sex is dirty, you will get syphilis and die

http://www.journalnow.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=WSJ/MGArticle/WSJ_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1173353751674&path=!nationworld&s=1037645509161

Abstinence is a nice idea.. sort of. I can readily understand that relationships where sex becomes a prominent part too soon can become rather less than optimal soon thereafter. Sex when it evolves as a part of a relationship is fine. Great even. Waiting for it (like for marriage) gives it some special prominence that it probably doesn't deserve. It's good to have sex, but considering how most people do, it's probably not the best thing in the world (I don't see this personally, but I can imagine given all the fuss it's given in comedy about how bad people are at sex. I can't imagine how bad everyone is the first time without practice, but it must be pretty bad because people are always laughing). Here's the problem with teaching abstinence as a solution to things like STDs and teen pregnancy. It doesn't do anything. It's not a solution. Teens have hormones. These hormones impede or otherwise short circuit regular decision making. It's possible to control one's self, admirable in many respects. But to expect all people to impose equal and high levels of self control as it regards sex, which combines both the raging hormones with confusing emotional and physical needs that have developed over puberty, is exceedingly unlikely. Teaching that there are consequences to our behaviors is of course useful. But teaching that there are ways to minimize those consequences and still experience a good deal of otherwise healthy behavior is ultimately smarter on a societal level. Because it's pretty clear that teens and young single adults are going to have a healthy level of sexual activity regardless of whether we tell them not to do it. And well should they because it can be a valuable, if sometimes painful, lesson for some. What it should not be accompanied with is the more serious (read: worse than embarrassment/emotional trauma) consequences of STDs or the complex decision of abortion/adoption resulting of a pregnancy. If some attempts are made to teach how avoid these problems, guess what, kids are generally smart enough to make some amends to their intended behaviors.

Personally, on the individual level, parents can try to impose some code of conduct as it regards sexual activity upon their children. To be fair, the most effective way to prevent such behavior is probably to generally be so overwhelmingly humiliating such that the child has no self-respect to begin with and therefore does not trust other human beings enough to let them have verbal contact, much less physical or sexual contacts. This is perhaps not the best way to raise a child with some hope for a prosperous and successful future however. Maybe it's functional if one wants to raise sociopathic killers or terrorists. But not so much for human beings. The easiest and least painful means for such imposition is to have some levels of communication between parents and children. Akward as it may be, talking about sex, in a serious manner, generally allows people to have some appreciation for the act itself that isn't limited to some lewd pornographic depiction of it, where children otherwise would learn about sexual activity in the modern world. Though they might emerge with some more creative sexual techniques and positions, they aren't going to learn very much about how sex is part of a relationship or the emotional damages it can cause to some if it's not. Women unfortunately are the ones with greater neurochemical responses to orgasms that lead to emotional responses. So naturally men need to either be not very good in bed or realize that if they do know what they're doing, they better have a plan on what to do after it's over. Because they may be stuck with this girl for a while if they don't, and that may be good, or it may be bad. I suppose like many things we say that it gets better over time..which might be true, but I think people get bored with it faster than it gets better. And if there isn't some structure in place that supercedes sexual intimacy, it's pretty much a waste of time personally.

Maybe it would help if instead of seeing sex as a weakness, akin to addictions like alcohol or drugs, sex was a wonderful form of recreation, engaged in between (generally two) people who have an accompanying intimate bond emotionally. This is not to say agape or pure love, but at least something like a genuine respect for the other person (s). We as a society are quick to depict sex, but it is rarely if ever shown in a positive manner. Sexual behaviors on TV or other mediums tend to emphasize aggressive and casual use of others, or provocative self-displays, rather than any manner of self or mutual respect. Whereas beer commercials always show men commisserating with his closest companions and a few dozen scantily clad women observing the latest great sporting event on a gigantic TV. As though this was an honest portrayal of beer drinking. Never is beer shown afterwards with someone having a raging hangover puking into a toilet after having pissed on some random dumpster the night before and waking up with no scantily clad women around, or if they are scantily clad, they themselves are probably in the same unpleasant condition, hungover and disorientated, thus in no condition for any pre-working/school sexual romp. This is essentially the type of extreme portrait shown as it regards sex in any overt manner on media. What sort of mixed messages are we to receive? Sex is great, but it's dirty and we shouldn't want it? But we do, because that beer commercial plays on that desire. So we have to suppress it and only expose our filthy lustful desire when we're intoxicated.. ? So yes, our society is full of it.

And until it loses this strange mixed signal, experts can continue to predict rises in teen pregnancy and STD transmission rates.