Up To 50 kids may be exposed to the AIDS

[Koga No Goshi]

Proper use of condoms is 99.8% effective. This doesn't take into account the monumentally retarded, human error, "other types of intercourse" and human passion. Add all of that together and anything else I've missed (condom resistant diseases and parasites, the de-sensitization and the cost) and it is not the best thing to push. I have no problem with birth control - this isn't a religious issue for me. I have practical concerns with anything that is not alluring being pushed as a surefire way not to ruin your life when in reality it is impractical and nowhere near as effective as advertised. Birth control pills and vasectomy are a great trade off in a monogamous relationship, but condoms are an all-round loser.

I'm sure that this high school has a great sexual health program. It is a public, quasi-urban black school. I don't think that lack of sex ed is the problem here.

1. Almost no teenagers apparently use condoms properly. Because I don't know a single one of my sexually active friends from h.s. (during h.s., I mean) who didn't have at least one story about breaking a condom or having it roll up/come off. I am sure the hit-or-miss presence or quality of sex education in lower income and rural school districts (and many private schools if they are Christian and minimize the topic, as was the case with my h.s.) has a good deal to do with this. As well as parent & school & church conflicts over making condoms available. And Tuff you would be surprised how quick sex ed gets cut when underbudgeting is a problem for a lower income school.

2. It is not difficult at all for an STD starting with one person to end up with a 50 person spread. It has nothing to do with white or black. Think about how many people you've had sex with. How many they've had sex with. How many those people have had sex with. With adults who are not married or monogamous for long periods of time, it can be in the hundreds when it's all added up. Combined with the fact that STD's frequently take much longer to become symptomatic in women than in men, so an infected woman can be spreading a disease for awhile before she even knows she has one. Fifty is not a shockingly high number of a "sexual encounter family tree." Not even in high school, not even in a white high school these days.

Think about the "popular crowd" at your high school. How many of those people at various points dated one another? And how many of them also dated people from other schools (or older men frequently, in the case of goodlooking h.s. girls.) Even though I went to a small school of about 1,350, it is not difficult to imagine sexual contact linking 50 of them. In addition even assuming you got regular testing (which I am sure h.s. students do not) it takes what, 3-6 months for HIV to be reliably tested? That's a long time in light of the short-lived nature of h.s. relationships for a disease to spread around before anyone even suspects they have it.

[Husar]

You could also have both of you tested together before doing it but then that's hard to do between meeting and the devilish act in the same night I guess.

[ICantSpellDawg]

1. Almost no teenagers apparently use condoms properly. Because I don't know a single one of my sexually active friends from h.s. (during h.s., I mean) who didn't have at least one story about breaking a condom or having it roll up/come off. I am sure the hit-or-miss presence or quality of sex education in lower income and rural school districts (and many private schools if they are Christian and minimize the topic, as was the case with my h.s.) has a good deal to do with this. As well as parent & school & church conflicts over making condoms available. And Tuff you would be surprised how quick sex ed gets cut when underbudgeting is a problem for a lower income school.

2. It is not difficult at all for an STD starting with one person to end up with a 50 person spread. It has nothing to do with white or black. Think about how many people you've had sex with. How many they've had sex with. How many those people have had sex with. With adults who are not married or monogamous for long periods of time, it can be in the hundreds when it's all added up. Combined with the fact that STD's frequently take much longer to become symptomatic in women than in men, so an infected woman can be spreading a disease for awhile before she even knows she has one. Fifty is not a shockingly high number of a "sexual encounter family tree." Not even in high school, not even in a white high school these days.

Think about the "popular crowd" at your high school. How many of those people at various points dated one another? And how many of them also dated people from other schools (or older men frequently, in the case of goodlooking h.s. girls.) Even though I went to a small school of about 1,350, it is not difficult to imagine sexual contact linking 50 of them. In addition even assuming you got regular testing (which I am sure h.s. students do not) it takes what, 3-6 months for HIV to be reliably tested? That's a long time in light of the short-lived nature of h.s. relationships for a disease to spread around before anyone even suspects they have it.

If this was a private Catholic school or a public school in the bible belt, maybe you could blame this on the church - but this is sex-ed central.

I do, however, agree with all of your points (except for the religious dig).

[Koga No Goshi]

If this was a private Catholic school or a public school in the bible belt, maybe you could blame this on the church - but this is sex-ed central.

I do, however, agree with all of your points (except for the religious dig).

I didn't blame this particular story on the church. But between religious/moral influences and the underfunding of public schools, we cannot operate from the assumption that every teenager or even most teenagers out there have an understanding or even complete introduction to the proper use of contraceptives, nor have access to them. So I think many people were jumping the gun big time in laying this on people being "massively retarded" or "black."

[Rhyfelwyr]

Don't teach children or teenagers about sex education full stop. It just makes them careless and think that sleeping around is acceptable.

[rvg]

Don't teach children or teenagers about sex education full stop. It just makes them careless and think that sleeping around is acceptable.

I am rvg and I approve this message.

[Strike For The South]

Every generation tried to do that and every generation failed.

[Koga No Goshi]

Yeah sorry Rhyfe I know that's the goodly church line you're supposed to go out and sell but study after study after study shows that it fails. Abstinence programs are, in fact, one of the worst ways to prevent teenage sex and pregnancy.

[Samurai Waki]

Teach Children that sex is bad, and that they will go to hell and have their gender based body parts eaten by rabid wild dogs.

[FactionHeir]

It works to a much greater extent in conservative Asia, but not so much in Europe. Must be the mindset of people I guess.

[Koga No Goshi]

It works to a much greater extent in conservative Asia, but not so much in Europe. Must be the mindset of people I guess.

Asia is hugely accepting of abortion. Those super low Japanese out of wedlock birth rates? Has nothing to do with abstinence only. ;)

[ICantSpellDawg]

Teach them that sex is way more dangerous and way less fun than advertised by media and their peers.

It is great, but it is even greater with the right girl - and you are stupid if you think you've found her in high school.

Make them feel dumb about it. Use all of the fools who have contracted serious stds or ruined their lives as leverage.

[HoreTore]

Right. So if fumbling for a condom ruins the tertiary and the condom itself ruins the main sensation - why bother, right?

"Fumbling for a condom"? That's like the 5 first times. Geez. And the first times you have sex you'll be fumbling with a thousand other things anyway.

Gah! Condoms don't ruin the moment. If you want a tip, I can give you two: put it on while you do oral sex on the woman. Or let her put it on right after she has finished oral sex on you.

I really, honestly can't say I've ever had a problem with condoms. In fact I like them. A lot. For some reason, I can pound for an eternity with them, every time. Without them, it depends. So, first few times I'm doing a chick, that rubber gets on no matter what she says. Later, when the "urge to perform" goes down, it doesn't really matter to me if I use them or not.

Teach them that sex is way more dangerous and way less fun than advertised by media and their peers.

It is great, but it is even greater with the right girl - and you are stupid if you think you've found her in high school.

Make them feel dumb about it. Use all of the fools who have contracted serious stds or ruined their lives as leverage.

And this.... is just rubbish. Sex is dangerous? Not in a billion years. I don't consider driving my car dangerous, even though I might die the next time I get in. I might get an STD from the next chick I do, but why on earth should I worry about that?

[Banquo's Ghost]

I'm sorry. I know this is a site that has a preponderance of young males, but can we grow out of terminology like "doing chicks"?

Objectifying much? Women are human beings too, oddly enough, not "things" to "do".

I don't agree with Tuff's main argument, but the underlying message that sexual relationships should be treated with care and intimacy is strengthened when opponents use the above style of language.

This is not a moderator message, just a lament from another age.

[CrossLOPER]

I'm sorry. I know this is a site that has a preponderance of young males, but can we grow out of terminology like "doing chicks"?

Oh dear.

Thanks for that.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Yeah sorry Rhyfe I know that's the goodly church line you're supposed to go out and sell but study after study after study shows that it fails. Abstinence programs are, in fact, one of the worst ways to prevent teenage sex and pregnancy.

Well the current system clearly doesn't work, at least in Scotland. I know the extent of our problem with teenage pregnancies and abortions is also largely due to our booze culture, but there are so many parents by the age of 13 its just silly. They teach that its OK to have casual sex, apart from psychological issues (but I'll be with almost everyone else when saying I don't pay much attention to them). Reminds me of a programme we watched in a Health Education class. Basically, the presenter shows three different scenarios, and we were to guess in which one the people took AIDS. The first scenario was gay sex, the second was some strange kind of sex which I can't remember exactly, and the third was sharing needles for drugs. And at the end we were told that nobody in any of these scenarios took AIDS - in fact it was the presenter who contracted the disease. What is the moral of this story - I don't know! It seems to give the message that AIDS will just affect people at random and there's nothign you can do about it, and so sharing needles etc will not put you at any more risk than anyone else.

Well done to a retarded education system.

[CrossLOPER]

Well the current system clearly doesn't work, at least in Scotland. I know the extent of our problem with teenage pregnancies and abortions is also largely due to our booze culture, but there are so many parents by the age of 13 its just silly. They teach that its OK to have casual sex, apart from psychological issues (but I'll be with almost everyone else when saying I don't pay much attention to them). Reminds me of a programme we watched in a Health Education class. Basically, the presenter shows three different scenarios, and we were to guess in which one the people took AIDS. The first scenario was gay sex, the second was some strange kind of sex which I can't remember exactly, and the third was sharing needles for drugs. And at the end we were told that nobody in any of these scenarios took AIDS - in fact it was the presenter who contracted the disease. What is the moral of this story - I don't know! It seems to give the message that AIDS will just affect people at random and there's nothign you can do about it, and so sharing needles etc will not put you at any more risk than anyone else.

Well done to a retarded education system.

It does not sound like a well-rounded course.

[Louis VI the Fat]

I'm sorry. I know this is a site that has a preponderance of young males, but can we grow out of terminology like "doing chicks"?

Objectifying much? Women are human beings too, oddly enough, not "things" to "do".

Oh come on, Banquo.

Don't tell me you can look at these huge boobies without wanting to take this chick home with you.

[Koga No Goshi]

"Fumbling for a condom"? That's like the 5 first times. Geez. And the first times you have sex you'll be fumbling with a thousand other things anyway.

Gah! Condoms don't ruin the moment. If you want a tip, I can give you two: put it on while you do oral sex on the woman. Or let her put it on right after she has finished oral sex on you.

I really, honestly can't say I've ever had a problem with condoms. In fact I like them. A lot. For some reason, I can pound for an eternity with them, every time. Without them, it depends. So, first few times I'm doing a chick, that rubber gets on no matter what she says. Later, when the "urge to perform" goes down, it doesn't really matter to me if I use them or not.

Um well I might be treading on a bit of controversial/off-topic water here, but I think this is where cultural differences are coming into play a little bit. I absorbed a lot of sex & culture stats as part of biweekly mini-seminars I had to attend in college as a student-to-student peer counselor, usually a specific topic hosted by someone from the Student Health Center or similar organization. I think something to take into account (I notice that you are from Sweden) is that while this is quickly changing, a majority of American men are still circumcised. And to get into the controversial part (it's something cut men are not happy to acknowledge, and I don't blame them) studies do show that this reduces sensitivity by a significant degree-- but there are a lot of conflicts amongst the studies and there is no "widely accepted" conclusion, in part because for a very long time in the U.S. the medical community pretty much took a "nope, it's better, period, end of discussion" attitude about the topic. But some studies do report (amongst men who were circumcised later in life) roundabouts a 30% drop in sensitivity, as well as some types of motion/stimulation to which cut men reported no tactile sensation whereas uncut men did. And most men report similarly significant drops in sensation in sex with condoms. So you put the two together, I mean, in my own life (anecdotally) I could count for you on one hand the American male friends I had who didn't rather vocally complain that condoms killed sex for them, or vastly decreased its quality.

Just thought I'd throw it out there, because I think it is a confounder in a discussion between Americans and Europeans about whether or not condoms "ruin sex" for men.

[AlexanderSextus]

Waiting to have sex like Tuff is describing really seems to me to be a tad bit unrealistic.

See, it sounds like a great idea, right, but the thing is that sexual attraction is a very strong force. When you have a perfect, 36-24-36 (or in my case 36-24-40) girl in front of you, in her bra and panties, like "take your pants off" are you really gonna sit there and say, "nah, its safer for me not to, lets just watch a movie"?

Hell NO!!! you're gonna put on a condom and have lots of fun, and hopefully, end up with a great girlfriend who may end up being your wife one day. (Ideally, anyway.)

The notion of human error in condom use is a little weird to me too. Proper condom use is not rocket science. They even put INSTRUCTIONS on the damn box nowadays. INSTRUCTIONS for god's sake! As if i needed them before. Honestly, i knew how to use one properly when i was 13, before they even had the instructions; there were hundreds of websites, if you were serious enough to want to know how to be safe, that taught how to use a condom.

Seriously, if you're too stupid to use a condom the right way, i have a hard time understanding how you got laid in the first place. Maybe the girl was just as stupid. And if that's the case, then there's really nothing that can be done, because abstinence simply does not work.

[yesdachi]

Teaching kid’s abstinence is a foolish waste of time. A young couple, I am sure you remember being one if you still aren’t one, have racing hormones and “doing it” on the mind. I am not just referring to Banquo’s reference about boys, but also the teenage girls sitting behind my family at the movies this weekend as Zac took off his shirt during a scene of High School Musical 3. No bones about it they wanted to screw his brains out (made me miss my youth) but my point is that girls are every bit as into “doing it” at that age as guys, it just gets down-played and the horndog aspect of guys gets up-played. Promoting the use of condoms is the only real option. Admit that the horny kids are going to “do it” and give them what they need to avoid pregnancy and disease, while simultaneously teaching them to be respectful and considerate like a parent should already be doing.

Yes I did take the family to High School Musical 3.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

well I have managed to control my raging hormones, actually I should say "I managed" because I'm 21 now and more or less out the other side. Yes, teenagers want to have sex, and yes a fair number will when quite young but the current attitude of "well they're going to do it anyway" is far too blarsae (sp?) for me. I'm all for safe sex and condom ussage but I think its worth teaching children that sex is more than just a fancy way to masturbate and it involves another person. At the same time you do take all kinds of risks when you have sex, no matter how small, and that should be acknowledged.

Apparently the freshers at my Uni this year were given a condom in the welcome pack this year. That pretty much assumes they'll be doing it in the first week with someone they've just met.

am I the only one who thinks there's something wrong there?

as to the original AIDS thing, anyone thought it might be someone piecing ears rather than lots of teen sex?

[HoreTore]

(I notice that you are from Sweden)

SHOCK!! HORROR!!! THE SHAME!!!!!!

I might have to kill you tonight, Koga. In a delightfully painful way.

[Koga No Goshi]

SHOCK!! HORROR!!! THE SHAME!!!!!!

I might have to kill you tonight, Koga. In a delightfully painful way.

Oh crap... Nevermind that wasn't me.

*hides from Hore Tore*

[HoreTore]

Apparently the freshers at my Uni this year were given a condom in the welcome pack this year. That pretty much assumes they'll be doing it in the first week with someone they've just met.

Every time the uni's send out mail here, a condom is included.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Every time the uni's send out mail here, a condom is included.

That's not realy an answer to my point.

In any case, you're Norse. You whole view of sexuality up there is very different to Britain.

[CrossLOPER]

That's not realy an answer to my point.

I think you're taking the gesture too literally.

[HoreTore]

That's not realy an answer to my point.

Your point doesn't really matter, my reply was a little something I call "additional information"