Why does sex education fail so often?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rodent1
    replied
    Originally posted by jta View Post
    I can only give my impressions, here in Spain there is much more openness about sex generally, there are even tv channels on in the early hours of the morning that show full blown sex in action, not by subscription, just free for the watching. So the kids that might see this are under no illusions about what bit fits where. Maybe, because it's so open, they don't see it as pornagraphic, which it would certainly be classed as in UK. So there's one reason possibly, the laws are not so repressive!

    There is a much stronger religious affinity is Spain, it is almost exclusively a Catholic country, maybe that's another reason, fear of divine retribution.

    Spanish Dads are likely to chop important bits off any boys that mess about with their daughters, there's another reason, simple fear of the consequences.

    So there are at least three differences straight off the top of my head.
    And all good i will add !

    Leave a comment:


  • jta
    replied
    Originally posted by mind the gap View Post
    those hormones rage just as rampantly across the whole of Europe, yet the UK is (apparently) the worst nation at preventing teenage pregnancies.

    Do you have any thoughts on why that may be so, or what can be done to reduce the number?
    I can only give my impressions, here in Spain there is much more openness about sex generally, there are even tv channels on in the early hours of the morning that show full blown sex in action, not by subscription, just free for the watching. So the kids that might see this are under no illusions about what bit fits where. Maybe, because it's so open, they don't see it as pornagraphic, which it would certainly be classed as in UK. So there's one reason possibly, the laws are not so repressive!

    There is a much stronger religious affinity is Spain, it is almost exclusively a Catholic country, maybe that's another reason, fear of divine retribution.

    Spanish Dads are likely to chop important bits off any boys that mess about with their daughters, there's another reason, simple fear of the consequences.

    So there are at least three differences straight off the top of my head.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rodent1
    replied
    Originally posted by mind the gap View Post
    Great idea. The reality is that adolescents (of both sexes) are notoriously averse to following the 'good example' set by their parents - they would rather poke their eye out with a twig, I suspect. Don't worry, I'm being devil's advocate here. I think we are not too far apart in our views, in fact. If the 'good example' is about treating people decently and learning to value yourself as a person (to the point where - perhaps?! - this may help you exercise some control over those raging hormones!)..then great, but I think it is an uphill struggle these days. More so than in the past, when the stigma of having an illegitimate baby was much greater? Parents were less compromising? Or am I generalising too much?
    Bring it back, I say !



    Originally posted by mind the gap View Post

    Er...I don't think she'd thank you, Rodent. However, teenagers who are hell bent on having sex, will find somewhere to do so, of course.
    Nope, but not a situation which will ever occur !

    The Rodent

    Leave a comment:


  • mind the gap
    replied
    Originally posted by Rodent1 View Post
    Or educate them (in the broadest sense of the term - by example)
    Great idea. The reality is that adolescents (of both sexes) are notoriously averse to following the 'good example' set by their parents - they would rather poke their eye out with a twig, I suspect. Don't worry, I'm being devil's advocate here. I think we are not too far apart in our views, in fact. If the 'good example' is about treating people decently and learning to value yourself as a person (to the point where - perhaps?! - this may help you exercise some control over those raging hormones!)..then great, but I think it is an uphill struggle these days. More so than in the past, when the stigma of having an illegitimate baby was much greater? Parents were less compromising? Or am I generalising too much?



    Originally posted by Rodent1 View Post
    ie At 12/13 i do not think it appropiate for my daughter to be in her bedroom alone with her boyfriend, let alone have him stay the night in the same room let alone same bed! As for tapping on the bedroom door with a packet of condoms, i think you know what my opinion of that would be.
    Er...I don't think she'd thank you, Rodent. However, teenagers who are hell bent on having sex, will find somewhere to do so, of course.

    Leave a comment:


  • jta
    replied
    Originally posted by PI Guy View Post
    at the end of the day, the legalities of the situation never even comes into their head. That is reality!

    Who here disagrees with the cervical cancer injections on 12 year olds cause it encourages sexual activity?
    Since my mother died of cervical cancer at the age of 49 I would try to get all girls to take advantage of it. It is not a pleasant way to die.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rodent1
    replied
    Originally posted by PI Guy View Post
    at the end of the day, the legalities of the situation never even comes into their head. That is reality!
    That is something can be be fairly easily changed !
    and better to change this than encourage more of the same irresponsibl behavior ?

    Originally posted by PI Guy View Post
    Who here disagrees with the cervical cancer injections on 12 year olds cause it encourages sexual activity?
    Based on what exactly ?


    The Rodent

    Leave a comment:


  • Rodent1
    replied
    Originally posted by PI Guy View Post

    Who here disagrees with the cervical cancer injections on 12 year olds cause it encourages sexual activity?
    Based on what ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Rodent1
    replied
    Originally posted by mind the gap View Post
    The principle is similar enough for it to be valid - when 'carrot' (free housing/no need to work) is removed and replaced by stick (removal of free housing/requirement to work), it makes no difference to rates of illegitimate births.
    Disagree. Working for cash as opposed to a handout in NO WAY compares to having your home removed.

    Originally posted by mind the gap View Post
    I can imagine that in the part of South Wales where you live and let properties, you are probably at the sharper end of this than most of the rest of us. I recognise the pattern you have described within my own extended family in the Rhondda. The only difference I have noticed is that where the grandparents are involved with bringing -up their grandchildren, happier families result.

    I agree with you that for many families it is a self-perpetuating pattern and one which we should be concerned about.

    It seems to me we have two main issues to address, not one. First, how can parents/teachers encourage adolescents (12-16 year olds) to delay becoming sexually active until they are older, and second, given that if that advice falls on deaf ears (as it seems doomed to, in many cases), and they are going to experiment, should we be doing everything we can to prevent them creating new life if they are too immature to care for it themselves? By 'prevent' what do we mean? Do we ground them for four years (impractical!) or supply contraception?
    Or educate them (in the broadest sense of the term - by example)
    ie At 12/13 i do not think it appropiate for my daughter to be in her bedroom alone with her boyfriend, let alone have him stay the night in the same room let alone same bed! As for tapping on the bedroom door with a packet of condoms, i think you know what my opinion of that would be.

    Originally posted by mind the gap View Post
    The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that it has to start young - not just the biology lessons and not threats, necessarily, but ensuring that each child feels worth a million dollars to its parents at least - back to self-esteem? Is it a bit like the drugs issue - it's about raising confident, self-assertive kids who like and value themselves enough not to. Easier said than done, I know.
    Agree. A child should be encouraged to develop full potential from a young age ...TP(<16) cannot factor into this, but when a child is surrounded by this for most of their life, it is a very difficult task.

    The Rodent

    Leave a comment:


  • mind the gap
    replied
    Originally posted by jta View Post

    Might be a case for bringing back the chastity belt.
    Only if boys and men had to wear them too

    Leave a comment:


  • jta
    replied
    Originally posted by Rodent1 View Post
    Yep agreed, just so long as they are emotionally and financially able to deal with bringing up a child let's do that ...lower the age to 12,

    few other laws we are going to need to look at as well though,

    like dropping marriage age to 12 as well,
    and young couples need accom so all the employment laws will need to be modified (back to child labor then) so they can support new young family

    Prop law, so that we can rent to 12 year old mothers,

    utilities co's will have to extend credit to these youngsters in order for them to survive,

    so complete over haul of the credit laws,

    and parents will now no longer take responsibility for a child over the age of 12,

    education - now they will have the option to leave at age 12 to start their brave new lives even more ill equipped than they are today!

    and countless other reckless and non workables put in place

    While we are at it - let's lower the drinking age to 12 as well, perhaps we wouldn't have so many pubs closing down then !

    We are a developed nation with sensible ideals and laws in place, a return to more traditional and realistic values is the way forward not irresponsible anarchy.

    Jta behave yourself
    The Rodent
    I was not advocating it. Merely pointing out that it happens in other places.

    The age of consent, in a historical context is fairly new:-

    The original age of consent, codified in English common law and later adopted by the American colonies, ranged from 10 to 12. In 1885, Britain and the states began raising the age to 16, ostensibly to protect girls' natural innocence. This moral idea was later bolstered by scientific reference to the onset of puberty.
    Quantcast


    I was simply pointing out that laws of nature will always take precedence over the laws of man!

    Might be a case for bringing back the chastity belt.

    Leave a comment:


  • mind the gap
    replied
    Originally posted by jta View Post
    This is all very academic, raging hormones will make a mockery of any good advice given to kids. Never mind the 'law', if their bodies are ready for making babies, their hormones will try to push them to doing just that. The statutory age of consent can only be an average at best, there are countries where the age is 14, in others girls have been married off as young as 12. In nature an animal becomes sexually active when it's ready, why should anyone think that humans are different?

    If we didn't feed our kids as well as we do then the age of puberty would probably rise, everybody seems to believe that girls are reaching menarche a lot earlier than fifty years ago, then the age of 16 for consent was probably justified, today, practically all of them are fully past their puberty by the age of fourteen, boys and girls. The only advantage I can see to sex education is to teach them the mechanics of the skill. That's something I had to learn for myself. Oh my! I remember it well!
    You speak sense, O Fecund One! (jta has brought up 8 children, so homage is due!)

    I agree about the raging hormones jta, however, (presumably) those hormones rage just as rampantly across the whole of Europe, yet the UK is (apparently) the worst nation at preventing teenage pregnancies.

    Do you have any thoughts on why that may be so, or what can be done to reduce the number?

    Leave a comment:


  • PI Guy
    replied
    at the end of the day, the legalities of the situation never even comes into their head. That is reality!

    Who here disagrees with the cervical cancer injections on 12 year olds cause it encourages sexual activity?

    Leave a comment:


  • Rodent1
    replied
    Originally posted by jta View Post
    This is all very academic, raging hormones will make a mockery of any good advice given to kids. Never mind the 'law', if their bodies are ready for making babies, their hormones will try to push them to doing just that. The statutory age of consent can only be an average at best, there are countries where the age is 14, in others girls have been married off as young as 12. In nature an animal becomes sexually active when it's ready, why should anyone think that humans are different?

    If we didn't feed our kids as well as we do then the age of puberty would probably rise, everybody seems to believe that girls are reaching menarche a lot earlier than fifty years ago, then the age of 16 for consent was probably justified, today, practically all of them are fully past their puberty by the age of fourteen, boys and girls. The only advantage I can see to sex education is to teach them the mechanics of the skill. That's something I had to learn for myself. Oh my! I remember it well!

    Yep agreed, just so long as they are emotionally and financially equipped to deal with bringing up a child let's do that ...lower the age to 12,

    few other laws we are going to need to look at as well though,

    like dropping marriage age to 12 as well,
    and young couples need accom so all the employment laws will need to be modified (back to child labor then) so they can support new young family

    Prop law, so that we can rent to 12 year old mothers,

    utilities co's will have to extend credit to these youngsters in order for them to survive,

    so complete over haul of the credit laws,

    and parents will now no longer take responsibility for a child over the age of 12,

    education - now they will have the option to leave at age 12 to start their brave new lives even more ill equipped than they are today!

    and countless other reckless and non workables put in place

    While we are at it - let's lower the drinking age to 12 as well, perhaps we wouldn't have so many pubs closing down then !

    We are a developed nation with sensible ideals and laws in place, a return to more traditional and realistic values is the way forward not irresponsible anarchy.

    Jta behave yourself
    The Rodent

    Leave a comment:


  • mind the gap
    replied
    Originally posted by Rodent1 View Post
    That was "work for your cash" not " removal of free housing" ....

    The Rodent
    The principle is similar enough for it to be valid - when 'carrot' (free housing/no need to work) is removed and replaced by stick (removal of free housing/requirement to work), it makes no difference to rates of illegitimate births.

    I can imagine that in the part of South Wales where you live and let properties, you are probably at the sharper end of this than most of the rest of us. I recognise the pattern you have described within my own extended family in the Rhondda. The only difference I have noticed is that where the grandparents are involved with bringing -up their grandchildren, happier families result.

    I agree with you that for many families it is a self-perpetuating pattern and one which we should be concerned about.

    It seems to me we have two main issues to address, not one. First, how can parents/teachers encourage adolescents (12-16 year olds) to delay becoming sexually active until they are older, and second, given that if that advice falls on deaf ears (as it seems doomed to, in many cases), and they are going to experiment, should we be doing everything we can to prevent them creating new life if they are too immature to care for it themselves? By 'prevent' what do we mean? Do we ground them for four years (impractical!) or supply contraception?

    The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that it has to start young - not just the biology lessons and not threats, necessarily, but ensuring that each child feels worth a million dollars to its parents at least - back to self-esteem? Is it a bit like the drugs issue - it's about raising confident, self-assertive kids who like and value themselves enough not to. Easier said than done, I know.

    Leave a comment:


  • jta
    replied
    This is all very academic, raging hormones will make a mockery of any good advice given to kids. Never mind the 'law', if their bodies are ready for making babies, their hormones will try to push them to doing just that. The statutory age of consent can only be an average at best, there are countries where the age is 14, in others girls have been married off as young as 12. In nature an animal becomes sexually active when it's ready, why should anyone think that humans are different?

    If we didn't feed our kids as well as we do then the age of puberty would probably rise, everybody seems to believe that girls are reaching menarche a lot earlier than fifty years ago, then the age of 16 for consent was probably justified, today, practically all of them are fully past their puberty by the age of fourteen, boys and girls. The only advantage I can see to sex education is to teach them the mechanics of the skill. That's something I had to learn for myself. Oh my! I remember it well!

    Leave a comment:

Latest Activity

Collapse

Working...
X