It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Teaching Children About Sex In School -- A Comparison

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 10:30 AM
link   
Saw this today:



I thought it was pretty proper considering all the debate we've been having about whether or not schools should be teaching children sex ed, or abstinence only.

Now the graphic is quite funny to start with, but it's also quite true if you ask me.

Not providing this information to sexually active teenagers, who are going to have sex whether you want to or not, is a detriment to their health and safety.

You could argue it's a parents job to educate children on these matters, but parents who don't are again, putting their children at risk. We've been teenagers, and we've all broken every single rule our parents put in front of us where there was 0 chance for you to make your own decisions.

What are you thoughts ATS? Is this imagine an appropriate comparison?

~Tenth




posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 10:33 AM
link   
True.

Most parents are lazy when it comes to parenting. Others, the religious type, don't think its proper to educate their own children.

I say we just leave the kids to their own devices but educate them on safe sex, pregnancy preparedness and responsibility that goes along with sex.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 10:40 AM
link   
I learnt about sex from an encyclopaedia when I was about 7, was quite a shock but everything I needed to know was there (obviously I didn't need to know at 7). I think this is the best way as it avoids all embarrassment from talking about what may be an uncomfortable subject with someone you know.

I do think sex ed should be taught at school though, from around the age when you start high school. You need to know BEFORE anyone starts doing things so I think that's the appropriate age.

Teaching abstinence is stupid, because we are human beings.
edit on 11-7-2012 by SpearMint because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 10:44 AM
link   
The average American teenager doesn't need to be educated about sex. They know what it is, they know what condoms are, and they know that you don't want a baby.

The problem that needs to be taken care of is the baby crazy girls. The ones who, at 16 or 17, will go to great lengths to have a baby. They just want to get pregnant. That is your problem.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 10:44 AM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


I don't think it's the best comparison, especially when it's talking about teens. They know that sex is pleasurable. What pleasure do they get in crashing a car? That isn't tempting.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by enjoies05
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


I don't think it's the best comparison, especially when it's talking about teens. They know that sex is pleasurable. What pleasure do they get in crashing a car? That isn't tempting.


Clearly it's not the best comparison, but it's certainly appropriate.

" I can't give you information that will keep you safe, because you might do the thing I'm trying to teach you about, safely"

" I won't tell you what a seatbelt does, cause that might encourage you to speed into traffic, thinking you are safe"

~Tenth



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by enjoies05
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


I don't think it's the best comparison, especially when it's talking about teens. They know that sex is pleasurable. What pleasure do they get in crashing a car? That isn't tempting.


It's showing how people think that teaching kids about a safety measurement will cause them to do the "dangerous" act, it's not about how tempting the act itself is. It's better to know how to do something safely just in case, rather than not knowing and suffering the consequences. Let's face it, they are going to do it at some point.
edit on 11-7-2012 by SpearMint because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 10:54 AM
link   
Where I am at in Texas they start sex ed for both boys and girls in 6th grade using a two part video. The boys only get to watch the first half in 6th and then the second half in 7th but the girls watch both parts in 6th since they mature faster.

I personally am totally fine with them showing sex ed at that age because by time the kids are that age they have already been exposed to semi-erotic TV and after being around adults for 10-11 years they have picked up enough to know the basics.

I think we should teach them at pre-teen like they are doing here because it is already part of their lives whether you like it or not just from exposure. My son knows almost the same as a 12 year old virgin then I did as a 13 year old that had already had sex and he is not even interested in girls barely.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Headshot
The average American teenager doesn't need to be educated about sex. They know what it is, they know what condoms are, and they know that you don't want a baby.

The problem that needs to be taken care of is the baby crazy girls. The ones who, at 16 or 17, will go to great lengths to have a baby. They just want to get pregnant. That is your problem.


They may know what condoms are, but you need to be taught how to use them properly.

Without sex ed I would know what a condom is, but I wouldn't know that oil based lubricants can break them down and cause them to be ineffective and break, that's just one example.
edit on 11-7-2012 by SpearMint because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpearMint
It's better to know how to do something safely just in case, rather than not knowing and suffering the consequences. Let's face it, they are going to do it at some point.


I agree. Obviously. But the comparisons to other "dangerous" things like crashing into things or speeding isn't needed in my opinion. Things don't always need to be compared or over complicated.
edit on 7/11/12 by enjoies05 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Mr Headshot
 


I don't think so.
The problem is that most kids and teenagers know about sex from watching porn. Rarely do they use condoms in porn movies, so they see this stuff, think "that's the way it needs to be" and then you have a 14year old pregnant girl.It's the same as 30,40,50 years ago when kids "learned" about sex from their parents porn magazines or books like "Everything you want to know about sex".
I don't want to know how many teenagers became pregnant back then, there weren't a billion news stations and websites to report something like that (and especially in the USA people were way, way to prude to talk about it) They may what sex is but they have no clue about it.

I'm all for teaching kids about Sex. They need to learn about the risks, about what can happen and how to prevent STDs and pregnancy. And as another one said, it should happen when they are about 9, 10 years old - not 14-16 years when they all have been #ing around for some time, doing gangbangs and filming their own porn movies. Then it's just way too late.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 11:06 AM
link   
Today, our children are encouraged to have sex...not by schools (although they admittedly add to it with their "don't do this, don't do that" reverse psychology, which ALWAYS works on teenagers
) but by the MEDIA.

What does underage sex and teen pregnancy do for our economy? It weakens the next generation, and kind of stonewalls the usual opportunities for aspiring young adults. What do we do with that? Welfare, drugs, foster care, jail, and eventually death?

But where does our nation benefit from this? Welfare takes money out of those who earned it and gives it to those who don't deserve it (a lot of the time), drugs zombify and distract the people, foster care just undermines the chances of having a good life (not a constant, of course) and jail just teaches the wrong stuff to kids.

Death...won't even go there. Seriously, what does underage sex do for our country? What hidden agenda is served?
edit on 11-7-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 11:06 AM
link   
I agree very much the same idea. No sex ed can lead not just to an unplanned pregnancy but to STDs as well. Children need to be taught that unprotected sex can kill these days. Parents need to step up and educated their children about sex it should never have fallen on the schools to do it but there are parents out there that can't even be bothered to teach their kids anything more than not to walk in front of the TV while mom or dad are watching TV.

I was the neighborhood hang out for many of my sons friends and I was amazed at the lack of parenting in some of his friends households. My son wanted to go see a concert but the band was not playing in our state so since I am a fan as well we bought tickets and got a hotel room. Several of his friends went with us. I was amazed some of these parents had never met me, never been to our home, and didn't even ask for my cell number of the name and number of the hotel where we were staying. These kids were 13-15 years old. My sons girlfriend at the time came and her mother didn't even ask about sleeping arrangements. My husband and I couldn't believe it.

Point is someone needs to do it. There are STDs that can't be cured by a shot and some that can kill. An unplanned pregnancy can result in a child and how many high school kids are ready emotionally or financially for a child. That job must fall on someone.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 11:06 AM
link   

edit on 11-7-2012 by Ladysophiaofsandoz because: Fat finger double post



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


Honestly, I think its a piss-poor comparison.

When has there ever been a class about how airbags work in any school?

Common safety measures don't need to be taught in school because parents have been teaching these things to their kids right from the moment of birth. Parents teach their kids not to touch the hot stove, or run out into the street without looking and not to talk to strangers. Most schools don't bother teaching most of that stuff (maybe a little bit of don't talk to strangers but, that's it) because they know the parents have taught it to their children long ago. My kids are terrified to travel by car without their seatbelts buckled (although, this may really be a comment on my style of driving
) and it was not necessary for any school to step in and teach them that.

Schools work on the premise that parents won't talk to their children about sex. This used to be a common, if unconfortable, rite of passage for parents and children a few generations ago. With the schools taking over this role, the children often know about sex before they ever reach puberty and before the parents decide it is the appropriate time to have "the talk", rendering the parent's role almost redundant.

Now, the schools have taken over and have offered "values neutral' sex ed in the place of what the parents used to teach, often times even long before the children even become aware of their sexuality. They teach the mechanics of the operation and some of the health consequences associated with sex as well as ways to mitigate those health risks but, refrain from discussing the moral, ethical and emotional aspects of sex. Its like giving a man an assult rifel, training him how to shoot it accurately, break it down, clean it and put it back together but, not teaching him anything about the laws against murder or why it could be wrong to go around shooting people.

Schools have usurped the role of the parent and, because of their "values neutral" approach (because of the supposed "seperation of Church and state"), have only eneded up doing half of the job and they do it long before it is necessary for the children to learn about this subject.

Parents need to stand up against sex education in schools and reclaim their role in teaching this important subject to their children so the children can receive the full picture regarding this subject; the moral, ethical and emotional consequences as well as just the mechanics of the subject.


edit on 7/11/12 by FortAnthem because:
_________ extra DIV



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by enjoies05
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


I don't think it's the best comparison, especially when it's talking about teens. They know that sex is pleasurable. What pleasure do they get in crashing a car? That isn't tempting.


I think it works better than you're giving credit, though I starred the observation.
Sex is pleasurable like driving a car fast is pleasurable
It's the one time you wreck, or conceive that's the problem.

I blame it on the culture. Your body develops and is ready to do its natural duty by highschool which is considered too early to marry by most. It seems only natural that you'd see more unplanned pregnancies when you push the acceptable age for procreation back 10 or more years from the age where there is a capacity to procreate.

I think sex-ed should be taught at or near puberty. That's when it actually becomes something of consequence in a child's life. Chances are they will find out on their own when they become curious enough to look on the internet or in a book. I was once a pubescent male and I would've been all for "safe sex" but I'm going to ensure that my future daughter is afraid of penises. Teen boys are manipulative



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
Today, our children are encouraged to have sex...not by schools


but by nature.
I know that especially North Americans for a long time were taught that Sex is evil, comes from the devil and should be avoided at all costs (makes me wonder how you americans were able to survive) but Sex is just part of our lives, it's natural, we have a sexual drive that developes and it's always been the case that around 11,12 years you start to discover Sex and the lust for it. I mean hundreds of years ago 12 year olds were married and got kids. Sure they died with 35 but that is natures way. Just because today with all the 'medicine' and chemicals we become older and older doesn't mean that puberty thinks "well...i take a step back and start when the person is 25 as he will live until 75"


Originally posted by AfterInfinity
What does underage sex and teen pregnancy do for our economy?


What does you, sitting in front of the PC babbling on ATS do for the economy? NOTHING! Yet you still waste your time because apparently, you enjoy it.
Same with sex: People (unless they are prude or religious as hell) enjoy it. Sex (good sex, not the 20 minute crap some people think is sex) is awesome



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


The problem however is that parents aren't doing their job in most cases.

Who has time to properly raise kids and educate them when both parents have to work full time just to put food on the table and clothes on your back.

If parents were doing their job educating their children, then we would not have this problem at all to begin with.

Here's another comparison.

" I won't tell you the potential disasters caused by drinking and driving, because you might go out and drink and drive once you have the information."

Is that better? Abstinence only education is a crock of bs, and we all know it, look at the statistics and the studies behind it.

I'm with you, that parents should be the prime educators of their children, especially in matters of sex and other issues like religion etc.

But when they aren't doing that job, then we must provide them with an avenue to get this information. We teach kids about biology and reproduction, it's normally a requirement, so why not teach them about the dangers of having sex at young ages or the dangers of not using protection?

A school's job is to educate, I don't see how them doing what is they are suppose to do is "ussurping" the rights of parents.

~Tenth



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 11:18 AM
link   
For the record, I am a staunch advocate FOR teaching safe sex tactics in school. However...


Originally posted by tothetenthpower
Saw this today:




What are you thoughts ATS? Is this imagine an appropriate comparison?

~Tenth


Nope. Not even sort of.

Comparing a fundamental biological drive with a HUGE postive chemical pay off (sex, for those who may be confused), to having an life threatening, generally painfull, nearly always expensive and ultimately negative accident with a motor vehicle is one of the most absurdly asinine comparisons I have ever seen.

Completely illogical, transparantly propaganda-ist, and (IMO) not even sort of funny. Any one on the opposite side of this argument doesn't even need to try to shoot holes in this; it started out as swiss cheese.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 11:18 AM
link   
the most important factor when it comes to teens or pre teens and sex is that they receive all the proper information. All the reality that comes with being a sexually active person. We all know teens are going to have sex. They're raging with hormones and the human sex drive is one powerful essence. If they're going to be having sexual realtions, the best we can do in society is to see them out with proper education beforehand. I don't think it matters where it comes from. I think that if all parents did their job properly that we wouldn't need to have this discussion. Sadly thoguh, we have many parents who simply teach their children to resist their humanity and that sex is evil and God forbids it.
This kind of thinking is dangerous. It confuses children and they're more likely to made a stupid decision without any foresight or info on what's safe or not.
-If schools can deliver the reality of responsible vs dangerous sexual practices, then children will at the very least know what they're headed for. After that we can only hope they make the right decision.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join