|
|
Post by Seany-D on Feb 13, 2004 12:22:18 GMT -5
|
|
Magonus
Proliferator of Blasphemy
Posts: 34
|
Post by Magonus on Feb 13, 2004 15:36:08 GMT -5
While I don't agree with the government pushing abstinence to the point where they do away with teaching birth control, promoting abstinence in teenagers in and of itself isn't a bad thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by profdunebastard on Feb 13, 2004 16:04:58 GMT -5
Abstinence in and of itself is certaintly not a bad thing. Neither, do I think sex in and of itself, unmarried or otherwise, is bad. I am of course very much underqualified and inexperienced on the subject of sex, but have done alot of research on the subject
Sex carries complications-disease, pregnancy, thorny emotional complications, guilt-thanks in part to christian doctrine, and many others, but the act in and of itself is not wrong. I think it takes a responsible and mature person who understands and is willing to accept the consequences-thus all the problems with underage teenagers. It can be related to alchohol, it has complications and dangers, especially for those doing it in ignorance or the wrong reasons, but if the consequences are understood and it is handled responsibly it is fine. There are many people under 21 who can handle alchohol responsibly, if not legally, and many legal drinkers who can not.
I don't think think however, there are set rules to sex-no set age limit, no magical marriage liscense saying it is ok because it has the government and God's stamp of approval, not even a mandate that sex is for reproduction and nothing else. Yes, sex is our species' way of reproducing. However, our species no longer really needs to reproduce as much as it does, we don't need the hormonal prodding to procreate that all teenagers get. Our minds and bodies very much enjoy sex, and in our society it has become more than simply procreation, that isn't the sole point anymore. Life is harsh, and if some small pleasure can be gleaned(as long as it is not at the expense of others) than go for it-no harm, no foul.
The bottom line is, as long as the participants are consenting and willing to accept responsibility for the actions and live with the consequences, than I do not care who, when, where, what position, how many, or why they have sex.
It is up to our society to aid in dealing with the consequences of sex in this scope without encroaching on rights. Instead of blame and judgement and controversy, we need scientists to cure diseases, healthy mindsets to stop guilt, emotional problems, cheating etc, and lawmakers and social engineers that understand that sex is no longer solely for procreation so that can make laws that aid society instead of punish minorities and the inexperienced or foolish.
|
|
|
|
Post by Seany-D on Feb 14, 2004 10:28:49 GMT -5
Sad thing is, teens don't seem to have the emotional maturity to handle sex and the issues that can come with it (VD, babies, sleeping in the wet spot, etc.), despite having the obvious physical maturity to perform the deed. Now, is that a failure of the parental system to educate? I won't even blame the school system, as I find the current PC trend of blaming schools for not teaching Johnny to read, write, add or fuck properly to be obscenely shortsighted. Parents don't take enough responsibility for their kids as it is ... I wonder if that ties back to this idea of teenage-boinking.
Given what's out there these days, I personally don't think teens have the proper education or maturity, on the whole, to be copulating. Having said that, they shall copulate, some of them furiously. Is coming at them with the message that "the only good way to have sex is to not do it" effective? I think it's like gun laws, in a way. The responsible gun owners will abide by the rules and handle the penises ... errr, guns ... properly. The outlaws will continue to cap others with reckless abandon. Not to draw too much of a comparison between outlaws and teens who screw, as I don't think there should be the same moral judgement assessed to copulation as killing, but kids who will screw should get the message that condoms particularly help prevent the spread of VD and toddlers, but ONLY when used properly. Don't fill them with water and throw them off the balcony. It's the lack of alternate education here that concerns me.
Sean "tab 'A' fits in slot 'B' " Davis
|
|
|
|
Post by FishBait on Feb 14, 2004 12:59:44 GMT -5
Sad thing is, teens don't seem to have the emotional maturity to handle sex and the issues that can come with it (VD, babies, sleeping in the wet spot, etc.), despite having the obvious physical maturity to perform the deed. Now, is that a failure of the parental system to educate? I won't even blame the school system, as I find the current PC trend of blaming schools for not teaching Johnny to read, write, add or fuck properly to be obscenely shortsighted. Parents don't take enough responsibility for their kids as it is ... I wonder if that ties back to this idea of teenage-boinking. Given what's out there these days, I personally don't think teens have the proper education or maturity, on the whole, to be copulating. Having said that, they shall copulate, some of them furiously. Is coming at them with the message that "the only good way to have sex is to not do it" effective? I think it's like gun laws, in a way. The responsible gun owners will abide by the rules and handle the penises ... errr, guns ... properly. The outlaws will continue to cap others with reckless abandon. Not to draw too much of a comparison between outlaws and teens who screw, as I don't think there should be the same moral judgement assessed to copulation as killing, but kids who will screw should get the message that condoms particularly help prevent the spread of VD and toddlers, but ONLY when used properly. Don't fill them with water and throw them off the balcony. It's the lack of alternate education here that concerns me. Sean "tab 'A' fits in slot 'B' " Davis um, aren't you going out with a teenager? personally i don't think it's more a matter of maturity than age, some teenagers are more mature than some adults, some aren't, you can't just make a generalization that teens as a whole aren't mature enough |
|
|
|
Post by Seany-D on Feb 14, 2004 13:28:39 GMT -5
um, aren't you going out with a teenager? Yes, yes I am. Would you like to ask her if we are fucking? personally i don't think it's more a matter of maturity than age, some teenagers are more mature than some adults, some aren't, you can't just make a generalization that teens as a whole aren't mature enough Well, I just did. As I said before, I think, on the whole, teenagers aren't emotionally or intellectually mature enough to deal with the consequences of fornication, and I'll stand by that remark. Some adults whom I know aren't mature enough either, but you seem to be implying that I said that all teenagers should not screw, period. I don't believe I said that. I was commenting on their preparedness as a whole, not my judgement on what they should be doing. Sean "perhaps I should offer lessons" Davis |
|
|
|
Post by ebonywnd on Feb 14, 2004 13:35:52 GMT -5
um, aren't you going out with a teenager? personally i don't think it's more a matter of maturity than age, some teenagers are more mature than some adults, some aren't, you can't just make a generalization that teens as a whole aren't mature enough Ok, first of all, I knew that was going to come up eventually.  Second, I completely agree that most teenagers are not ready to have sex. There are many who are pressured into it, or who have no idea what they are really doing...and I don't mean experience-wise. Then again, I have known a few...very few...teenagers who could deal with the other aspects of sex. Turning twenty doesn't make people that aren't ready suddenly ready though. But no matter what message we try to send....people will fuck, whether they are truly ready for it or not. The best thing to do is try to pound it into their heads that they need to at least protect themselves. |
|
|
|
Post by Valvilis on Feb 14, 2004 15:41:24 GMT -5
A lot of the unpreparedness that teens experience with sex and the stuff that comes with it (no pun intended), is due to societal restriction. It really isn't that younger teens cannot have the same thought processes and stable emotions that adults (some adults, rather) can. In some cultures, marriages happen at 14 or so for girls, it is brash and ethnocentric to say that the girls in those societies cannot possibly realize the scope of what they are involved in. Our brains experience some change around puberty, yes, but for the most part, "immaturity" is the ironic result of us trying to protect them. There are a lot of jerks in the world, and even many mentally mature women aren't ready to deal with them. But there are also a few good guys out there, barring the issue of what a 25 year old would connect with a 15 year old on (which is a whole other conversation), if he means her well and no one has put things in her head that shouldn't be there, human biology and psychology alone do not dictate that there will be any problem of any sort with her understanding the situation she is in. I guess I'm willing to claim that all pubescent girls have the potential to understand a sexual (and inevitible emotional) relationship, and, hypothetically, if the partner means them well and isn't out for just sex and then to crush her heart like so many packets of large grain sugar between the teeth of a nervous man in a coffee house, then we are simply talking about our own personal societal norms - which are completely arbitrary and have no bearing on reality.
|
|
|
|
Post by Seany-D on Feb 15, 2004 15:51:55 GMT -5
I agree with your assessment, Jason. Odd how society seems on one hand to be a little more brash these days (seen any tits on the Super Bowl lately?), but on the other hand, adults shelter their kids from so much in society. It seems that parents often don't want them to grow up past the age of 10 or so, emotionally or socially. Eventually, you have to deal with these issues, and it's not just as simple as "tab A fits into slot B". Telling kids that Jesus says to not do it, or that praying to Vishnu will help doesn't seem to provide a teen with the tools to deal with society. How are they supposed to rationalize the world around them, take control of their lives, once the restrictive/protective yoke of parental control is loosed? You have to get hurt sometimes; otherwise The Golden Rule doesn't really sink in so well. Better to get hurt in little ways, with getting your favorite toy stolen or seeing how real people fight from time to time, than waking up one day with HIV or bleeding internally from rampant drug use.
Sean "I want them back" Davis
PS -- BTW, on the tit issue, I really don't see why a breast should be a big deal, but Janet and Justin should be hung out to dry in the court of public opinion, not strung out by the FCC. It's as if there should be an agency that governs every aspect of our lives some days, with the goal being an aseptically clean existence. It's a tit, people! A floppy one at that! Deciding to ultra-sex up the halftime show, well, that's inappropriate, IMHO, but it's only a breast. Relax. Explain to little Johnny that milk comes from there, and then deal with explaining all those commercials for erectile dysfunction....
|
|
|
|
Post by the anti-myrmidon on Feb 15, 2004 18:27:04 GMT -5
Yeah...the obsession with hiding every aspect of a person's body is rather silly to me. Had this happened in Europe or Japan, or just about anywhere else, everyone would have had a good laugh, and the little kiddies would still have teenage pregnancy rates far, far, FAR below the United States. Oh, and rates of violence too. And yet here, one saggy booby (hey, it's not like she's still 18, folks) is made a scapegoat for every wrong in our society.
Also, while not an uber-feminist (more egalitarian really), Sean did touch upon an interesting point. All these complaints about seeing one little part of a woman naked, yet nothing about all the thinly-veiled innuendo in the boner pill ads. I would have to say that it is far more mentally disturbing to see Mike Ditka hawking Levitra (eww...image) or Bob Dole hawking Viagra (eww...worse image) than to see Janet's hooter-kabob.
|
|
