Zelda
-
Posts
1,157 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Classifieds
Store
Posts posted by Zelda
-
-
http://www.yale.edu/ciqle/PUBLICATIONS/AfterThePromise.pdf I am certain that this will not change minds but for those who are interested in reading who sponsored the study, what methods were utilized , it is fascinating. It was featured in a peer reviewed journal aptly named, Adolescent Health. Of course it is authored by two Yale grads thus not a trustworthy source...please this is ridiculous. Disagree with their underlying beliefs , criticize their specific methods including the manner in which the data was gathered but suggesting that a study of this import is to be disregarded and scoffed at due to the presumed socioeconomic/political leanings of the authors is not satisfactory. Read the darn thing and then tear it to pieces if you wish but for gosh sakes I am a bit surprised by the responses here that clearly demonstrate that the study was not read. Articles about the study are not the same thing. http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/505765/description#description Link to description of said journal . Not the New Yorker etc
One person's fascinating is another person's ridiculous. That's why they make chocolate and vanilla. Medical journals are not the end all and be all of science, btw. The kind of machinations that go into getting published would probably surprise people who think medical journals are the same as medical fact. Not to mention that we're dealing with a subjective "science" here.
-
Why? I just read the whole article and it's fascinating. And part are downright funny. About the pledge movements:
"Bearman and Brückner have also identified a peculiar dilemma: in some schools, if too many teens pledge, the effort basically collapses. Pledgers apparently gather strength from the sense that they are an embattled minority; once their numbers exceed thirty per cent, and proclaimed chastity becomes the norm, that special identity is lost. With such a fragile formula, it’s hard to imagine how educators can ever get it right: once the self-proclaimed virgin clique hits the thirty-one-per-cent mark, suddenly it’s Sodom and Gomorrah."
These men are doing their research using credible sources of information and they are being published in peer-reviewed journals, not just The New Yorker.
Thank you Catherine, for bringing this up.
Because its in the New Yorker (I don't care where else it is). Because its a social science. Because its not statistical so much as subjective interpretation of numbers.
-
I haven't been there, and I'm sure you will have plenty of useful insights coming. But, for your own psyche, let's apply one of the standard rules of medicine: Common things occur commonly.
My boys routinely spray the seat and the floor... and the laundry... and sometimes the wall. I do not suspect there is a physical cause for this. They fairly frequently don't make it in time and have a wetting accident. (They're 4). I don't think it's a physical issue.
There is no reason for you to have suspected aiming issues - which, as far as I can tell, occur in about 90% of the male population - were due to anything medical at all. And it's not uncommon for kids to wait until the last. possible. second to go running to the toilet.
So, no mommy bashing. You are not Crescan the Magnificent.
Ok, on with the usable advice, then. ;)
Wow. I love this post. LOVE.
:grouphug: to the OP
-
I want to direct anyone who is interested to a book and some research done that addresses the topic of teenage sex, pre-marital sex, purity pledges and social\cultural\religious factors. Mark Regnerus is a researcher at University of Texas who has written a book about his work in this area. I confess I did not (yet) read it, but read excerpt after reading about his research in The New Yorker in a fascinating article called "Red Sex Blue Sex"
I would be very inclined to doubt the neutrality of this article and any research that was involved.
-
I read that as "edible" and thought, "I really hope not". Glad you got some answers.
-
My experiences are more like SpyCar's. I did not wait for marriage, and I do not regret my decision at all. I know women who did wait for marriage who are extremely dissatisfied sexually.
I know women who waited and women who did not, and I think the women who did not wait in general have more satisfying relationships. (Not to say that all women who waited are unhappy- I know some very happy couples who waited.)
When the time comes, I will recommend my daughters live with a man before marrying them, to ensure they are compatible "room-mates" as well as compatible sexually.
I find it very odd that there seems to be a link between sexual happiness in a marriage and prior sexual experience. I find it equally strange that sexual happiness with a person prior to marriage guarantees it 10 years later. I think its entirely possible that delaying sex until marriage can create a marriage with the typical ebbs of flows in all aspects of the relationship all of which require some work and commitment by both parties.
Our world is full of examples of people who tore it up before marriage still end up being unhappy with their sex life. What's that about?
-
I wonder if part of the problem also is that we pressure children to delay marriage. I see no problem with my young adults falling in love, marrying, and supporting each other through college. In fact I think that could help them to remain strong in an immoral environment.
This is a great point and I think it goes to this whole movement toward a society that feels that failure is not an option. You know, because failure makes us feel bad. So we lower the bar until we can easily step over it and then we throw a party for ourselves. We've moved away from the idea of pairing up at a younger age and weathering the storms of marriage so that we could have less divorce. In exchange we got a society that celebrates promiscuity and places an outrageous importance on sex raising it to a level that actually makes most people feel like they are doing it wrong because in their own lives it doesn't take on that level of import.
Its wild that now teen pregnancy is only a failure if you've appeared to make a commitment to avoid it. The same group that acknowledges that teen sex is such a temptation that we should just accept its likelihood are the same ones who point fingers of blame at teens whose families still tried to avoid it. Our progressive society has decided that its only a failure if you bothered to try.
-
Yes, the risk is taking oaths that very likely will not be kept. Call me old-fashioned, but to me not keeping solemn promises is extremely bad behavior. I don't make promises i don't think I can keep, and I certainly wouldn't coerce a child of mine into a position where they felt forced to do so.
Does this mean you don't teach right from wrong? No. But making false oaths to me falls in to the class of wrongs. And the various quotes posted earlier by Lori shows there are numerous references in the Hebrew and Christian that show making false oaths to God is considered an grave offense in those faith systems.
And such oaths are unnecessary since a child can follow their faith (or their internal sense of right and wrong) and remain a virgin without taking oaths, wearing rings, or engaging in public ceremonies.
I didn't suggest anyone should abandon their faith or their beliefs.
I'm unaware of a religion that requires "virginity oaths" as part of its practice. And again, taking "oaths" seems to be a discouraged practice from my (limited) understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition.
Bill
I find the difference between breaking an oath and committing a mortal sin to be a pretty blurry line. I'm neither personally for nor against the oath actually. In my argument I'm believing the oath to be an extension of the commitment to godly principles I imagine are inherent in the religion. I'm basically saying what Drew says, that the oath is extraneous to the idea. I don't know that the presence of the oath creates any stronger a dedication to the spiritual commitment...it merely brings a physicality to it. I don't think it increases your liability to God. I don't believe that's the intention.
-
Really? I only have my non-religious form of "sacred promises" to go by, but when I got married and took an (secular) oath to be faithful to my wife I sure took it seriously.
And I haven't been too weak to keep the pledge without the benefit of belief in supernatural forces. You all know better than me, but I'd be really shy about putting kids in a position where they might end up lying to a divine being that they faithfully believe exists and judges them and the promise they make. Seems risky to me.
Bill
The risk being that they will make a promise and not be true to their word? Perhaps I'm not understanding you. Because I don't think we lower our standards until they are sufficiently easy to meet and failure becomes exceedingly unlikely.
For people of faith I don't think its going to be very convincing to suggest that they abandon their belief because its tough for kids to live up to the moral code of their religion.
-
Purity pledges are based on the belief that sexual activity should be inextricably bound with marriage. If a person believes that and then has sex outside of marriage, their sense of guilt is the natural consequence of the dissonance between their beliefs and their behavior. In other words, their conscience is doing its job.
Well said.
In a world that tries to avoid making anyone feel bad about anything a conscience isn't seen as a positive thing anymore . Too bad.
-
-
-
Nah, it's expected of girls these days.
I would add that its expected by their peer group. There is no pressure to be "nice" anymore.
-
Well, I do not intend to make prophylactics available to my children. Meaning, they will not get them from me.
-
You would rather your teen son have sex and possibly become a teen parent so he won't be stigmatized?!?
I believe the exact same pressure is now applicable to girls who delay sex. They are prudes or cold or unpopular.
-
If they understand the potential natural consequences does this mean they will also have information and access to prophylactic measures that could reduce the chances of unintended pregnancy or contraction of STDs?
Or will they just have to play the odds?
Bill
Given that no system but abstinence is fool proof they are playing the odds either way.
-
Personally, I don't think teenagers would lack the desire to explore their sexuality absent pervasive sexual content in the media.
The desire for sex is an innate desire, and as such it isn't one that needs to be fanned by suggestive content and isn't one likely to be repressed by measures such as virginity pledges.
That doesn't mean there are no valid reasons in our modern cultural context not to teach our children to delay sexual experience, outside of guilt and shame.
There is a middle ground that involves establishing a child's self-respect and feelings of self-worth with open and honest communication between parent and child. The current media obsession with sexuality I believe is destructive to finding that middle path, where human sexuality is a gift and not a destructive curse.
Such a course requires maturity on the part of both parent and child, and both highly-sexualized media and things like virginity pledges are destructive to this end. At least that's my feeling.
Bill
I will in turn surprise you by agreeing with almost everything you say here. I do not agree that the virginity pledge has to be a shaming experience. Its my experience that these families are actually very open about human sexuality and its benefits but prefer that their children delay sex until marriage. Often the pledge is private.
-
The lineup for the Nickelodian channels is horrifying. Degrassy and a ton of other shows actually have TEENS having sex, or at least discussing it.
Having it in very casual, adult ways too. And yet we expect so little of them in terms of being productive. They can have casual sex but still need mom to do their laundry? Go to job interviews with them? We infantilize them when it comes to responsibility and then rush their maturation when it comes to recreation.
-
But then why has sexual activity always occurred in young teens, even before the so-called on set of over-sexed media? Though out history kids have had sex at a young age. Yes, most times they were married off, to one not of their choosing. But still, where do we get the idea that kids will not wish to explore their sexuality if there were no sexual images in the "outside" world?
And do boys get rings too or something else?
Just wondering...
I've never heard anyone assert that they would not wish to. I would just prefer them to not get the messages about sex that the media pushes. Their interpretations of what is desirable and healthy don't mesh with mine.
-
The children that are subjected to constant references to adult sexuality in the media are the ones that really need to be the object of our concern. It is no better to be pushed into sexual expression than it is to be told that sex is wrong (though I have yet to meet a single person who is teaching their child this).
-
Can't imagine where you got that from. :rolleyes:
I can. ;)
-
This is a great example of how you can play with the numbers to get the desired result. I guess what it proves more than anything is that decisions about morality need to be based on a standard that is something other than the most likely result as "proven" in a study.
-
Starting my second year with it but might not until next week when my folks go home.
-
Oh, good! A nurse checking in. Thanks, Karen!
I'd heard the suggestion for more water, but I certainly didn't drink one for one.
About the suggestions folks gave for using pain relievers after drinking, I thought that was a no-no. Isn't it hard on the organs (the liver or kidneys, perhaps)?
I wouldn't mix Tylenol and alcohol if one can help it. It can be hepatotoxic.
New Study about Virginity Pledges
in General Education Discussion Board
Posted
No, I do not discard all studies published in professional journals. I spend a good deal of my time each morning reading medical journals on a particular subject. Because of how specific my area of interest is I'm able to see which studies were done well and which were heavily manipulated in desperate attempts to get published.
Virginity pledges are not an area of specific interest to me so I'm loathe to spend a bunch of time reading the study and evaluating the data. So I used the following formula:
New Yorker liberal agenda + Unbridled support of anti-Christian community + Highly subjective data + Highly subjective field of science = Significant doubt as to the objectivity of the results
Notice that I always expressed doubt and nothing more. Facile? Perhaps. But part of gathering knowledge of the world around you is to simplify some of your decisions by basing them on what you already know.