ImTheCaptain
I disagree with you
or we could just give birth control to women for free without hassle
They can with two incomes. And they won't have child support for 3 other kids either.
Regarding what we can do as a society to change our behavior: the first thing would be to admit the truth. Sex is best when confined within a lifelong monogamous relationship. How do we promote that reality? First step would be a national leader 'coming out' to this admission and promoting it in a similar manner to Michelle's promotion of healthy eating styles. Our government promotes ideals all the time. We could promote it in our sex education. We could make it a part of national party platforms. There are a million ways to promote an ideal.
What we lack is the conviction to do it. We say things like " of course that is great, but it isn't realistic" but we don't believe it. The first step towards solving a problem is admitting the problem exists. We don't want to admit this issue because we love sex. The rational and logical solution to both AIDS and premarital sex is monogamy. We are simply too hormone driven as a society to do anything about it.
I will reiterate I am not offering a no sex Ed solution. I am offering this as a way to transform the current assumed rational on sex. It is entirely possible to choose to not have sex as a 16 year old despite having the ability to enjoy it. We have to make the value of waiting evident. You can see in this thread alone that despite the clear societal and personal benefit, that we as a society choose irrational over rational.
I'm fairly certain sex is best with 2 bi-curious fitness-model nymphos and a 6 pack of gatorade to re-hydrate repeatedly.
Opposing viewpoint = SHUT THE FUCK UP!
Conservative viewpoint = Troll
So open to opposing thoughts around here.
They can with two incomes. And they won't have child support for 3 other kids either.
Regarding what we can do as a society to change our behavior: the first thing would be to admit the truth. Sex is best when confined within a lifelong monogamous relationship. How do we promote that reality? First step would be a national leader 'coming out' to this admission and promoting it in a similar manner to Michelle's promotion of healthy eating styles. Our government promotes ideals all the time. We could promote it in our sex education. We could make it a part of national party platforms. There are a million ways to promote an ideal.
What we lack is the conviction to do it. We say things like " of course that is great, but it isn't realistic" but we don't believe it. The first step towards solving a problem is admitting the problem exists. We don't want to admit this issue because we love sex. The rational and logical solution to both AIDS and premarital sex is monogamy. We are simply too hormone driven as a society to do anything about it.
I will reiterate I am not offering a no sex Ed solution. I am offering this as a way to transform the current assumed rational on sex. It is entirely possible to choose to not have sex as a 16 year old despite having the ability to enjoy it. We have to make the value of waiting evident. You can see in this thread alone that despite the clear societal and personal benefit, that we as a society choose irrational over rational.
I merely repeated what you said back to you. Sorry if the mirror stings. The issue with poor sex decisions is at its root parental not education and access to contraceptives. When you are 13 your body tells you to have sex. It takes an adult to wisely advise you to consider another path.
We have been sold a lie about sex and are too foolish to see it.
Don't disagree. But the narrative needs to change from "sex is awesome! Go do it! And wear this rubber." To "wait, please wait - but if you have sex make sure you are protected".
And when I say the message I mean our cultural message. The one kids actually listen to. Condoms are terrible. Anyone that has worn one will agree. We can't continue to promote sex as the Wild Wild West and then act surprised when kids don't wear a condom.
Don't disagree. But the narrative needs to change from "sex is awesome! Go do it! And wear this rubber." To "wait, please wait - but if you have sex make sure you are protected".
Are poor people poor? Sure. Are they all living in cardboard boxes eating dirt and bugs? No way. Do they have $5 to spend on a box of condoms to prevent 18 years of a kid? Yes they do. So they have money to buy cigs and beer and Big Macs and the latest Florida Georgia Line or Drake album, but no money at all to buy condoms, sure that makes sense.
And GTFO with "the time it takes to get them" garbage. Do they not otherwise go to a convenience store or grocery store or anywhere else? If not, where do they get said beer and cigs? And, despite how often it is alleged on this board, I am still yet to find anyone who works 80 hours a week, prohibiting them from making a trip to a convenience store, yet still doesn't have $5 from all that work to buy a box of condoms. And if they don't have a job and are on the woe-is-me welfare, then they have all goddamn day to go buy some.
I'm fairly certain sex is best with 2 bi-curious fitness-model nymphos and a 6 pack of gatorade to re-hydrate repeatedly.
I've never disagreed with you more.
maybe we just let women have control of their bodies the way men do and shut the hell up if your sky-boss has qualms about it
I'M AN ATHEIST AND YOUR RELIGION IS DUMB AND I NEED TO TELL EVERYONE THAT I'M AN ATHEIST AND HOW DUMB I THINK CHRISTIANITY IS!
Where exactly is this narrative? It's certainly not in the overwhelming majority of sex-ed classes.
The best approach, as is almost always the case, is to be perfectly honest with kids about sex. "It is awesome, life is better when you are having sex. It also can have some serious negative emotional, physical, and economic consequences. Here is how you can protect yourselves from those negative consequences. For some of you the best way to protect yourselves will be to wait."
The idea that one monogamous relationship for life is the best option for every single person is pretty ridiculous.
Where is this narrative NOT present is a better question. Look at this thread for a perfect example. The facts simply don't support your conclusion. I have yet to see someone list a true benefit to society of multiple sexual partners outside of 'its fun'. On the flipside there are numerous downsides to the individual and to society. What is the potential downside of a lifelong monogamous sexual relationship outside of "you are missing out on fun" (which you aren't by the way). The sexual upside falls all on the side of a committed relationship, and all the downside falls on multiple partners no commitment. Yet we don't push the correct narrative. Instead we say 'sex is awesome, life is better when you are having it, just make sure you protect yourselves."
I fully realize I am the 1% on this topic on this boards, I am just trying to offer another opinion on the subject. One that I fully realize is VERY unpopular with current culture. Your neg rep on this thread pretty is a good indicator of the reality that despite the fact that I am honestly attempting to have a productive discussion about the topic, my opinion is treated as very hostile. It is not popular to say that sex is best waited up on until you are committed to a lifelong relationship. But to me, the facts seem to weight heavily on that side of the argument. The only argument produced thus far against it is the classic 'you are a loser/you are missing out on fun', and those are pretty shallow arguments.
Disease prevention, family planning, and the true sexual satisfaction that originates from absolute trust seems to me to be a much better way to go.
That is the narrative we should push in our sex education, while at the same time educating children about methods to protect themselves from disease and unplanned pregnancies. Instead sexual discipline seems to be an afterthought. More importantly sexual discipline is a clear afterthought to the large majority of our society. It is a false path, and it is lie that we keep telling in every advertisement, tv show, and even political plan to address these very real issues. It should be the first thing we talk about before we move on more practical prevention matters. We need to change the paradigm if we want to truly address these issues. Until we do, our bandaids will continually peel off and reveal the open wounds of our society.
I don't see what is so wrong with what wrangor is saying.