An Ignored 'Disparity'

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

I'd actually be fine with that provided you included the health aspects (i.e. "you can get HIV unless you use protection.")

I'd prefer they used actual facts (i.e. you can get HIV even if you use protection).

and delivered in this manner to promote abstinence, will allow them to rationalize not using protection at all, and worse, to go anal and dramatically increase the odds of HIV transmission.

[Southern_Man 0]

Quote

True dat. But maybe even complete facts, like the protection rates.

Of course, we're getting deep into what some people consider to be morality here, aren't we.

Wendy P.

Maybe some people, I'd be fine with that.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

As an aside, my wife and I are coming to the conclusion that there is nothing that can hold a person back as much as being the child of a teenage mother. Want to make it more probable that your kid will end up in prison or a group home? Have the kid as a teenager and try to raise the kid yourself.

There are some appalling stats on that somewhere. The probabilities for a whole bunch of nasty things go way way up for kids from single parent homes. And most of them are not just a little more likely, say 20 or 30%, but more in the neighborhood of 5 to 10 times more likely.

with all the supposed risk factors I have, I should have been a 3 strikes lifer years ago.

[billvon 2,991]

>I'd prefer they used actual facts (i.e. you can get HIV even if you use protection).

Fine with that too. Give them the actual odds with and without protection.

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

>So it seems you and rush then agree that it would be best to delete all the portions
>of a sex ed class that don't relate directly to anatomy and biological function?

I'd actually be fine with that provided you included the health aspects (i.e. "you can get HIV unless you use protection.") Which when it comes right down to it is perhaps the most important thing you can learn when it comes to "sex education." But yes, the rest of the stuff - birth control (beyond the factual) sexuality, and social/political aspects of human sexuality - get rid of it.

There's overwhelming evidence that hands-on gives far better retention than lecture format.

I learned far more about sex from my first GF than I ever did in a classroom.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[wmw999 2,447]

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

There's overwhelming evidence that hands-on gives far better retention than lecture format.

I learned far more about sex from my first GF than I ever did in a classroom.

I can just imagine the protests when the first school brings in hookers for the lab practice.

[pirana 0]

Quote

with all the supposed risk factors I have, I should have been a 3 strikes lifer years ago.

Understood. That is why they are risk factors and not a guarantee of results. I came out the other end with only one strike.

The resilience of kids is amazing; and is probably why being at risk only raises the odds of ending up on an unhealthy path from 2 or 3 percent to 10 or 20 percent. (Numbers used for demonstration purposes only - I can't remember the exact figures).

So yes, the bulk of kids make it to the other side just fine, but the dice are loaded in a bad way for kids from single family homes.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley