As a parent, I would prefer my son not have sex ed in school, largely because I would prefer to do it myself. Sex ed started very young with him, and hasn't stopped, and won't stop until he's out on his own. I'm now to the point where *I* have to get some education, so I can be an effective educator. So I have some books, and Christian and I are working through them together. It is uncomfortable sometimes, but I wouldn't change it for all the world -- I am learning so much about my son in the process, and discovering what a truly interesting person he is. I knew that before, but he still surprises me all the time.
I know that not all parents do this, and so I think there's a place for sex ed...it's a part of grown-up life, and so shouldn't be ignored from school curriculum. I'd like to see it, however, presented much like AJ suggests. And I really think it needs to be progressive, all the way through schooling, so that you don't "start" when the kids are already in the early hormonal stages. But I also think that parents should be given the option to opt their kids out of that education and be given free and open viewing of what will be presented.
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
I'm sure you weren't really after that kind of response. I just get really annoyed when I'm told that "your teenagers are going to have premature sex, get used to it" because dammit, people said that when I was a teen, but I didn't do it, and I know why I didn't do it, and I don't think I'm all that weird and unique. I just had the advantage of belonging to a family and a culture that strongly values chastity. So even when my pubescent horniness overcame my personal judgment, it never overcame my desire to remain an upstanding member of my community.![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
)but I was a strange kid who didn't really get interested in all that until I was twenty.![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
