It seems that since 1940 premarital sex has been a major issue. Everyone always talks about how it's so bad, and it can be depending on if you use and abuse the principle or not. But think about it this way we think of the past as very prude and maybe before 1940 this would be a true statement. But since 1940, nine out of ten Americans, both men and women have had premarital sex. For Americans it seems to have become normal behavior, just a part of our day to day lives. We have sex before marriage. This to me made it more clearer how special it is to save yourself. I mean I know I'm not one to say anything, but I just think it would be all the more romantic to hold out and just save yourself in ways. Yet if we goes by the numbers, it seems that it would be really hard to find someone that had waited specially for you.
This new study was done to go against the Government's view of Abstinence only education to show that many Americans when taught in this manor will still have sex. The study was conducted by Lawrence Finer, a research director at Guttmacher Institute. "The study, examining how sexual behavior before marriage has changed over time, was based on interviews conducted with more than 38,000 people — about 33,000 of them women — in 1982, 1988, 1995 and 2002 for the federal National Survey of Family Growth. According to Finer's analysis, 99 percent of the respondents had had sex by age 44, and 95 percent had done so before marriage." Even if people waited until they were 20, or older, 4 out of five had premarital sex before turning 44.
The study goes on to say that the numbers aren't really changing and that this is not a new trend, or even a trend at all, but a factor in a our lives. The only thing that has changed regarding sex is people usually have more partners or are more sexually active without being married, because we now marry at a later age.
I'm glad some research has finally been done on this. It really bothered me that instead of being taught how to have sex safely I was taught not to have it at all. I mean it really came back into my mind when I was watching Family Guy. It's a pretty bad problem when you see a cartoon make fun of something like this. Yet Family Guy did a great job. Family guy deals with a suburban family who is dysfunctional. the family includes a father, mother, baby boy, a son and a daughter, and their dog (with some random neighbors and others thrown in). Lois the mother, goes to the school to teach her daughter's class about sex, but when she tries to teach prevention the school kicks her out and instead the children learn about abstinence. The only problem is curiousity gets the best of the children and they end up trying to have sex in the ear.
I know this is extreme, but I think that it just goes to show that things need to be done. I think that abstinence is a all but dead (to the people that do wait as I said kudos). I think though that education is a major thing that needs to be done in the schools because too many times teachers end up being like parents to the children. I think that by educating the students on safety rather than abstinence, it would prevent unwanted pregnancies, abortions, and sexually transmitted diseases.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/premarital_sex
I would like a link to this study. Was it really conducted to prove the Government wrong? Whatever happened to disintredted inquiry? WHy did they choose the 44? Seems kind of odd/random. I think they teach abstinence as a scare tack tic so that kids will use prevenative devices when they do do 'IT'.
Nice blog and way to use the family guy as a source.
all truths are easy to understand once discovered; the point is to discover them ~galileo
Yes it was conducted to prove the government wrong. I don't know about the 44. I honestly have no idea maybe to have more of an impact because it's not seen as over the hill yet? No idea. How can you scare kids into using preventative devices if they don't teach them? If they only teach you not to have sex, how do people learn about the options.
I didn't use family guy as a source. I just said that it kind of showed the extreme end of things. Hoping that it would show ignorance is not always bliss. I put the link to it in my post.
yeah I did not see the link, they are usually diffrent a color, sorry about that.
The family guy was an excellent source of imagery ...i saw the show and although funny makes an interesting point...that is what i ment.
i guess when i went through sex ed no sex was the emphasis and point but we also went over, however breifly, other methods of birth control. I just figured that what was really happening ...i can not believe they do not mention contraceptives in other schools...no wonder there is a prego problem
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16287113/
all truths are easy to understand once discovered; the point is to discover them ~galileo
Thank you. Sorry if I sounded defensive I was just confused.
Yeah schools really need to realize that students are going to have sex regardless of their teaching and so they should work to try and teach preventative measures rather than anything else. At my school we had to pull condoms out of them and that's only because someone in my class had asked what they were and how effective they were. Kind of sad considering there were at least 3 pregnancies before or within six months of graduation, and God only knows how many abortions, and they were all people that weren't the most educated. If they had received some form of education on preventation from school who knows maybe it wouldn't have happened.
I thought the family guy was funny and a light-hearted way to point out the seriousness of the problem. But thank you for the compliments. It's sad that it has come to this, needing studies that have spanned almost 70 years to prove that change is needed.
Lovely blog. Way to go! I know that most of my friends are having premartial sex, and they're not even out of high school! If people are going to do it anyway, teachers and parents might as well tell them how to do it right. When we are taught abstenince, we are taught not to do it, and teachers skip the part about what to do if you do have sex. Parents won't let teachers teach kids about protection, and they don't do it themselves, sooo . . .
If a STD or pregnancy arises, the parent can be blamed, according to most people.
~Annalas
I think that the blame lies in both the parent and the government/schools. If we refuse to accept the fact sexuality is a huge part of our society, we cause ourselves to be blind to the truth. Which only causes more and more problems, such as unwanted pregnancy, abortions and sexually transmitted diseases.
I know what you mean about having sex in highschool so many people are having sex. I mean I don't know it's crazy to me. Because of the whole idea it seemed like if you didn't have sex in high school you were a prude or might not be attractive.I mean if the subject hasn't come up in ways you may feel that you aren't sexually attractive and such because that's what society and the rest of our peers in ways make us feel. It's sad because my younger cousins have started high school and I'm scared of what they are going to get themselves into. They're parents aren't the most involved and basically give them whatever they want, which only leads to problems.
One of the problems with statistics and studies like this is that they can be used to prove, or disprove, almost whatever you want. I for one don't really want to take the information of a study that was conducted with the expliciate intent to disprove something else. That is neither scientific nor fair. Another thing to consider is the fact that condoms, which is one of the most used methods of safe sex, cannot keep you from getting an STD. It doesn't even garuntee that you won't get pregnant. Here is an interesting article on the affects of the sexual revolution. http://www.resourcefoundation.org/Current/S&L/std.shtml
One other thing to consider is that something does not become ok just because a lot of people do it. Morality is not determined by the cultural norms or the decision of the masses, absolute truth does exists.
I would also challenge your premise that kids are being taught abstinence. In the media, in school, and at home kids are being taught that there is really nothing wrong with sex outside of marriage. They are told that a condom will protect them from STD's and keep them from getting pregnant when in fact science shows otherwise. Also when kids are taught that whatever is natural is good, that they should follow their own path and do whatever they want, why wouldn't they have free sex? To really adress this issue we must first return to the belief in absolute truth. Without that we have no foundation on which to build.
In Christ,
Hamalas
Condoms do cut down on the risk of STDs, no they don't always work, but nothing does except abstinence and even that isn't 100% because you can get STDs from toliets and public areas, even AIDS can affect you from other things not only sex. Okay about that site, I know about the different diseases that are possible. And yes there is no gurantee but as you can see from just two of the many articles on condoms they REDUCE risk. To argue against that is crazy. No there is no guarantee you won't get pregnant, but you have a 99% better chance of reducing the risk. I'd rather have the risk reduced than have everyone that is having sex just have it regularly.
They are being taught abstinence in the schools, and by the government. The media is the only one that teaches anything else and they don't teach anything else other than sex. I wouldn't say at school or at home they are being taught outside of marriage. But in reality do you really see that changing? I understand you are religious and that's not your route, that's fine but to be blind to the fact that people are having sex and it's not going to change, isn't going to help the situation. No they are told there is risk to it to. But it's a better option then just having sex. It's a PREVENTATIVE MEASURE. Measure does not always mean it will work but it's doing something to try and combat teen pregnancy and STDs no it's not perfect. But what is abstinence? Do you really see our society doing a 180? No, not likely. Kids aren't taught that whatever is natural is good, at least not where I live. If everything that were natural were good, killers wouldn't go to jail and we would let people beat eachother and hurt eachother because to some people that is natural. I understand where you are coming from you are basing this on a religious background and that's fine but don't deny the facts because of your own personal reasonings.
No offense but to call everyone to religion is ridiculous and religion will never ever be a part of government. Thankfully! To say that we can't have a society to build on without absolute truth is ridiculous as long as people have morals, regardless of their basis and foundation of these morals and they know right and wrong, society will thrive. Maybe not in the direction you imagined or hoped, but that's what changing and adapting is all about. To turn our backs to the changes and to try and look past them would be to ignore our society and evolution. (And Science has proven that evolution happens, since you like science.)
risk.http://www.dph.sf.ca.us/sfcityclinic/stdbasics/stdchart.asp,
http://www.fda.gov/oashi/aids/condom.html#life
Unfortunately, belief in god does not dictate morality. It never has and never will. While it may be a good guideline, societal views are still the primary metric by which acceptable behavior is judged. In Mexico (A Catholic country, by the way), it is acceptable for a 22 year old to marry and impregnate a 14 year old. Same behavior would have you incarcerated in the US. Immoral here, morally acceptable there.
The belief in absolute truth can only logically be belief in observable fact. God, unfortunately, is not yet more than a mere conjecture. His word is never taught or preached, for He has never spoken to any other than those who claim to have been spoken too; with no witness. Only once in history has a man claimed to have been spoken to either by God or his agents with witnesses to bear. Sadly, that man founded the Church of Latter Day Saints and cursed us with a people who would later found Salt Lake City. Until we can be given undeniable proof that the word taught in church is truly the word of God as he intended, we have to resort to something a little more logical than "It's just not right, trust me! The lord says so!"
Until such a time that God himself speaks to the common man, we feeble creatures must find a way to coexist and live on a basis more conducive to human nature. Sorry dude, but sex is as much a part of human nature as speech and thought. It's as much a form of communication and bonding as talking. Unfortunately it carries with it risks. I'm not a proponent of free love or promiscuity (as much as I'd like to see a world where that was common place :-P), but there has to be a balance. Education has to be for the best interest of the student, and it is in their best interest that they be able to carry about a normal life without being struck down by an unexpected pregnancy.
As much "proof" as you may have provided, it is not worthy of scrutiny on the mere premise of bias. Your source was authored by a ministry, and as such has to be discarded as hacked observation due to the glaringly obvious bias on behalf of the author. As someone on good authority I can assure you that condoms are extremely effective if used properly and birth control is about as sure a thing as you could ever expect to come from any scientific endeavor, around %99.997 effective at last study. Again, only if used properly are these methods of contraception effective, which is the root argument here. There needs to be education as to how these contraceptives are supposed to be used.
Until parents and ministries are given the bill for the children and not the state, this sad state of affairs will likely never change.
--It's only worth having your name in history books if you wrote your own epitaph.
So what do you teach children who aren't Christian, Hamalas?
The reality is--when practiced safe, and by those who are mature enough to experience it, there really is nothing wrong with pre-marital sex. If sex ever was just for married couples, there would be no human civilization today because marriage didn't exist when civilization/culture/etc didn't exist.
I don't think 12, 13, or even 14 year old teens should be having sex--because personally, I don't think the mentality those age groups are in is fit for sexual behavior...however, I had sex at 16, and most of my friends at 17 or 18. None of us are pregnant, none of us have died of AIDS, all of us are on the pill and practice safe sex. We do not sleep with hundreds of men, we are not reckless and all 3 of us (me and my 2 best friends) are in monogomous relationships. I'm 21 now, and I am happy, well adjusted. My mother knows I have sex, I don't have to hide anything from her. I go to the doctor annually, I make sure I am healthy, I keep tabs on my reproductive health, I am always always always encouraged and reencouraged to practice safe sex. It was beat over my head by my mother, my doctor, and my older sister. There is nothing wrong with the sexual experiences I've encountered. They've made me who I am today. They were personal choices.
You can't tell a sexual being to not be sexual until they find "the one". They may never find "the one". I think encouraging abstinence until maturity and "readiness" would be more effective than marriage. I think educating the 100% effectiveness of abstinence only is important as well, however, I think it is exceedingly important to stress safe sexual practices....denying that the world is sexual doesn't make people less inclined to be sexual--it lies to them, misinforms them, and leads them to unsafe choices because of a lack of education and knowledge. People will have sex regardless of whether or not you tell them how to. People will have sex regardless of whether or not we tell them we don't want them to, god doesn't want them to, or their parents don't want them to.
It's like driving a car--most parents really don't want to hand the keys over to their kids--but it's a right they have. And instead of avoiding the right, giving them a set "ok time" for them to drive many years after they are probably ready to, we educate them on how to drive a car safely.
I really liked the analogies you used. I think that the way you wrote this comment was really well written and I appreciate your feedback. Thank you for also mentioning maturity, that is a huge issue that should be encouraged.
Now a days kids are going to do what they want to anyway, no matter what anyone says. I agree with Stefanie, It would be better to teach them to at least wait until they are mature and ready rather than until they are married.
I didn't wait until I was married, but I did wait til I was ready and we were engaged and are now married.
Yeah, waiting until marriage isn't always going to happen anymore. I think the realistic option is to teach it and try to help people understand that maturity is a huge part of sex and they need to be ready and understand what they are getting into before they do have sex.
I think no matter how they are taught against premarital sex, if they want to have sex, they will have sex. The deal is that people give into their mortal desires. If we are hungry, we eat. If we are thirsty, we drink. If we are tired, we sleepy. If we are aroused, most of us have sex. I am a virgin. I am holding off until marriage. But probably the only reason is my religion and devotion to God. I've been taught to respect my body. But obviously, school's can't feed religious views and even if they could, it wouldn't work on someone who didn't believe in God.
Honestly, I think there's not much else education systems can do to teach against premarital sex. If demonstrating how awful STDs are, showing death rates of AIDs, and bringing teen mothers in to show how hard and awful it is to have a kid before you're ready doesn't work, I don't know what will.
Nothing will stop people from having sex which is why we need to come with a new program that teaches preventative sex.
Solo sex is safe sex. Clearly not a sin in the Bible. Check my web site.
Partner sex is not a sin unless you add a sin to it.
Partner sex may be risky or not.
I wish everyone had all the sex they want awith minium risk.
The "family" a Christian missionary group have free sex in group but not outside the group. This way you min. the risk and max the sexual enjoyment.
to tell people to have no partner sex is hard. I got married at 27 and i was a virgin on my wedding day as well as my wife. So when i got masrried i had a lot of making up to do.
If you can not stay a virgin until marriage, then more an likely you will be able to have only sex with your spouse. It is equally as hard to only have sex with your spouse only as it is to only have solo sex before you are married.
If you have to have sex before marriage, then get married as a open marriage letting your spouse have sex with others. Becuse they will anyway. Why not just ok it ahead of time.
85% of marriage has a high sex drive person and a lower sex drive person. In 85% of marriage there is one person who wants more sex and wishes they could have sex with other people. But they try hard not to so they don't make the other person angry.
What is the solution? Smal groups of 15- 20 all have sex with each other freely. In a group of 20 you will have both high sex drive males and females. Some will want a lot of sex and others less.
But in reality no one people can meet all the need of one other person over a life time. Marriage of one man and one female is very hard. One person will get all the sex they need and the other will alway be wanting more. How do they get more without hurting the feels of the lower sex drive person?
Bonobo solve that problem. We should copy the bonobos. they have no jealousy and everyone gets all the sex they want. They live in a very peaseful society. They are the close to the human make up.
Check out my web site for a lot of sex research and expose Bible misunderstanding about sex. God is clearly pro-nudity and pro-sex with many sex partners like the bonobos. God designed and program the bonobos to teach us how it should be done.
Umm. not every person that has sex before marriage means the person is going to cheat. I just don't get a lot of this info. Groups of 15-20 people that have sex together is all but encouragine stds because one day if it hadn't happened already one would venture out of their circle to get diversity and change much like one does in a marriage when they cheat, and the rest would be left with the consequences. I really have no idea who the bonobos are, where they are from, and what kind of society they are. i am going it's not in America. What is the human make-up? No offense, but this really doesn't make sense at all. It just sounds like excuses for cheating, and in reality there really is no excuse except weakness in the other because they can't fight temptation, and if we go by the bible we face temptation everyday in our life, such as that in the garden of evil and if we give into it, well then we are straying from our path and our forced to leave the joys of comfort and privledge.
I have studied religions and have never heard of the Bonobos it sounds like an extremist group. That takes certain ideas and molds them to their likings. If you want to have sex with multiple people before you are married and are still going to go through with it, maybe the people really shouldn't get married, because it really doesn't sound like they are ready to commit, unless they are doing it for the monetary and financial benefits, but i really wouldn't call that a marriage. That would be more convienence.
What does this really truly have to do with the teaching of preventative measures? Did you even read the article?
We are put on this earth for really one reason. TO REPRODUCE. Have you ever seen two dogs get married and have a single dog in which they were committed to?
I say as long as you and your mate feel comfortable about it have sex, make a few kids. Who are any of you (or society) to say what a person can or can't do.
It is not bad in any way unless if you tie in religion to it but we have to face it, not everyone believes in religion anymore. We are just not what people used to be. I don't believe in any religion so I guess this is why I have this view on this.
The only way you can view humans goal and existence simply to reproduce, is if you are religious, also to say we were put on this earth refers to a belief in God. Otherwise you wouldn't even think of that, I think love, affection and to care for one another are some of the major reasons for humans.
Not everyone should be having kids. That's not what I am trying to say with this article, that's why there are so many orphans because people just have kids. It's not a matter of saying what they should or shouldn't do it should be something that within themselves they know if they are ready and able to take care of a child and provide for them. But that's a totally different issue.
This isn't about who has sex with who, it's about how it's being taught in schools. I really don't care if someone has sex with 50 people as long as they are being safe, get themselves checked out and tell their partner or at least share a part of their history, I know this probably isn't going to happen but it's better than thinking about the reality at times. What I care about, is that we ignore the fact people have premaritial sex and that we teach abstinence programs instead of prevention. This is important and need to be taken seriously, it's becoming a more and more important issue.
"Who are any of you (or society) to say what a person can or can't do."
Are you really in college?
"It seems that since 1940 premarital sex has been a major issue. Everyone always talks about how it's so bad, and it can be depending on if you use and abuse the principle or not. But think about it this way we think of the past as very prude and maybe before 1940 this would be a true statement. "
Maybe? Not a history major eh? yes, the past was very prude....uh yeah
"But since 1940, nine out of ten Americans, both men and women have had premarital sex. "
Ok, lets just hope that they are able to pay for their own kids. Lets read on....
"I'm glad some research has finally been done on this. It really bothered me that instead of being taught how to have sex safely I was taught not to have it at all. "
Yes, they are just being prudes and spoiling your fun! Thats it!
"the family includes a father, mother, baby boy, a son and a daughter, and their dog (with some random neighbors and others thrown in). Lois the mother, goes to the school to teach her daughter's class about sex, but when she tries to teach prevention the school kicks her out and instead the children learn about abstinence. The only problem is curiousity gets the best of the children and they end up trying to have sex in the ear. "
Hey imagine if the "family" were typical inner city savages with no father figure (you can cross one character out). They should teach prevention and the glory of abortion to these "people" . When they have sex they have kids...they then soak up our taxes and consume oxygen they simply do not deserve.
"Yet Family Guy did a great job. Family guy deals with a suburban family who is dysfunctional."
Hmmmm....would they do a great job if our inner city mom was a whore and her son was her pimp? Or would that be too real?
" Lois the mother, goes to the school to teach her daughter's class about sex, but when she tries to teach prevention the school kicks her out and instead the children learn about abstinence."
And they should. But I disagree with these tolerant Christians ....teach them the value of abortion.
"I know this is extreme, but I think that it just goes to show that things need to be done. I think that abstinence is a all but dead (to the people that do wait as I said kudos). "
Hey kiddies f**k your brains out but pay your own way.....
"I think that by educating the students on safety rather than abstinence, it would prevent unwanted pregnancies, abortions, and sexually transmitted diseases."
Or maybe children should just do what they are told to do?
The past was viewed as prude, but so were the 40's when many of our grandparents were growing up. It wouldn't be until the 60's and 70's that sex became more of an open topic, so the fact that people were having premarital sex further back could be questionable too.
It's not about being prudes and spoiling fun, it's about the fact that people have sex and we ignore this. They don't wait until marriage.
Typical families have fathers, the parents may be divorced(since divorce rates are on the rise) but they still have both parents.
No one has ever taught the glory of abortion it's a dangerous procedure and that's how it should be taught. It's only to be used as a last step, not as a preventation measure like birth control.
No offense but I really don't know where you get your information. Not every inner city family's mother is a whore, and father is a pimp. Maybe you should try going to one and spending sometime there, many times they aren't so different from you and I. I have been to Detroit many times. My aunt teaches there too, yet there is hope in every city. That's not too real because it just doesn't happen. The likelihood of that happening are slim to none. (After reading your name, I realized where you were coming from, but I don't agree with any of your points.)
How would they learn about abortion if they don't learn about preventation? If you are just going to tell me the same old, it's taking away a life stuff, that's fine, whatever, that's ridiculous to just teach two methods, abstinence or abortion. Great! So we either have people not having sex because of the fear of God, and your religious views or we have people having sex everywhere and having abortions because they think that's the only route.
I didn't say for people to have sex, but the practice of abstinence has been on the decrease since the 40's. So something needs to be done as soon as possible, so that people aren't only learning about abstinence.
How old are you? Have you ever not listened to your parents? Then you would know kids don't listen! This is not only about children though, this is about people of any age under 44 who are unmarried, anyone that has premarital sex. What are people even told to do? The media and television tells people one thing, SEX. Schools and religion(depending on the religion) teach abstinence, for the most part. So, who do you think a person is more likely to listen to, and hear what they are being told from?
that either/or policy is actually what's holding us back. We must teach ONLY abstinence, we must teach ONLY "safe sex".
Condoms DON'T always work. Neither does birth control. The only safe sex really is no sex. That still needs to be taught.
HOWEVER, I think they should ALSO teach about condoms, birth control, etc, but ONLY if it's done in the right way. As in, explain how most particles of STDs are actually smaller than the pores of a condom, which makes the condoms pretty useless. But how also you should be free to make your own choice, with the advice of friends, family, church, etc. I think "talk to your parents/church/whatever" is something that needs to be emphasized in any teaching on how to stay safe from unwanted pregnancy or STDs, or anything. And since schools are so interested in the the "triangle" or whatever it is of health, mental, physical, and emotional wellbeing, they also need to say something along the lines of, and are you really okay with being with a billion different people before you're married? Even if you only sleep with the people you date, how many people are you going to date? It's not just about health risks, it's about how many times over and over and with how many people you feel comfortable with sharing that most intimate part of yourself.
The other reason abstinence only education doesn't work is because it's taugth incorrectly, and/or associated with religion, when it doesn't and shouldn't have to be. Lots of people reject perfectly good ideas just because they're into the whole "let's reject everything Christian" mindset, which is just as ridiculous as abandoning purely secular ideas because they didn't originate within the Christian framework.
--
~I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.~
That is how it was phrased to me once as a young person (older then child younger then teenager). The couch may have had covers and protection and cleanings but it is still a used couch and people only want new ones. It was very insightful and wierd but made a interesting point esspecially because we had just driven by a used couch tossed outside on the road...
all truths are easy to understand once discovered; the point is to discover them ~galileo
My parents were divorced, and they DID NOT have sex before they were married. I guess you still believe in the toothfairy, don't you? Zena
I'm not sure if this was in reference to me or to what someone else wrote, if I made it seem like people that had premartial sex were the only people that had divorces I'm sorry. I didn't mean to I know that's not the case at all. If I didn't write that, my bad. I know that everyone has a chance of divorce, people relate divorce to that but it really shouldn't be. If people don't want to be together any longer divorce has become more common and accepted so it is on the rise
I wrote a blog about this not to long ago...
Most people disagreed with me, while many seem to agree with you :)
Hail The PitGodess!
It's a sexual revolution? = P