Jump to content

Menu

Allowing (encouraging) your teen to have s*x


DawnM
 Share

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, regentrude said:

Teens will have sex. I'd rather they do it in the safety and privacy of their own home rather than in a car in some lovers lane or behind a dumpster in the park. Having to hide from the parents doesn't create safe situations. 

Except that many, many teens choose not to have sex, particularly if they grow up with consistent messaging and examples of saving that for marriage.  Not all teens, obviously.  They’re all going to make their own choices.  But doesn’t it make sense to encourage the wiser course of action?

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thinking about this more...  I think it's easy to interpret how Christians calling premarital sex a "sin" as it being wrong simply because of some rigid rule.   As a Christian, I think sex is ideally meant to be a beautiful aspect of a life-long commitment to another person, but not because of some rigid morals.  Like, is deciding to eat cake for dinner every night instead of a healthy, balanced meal a sin?   No, but it's generally not what's best for us in the long run.  That's how I think of premarital sex.  It doesn't even mean it's going to mess up someone's life or future relationships.  

But, sex is very complicated and has many layers, some of which have been brought up on this thread already.  It can also be exploited so easily, and have some pretty devastating outcomes.  Throughout the life of a long-term commitment, sex has value that goes far, far beyond a lesser version that might be experienced in short-term teen or non-committed relationships.  

Anyway -- just a little side-track, thinking about another way to view "waiting" on sex from a Christian's perspective instead of just labeling it a moral sin.  I do agree with @FuzzyCatz though that life doesn't always go as you expect and sometimes you aim for making the least bad choices.

 

Edited by J-rap
correcting grammar :)
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Excelsior! Academy said:

I am shocked how many times I am in the minority on this board.  Paying for a hotel room for two teens to share with the assumption and/or expectation that they may be having s@x is a hard no for me.  I am a Christian, but from a non-Christian standard I still see problems with it.  The possibility of conception, even while using contraception, possibility of std's, and possibility of teen romance drama is just not worth it.  One could argue that none of those are going to happen, but I wouldn't feel comfortable with nonetheless.

I don’t think your opinion is in the minority on this, except for maybe the strength of it. If you go by posts on this thread, most would be opposed. If you go by likes of posts, it’s a bit closer. Plus, we don’t know where all of the lurkers stand.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, DawnM said:

Ok, I am positive I grabbed your attention!

No, not my me or my kid....🤣

I am just a little surprised.   Some friends of ours have a teen daughter.   She is bringing her new relationship on a family trip and the parents are allowing them to stay in their own hotel room together.   they are even paying for it.

ETA:  To me, this fact didn't matter, but I will add it into the first post.....teens are 16 and 17 years old.   Dating a few weeks.   Parents have some money but are not rich, solid middle class.   I find their daughter to be spoiled and whiney, but that is just my opinion.   They tend to dote on her.   so, I don't see any strain in their relationship.   

Am I the only one who feels this just isn't quite right?   Or am I just an old fogie?

I would not be against a young couple sharing a room at a young age. In this case, however, they've only been together a few weeks and that alone would make me say no. I can see allowing a couple that had been together for a longer period of time to share. A few weeks? Nope, I wouldn't pay for a boyfriend to tag along yet. 

I can understand the hesitations because of setting the appearance, creating opportunity, even if you know they're already having s*x. 

Edited by elegantlion
clarifying statement
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Condessa said:

Except that many, many teens choose not to have sex, particularly if they grow up with consistent messaging and examples of saving that for marriage.  Not all teens, obviously.  They’re all going to make their own choices.  But doesn’t it make sense to encourage the wiser course of action?

I think it depends on what you consider the wiser course of action. I was raised to wait until marriage, but I actually don’t consider it the right thing to promote. I think it can seriously mess up one’s view of sex and that a slowly growing physical relationship is a natural part of a healthy, committed relationship that is growing and maturing. Hearing about those families that save even kissing until the wedding day and then go from almost zero to everything overnight sounds terrible and unnatural to me. Now I also don’t agree with the idea that all teens are going to have sex and we should just be fine with it. Plus recent data shows that it is no longer the norm. Personally, I think it’s best saved for a serious, committed relationship. While a minority of teens might find themselves in such relationships, I don’t think most people will be there until they are older.

I do share concerns about unplanned pregnancies and STDs whether married or not. That’s why I would always emphasize using two effective methods of birth control and comprehensive education.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Excelsior! Academy said:

I am shocked how many times I am in the minority on this board.  Paying for a hotel room for two teens to share with the assumption and/or expectation that they may be having s@x is a hard no for me.  I am a Christian, but from a non-Christian standard I still see problems with it.  The possibility of conception, even while using contraception, possibility of std's, and possibility of teen romance drama is just not worth it.  One could argue that none of those are going to happen, but I wouldn't feel comfortable with nonetheless.

It’s weird how perceptions work.  32 people commented before you on this thread.  Four of them addressed side issues and did not say whether they’d pay for a hotel room for teenagers.  Sixteen said they would not.  Eight said it would depend on age and four said they would have no problem with a teenage boyfriend/girlfriend sharing a room with their teenager. So you are clearly in the majority, at least of people who’ve posted,  and yet feel like you’re in the minority. 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Katy said:

I’m struggling with all the references to a teenage “significant other.”  To me SO means serious, adult, committed relationship, equivalent to marriage but you aren’t married for some personal or political reason.  Not a first or fifth boyfriend.  Teenagers aren’t capable of having a significant other. 

I say that knowing several couples in their 40’s who started dating their spouse in 7th or 8th grade. Even if you think you’re in love there are way too many unknowns when you are 13 or even 17 to call a boyfriend or girlfriend a significant other. 

I think there's enough fuzziness around the edges of "significant other" to make it an acceptable shorthand for relationships that don't necessarily meet your unilaterally imposed definition.

My son and his ex-girlfriend started dating when they were 17 and were together for over four years, including essentially living together for two stretches of time. It was a first relationship for both. They didn't end up married, but they were absolutely a serious couple, and the relationship was absolutely "significant." 

In fact, I wish I had thought to just caller her SO at the time when mentioning her here. It would have saved my fingers from needing to type "girlfriend" over and over.
 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

no, just no.   granted I came from a messed up family - but I grew up with tolerance and passive aggressive comments about this stuff.   It only encouraged teen drama, not to mention there were teen pregnancies and abortions, despite contraceptives.  I'm not going to go into all of it, but it was not healthy.  at. all.

you can be supportive of teen relationships without going this far! - so claiming that as an excuse, is pretty lame.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been thinking about this all morning.  
 

Really for myself — I think I want to be neutral as far as — coming across like I want to choose or weigh in excessively on relationship choices.

 

But I also want to provide guidance.

 

To me — if I was going to be neutral — it would potentially mean that a younger sibling’s new dating partner would also need to be invited in the future, to not be playing favorites in some way?

 

And if not — I think it can just backfire so much to play favorites with one young person over another — based on what is likely to be a shallow impression.  
 

Really I think — there are times when parents think a young person is amazing, but then he turns out to be Josh Duggar (or something).

 

I think just the thought process where parents think certain kids are a catch — and want to encourage those relationships — sometimes they are right and sometimes they are wrong.

 

Especially when they do not know someone well!  
 

I also think there are young men who will act one way around family members, and then that is not necessarily how they act within the relationship, but it puts the young woman in a position of feeling like — she will have no support if she leaves the relationship or doesn’t think it is as good as she is supposed to think it is.  
 

There is maybe something like this I am close to, and the young woman has distanced herself from her family in a way I find really sad.  Like — they are still close, but she is not interested in their opinion on some things in a way I think is too bad.  
 

Really I come back to thinking — it is hard for me to believe that the parents would invite someone this way, without believing this was a desirable person.  If it was someone they didn’t like, they wouldn’t invite him, unless there was some situation there where they needed to do it to help their relationship with their daughter.

 

But I think it is just — not appropriate for parents to be involved that way in pushing a relationship, and I think it is pushing.  

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Condessa said:

Except that many, many teens choose not to have sex, particularly if they grow up with consistent messaging and examples of saving that for marriage.  Not all teens, obviously.  They’re all going to make their own choices.  But doesn’t it make sense to encourage the wiser course of action?

I am not on board with “in my house is safer”. And it kinda grossed me out.  I am on board with increasing the odds of well protected sex rather than the existing risk of unprotected or less protected sex.

I know kids aren’t all going to have sex. But, if they do, I want mine to keep living normal lives without hardship or judgment. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think younger teen sex is almost always a bad idea, 16-17 might be okay if already been in a healthy relationship awhile, and 18 plus fine if in relationship. In this situation, I would probably say no because it's an early relationship and even if they were already having sex, I wouldn't want to bring him because it's too early for that sort of family support at that age.

My kids are now 23 and 20, and if they wanted to bring a new boyfriend/girlfriend along on something, we'd pay for a room assuming that's what they wanted. I am supportive of premarital sex in a healthy relationship, but also believe it is a serious thing, particularly for younger teens. Waiting until you are old enough to deal well with the serious is a good thing. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it’s icky. Religious POV aside, I think it’s icky to have any financial contribution or do the setting up of my kid getting with someone romantically.  I’d feel like I was pimping my kid and that’s a hard hells no for me.

We also won’t drive them to dates.  So at least I’m consistent. LOL

I have always had a policy that a child not old enough to do something on their own probably isn’t old enough to help do it.  So for example if we went to a playground and they couldn’t climb the jungle gym themselves - we never picked them up and put them on it. We might discuss pointers of foot placement or encouragement but we never actually made it happen for them. Bc they obviously to me were not developmentally ready to do that.  It’s not been a perfect marker of development - but it’s been a surprisingly accurate one most of the time.

We sorta defaulted to romantic relationships the same way. They have to be able to schedule it and arrange it and afford it all on their own.  I’d feel icky if I was involved in making that happen for them.

As for sleeping arrangements.  I’d be extremely surprised if any of my kids thought they had a chance of us setting up the rooms so they could have conjugal time with their bf/gf. We have had adult relatives and friends stay with us who have live in arrangements and when they stay with us - they get separate rooms and it’s not even discussed. They presume they will sleep in separate rooms and there’s no angst of anything about it. This has included my own father when he was alive, uncles, roommates of older siblings, family friends…

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mentioned this to my husband and he was like - “we just spent a week going down to Houston and then up to Wichita and back. And WE did not get to sleep alone in our room and enjoy any conjugal time. Hell if we are paying for our kids to get some! And yeah of course all that other stuff too.”

😂🙄😁

  • Like 1
  • Haha 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hard no from me. But then the sex talk from me never came from a religious perspective. I gave my daughter the same sex talk my mom gave to me:

No method of birth control is 100 percent. NONE. ( Heck, my daughter was conceived while taking birth control pills.) If you do not think the current guy you are dating would make a good father, if you are not ready to be a mom and financially support a child, if you are not willing to put away your goals ( ie, going to college) to have a baby, then don't have sex. Period.  It was never, ever worth it to me to be saddled with a baby. It was hard enough being married. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have a potential similar situation happening over Christmas. Our family will be traveling and our former German exchange student might join us with his girlfriend. We'll be renting an AirBNB and are trying to calculate how many rooms/beds we need. Our girls would prefer to share a room only with each other or possibly ds. I believe, though haven't confirmed it, that our exchange student would prefer to share with his gf. DH says if they're not married, they.will.not share a room. The youngest adults here are our exchange student/girlfriend who are about 18 yo and have been together for about 5 years. If they join us, we'll likely have single gender rooms for the 5 young adults and a room for dh and I, even though most of the young adults would prefer different arrangements. I don't feel it would be a problem for our German friends to share a room. I have other German friends who have lived together and raised families together and aren't married, so I believe this is likely a cultural difference.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Murphy101 said:

I think it’s icky. Religious POV aside, I think it’s icky to have any financial contribution or do the setting up of my kid getting with someone romantically.  I’d feel like I was pimping my kid and that’s a hard hells no for me.

We also won’t drive them to dates.  So at least I’m consistent. LOL

I have always had a policy that a child not old enough to do something on their own probably isn’t old enough to help do it.  So for example if we went to a playground and they couldn’t climb the jungle gym themselves - we never picked them up and put them on it. We might discuss pointers of foot placement or encouragement but we never actually made it happen for them. Bc they obviously to me were not developmentally ready to do that.  It’s not been a perfect marker of development - but it’s been a surprisingly accurate one most of the time.

We sorta defaulted to romantic relationships the same way. They have to be able to schedule it and arrange it and afford it all on their own.  I’d feel icky if I was involved in making that happen for them.

As for sleeping arrangements.  I’d be extremely surprised if any of my kids thought they had a chance of us setting up the rooms so they could have conjugal time with their bf/gf. We have had adult relatives and friends stay with us who have live in arrangements and when they stay with us - they get separate rooms and it’s not even discussed. They presume they will sleep in separate rooms and there’s no angst of anything about it. This has included my own father when he was alive, uncles, roommates of older siblings, family friends…

I'm having trouble with the idea that dropping my kid and his girlfriend at mini golf is "pimping them out".  

To me, that is an entirely different thing from getting them a room together at a hotel.  I can't see any inconsistency in doing one and not the other.  

  • Like 7
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BaseballandHockey said:

I'm having trouble with the idea that dropping my kid and his girlfriend at mini golf is "pimping them out".  

To me, that is an entirely different thing from getting them a room together at a hotel.  I can't see any inconsistency in doing one and not the other.  

To be clear, while I wouldn't pay for a hotel room for a teenager and their bf/gf, I don't consider that "pimping" either.  But at least there I can wrap my mind around the thought process.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, regentrude said:

This. I don't have a religion that considers premarital sex a sin. I don't attach any moral value to a person's consensual sex life ( person being above the age of consent) in a committed relationship. Nor does the latter have any negative character implications.

( Despite my lose morals, both my young adults are in year 5 with their respective partners)

So if they had partner after partner after partner throughout the same five year period...what would your bolded sentence be?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TexasProud said:

No method of birth control is 100 percent. NONE

I do hope all parents are stressing that point. My (big) kids know about my own birth control failures.

I also hope parents are talking about all of the other important issues mentioned; power imbalances, mind games, future goals, inner strength, self-worth, availability of sincere parental guidance and unconditional love, and all the other things that guide (all sorts of) relationships well before they’re IN them.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, pinball said:

So if they had partner after partner after partner throughout the same five year period...what would your bolded sentence be?

 

Wouldn’t your scenario negate her statement of “… in a committed relationship”. In my experience, most kids raised with the example of a committed relationship are not going to engage in numerous, casual serial sexual relationships. Of course there is no  guarantee, just as emphasizing no sex before marriage guarantees nothing.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, BaseballandHockey said:

I'm having trouble with the idea that dropping my kid and his girlfriend at mini golf is "pimping them out".  

To me, that is an entirely different thing from getting them a room together at a hotel.  I can't see any inconsistency in doing one and not the other.  

Pimping to me is basically arranging for other people to have an intimate encounter. That intimacy may or may not include sex acts. In fact, ideally, most intimacy isn’t a sex act.  

To me, people who are ready to have such intimacy should also be ready to facilitate all that such a relationship entails, such as making arrangements to get to those people, pay for whatever while with those people, and accept any consequences of that intimacy.

Now if an adult is like hey I am ready do all that but I need help finding those people so I’m going to use Catholicmatch.com to find them? Okay.  But I wouldn’t make the Catholic match account for my kids of any age either.  Because to me that’d be an icky child/parent boundary I have no interest in crossing. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

Pimping to me is basically arranging for other people to have an intimate encounter. That intimacy may or may not include sex acts. In fact, ideally, most intimacy isn’t a sex act.  

To me, people who are ready to have such intimacy should also be ready to facilitate all that such a relationship entails, such as making arrangements to get to those people, pay for whatever while with those people, and accept any consequences of that intimacy.

Now if an adult is like hey I am ready do all that but I need help finding those people so I’m going to use Catholicmatch.com to find them? Okay.  But I wouldn’t make the Catholic match account for my kids of any age either.  Because to me that’d be an icky child/parent boundary I have no interest in crossing. 

 

So, you are saying that no kids should ever do anything with any peers (because intimacy is not just about sexual encounters) until they are able to afford their own car and cell phone?  (Because at least here, a car is required to get anywhere.  My kids couldn't walk anywhere to meet a friend, and there is no functional public transit.).  

I'm really not following the logic that dropping kids at mini golf is in any way pimping them out, or even that it's an equivalency with renting them a hotel room.  

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

Pimping to me is basically arranging for other people to have an intimate encounter. That intimacy may or may not include sex acts. In fact, ideally, most intimacy isn’t a sex act.  

To me, people who are ready to have such intimacy should also be ready to facilitate all that such a relationship entails, such as making arrangements to get to those people, pay for whatever while with those people, and accept any consequences of that intimacy.

Now if an adult is like hey I am ready do all that but I need help finding those people so I’m going to use Catholicmatch.com to find them? Okay.  But I wouldn’t make the Catholic match account for my kids of any age either.  Because to me that’d be an icky child/parent boundary I have no interest in crossing. 

 

So, when I drove my elderly GFIL to wave to his beloved sister through the window on Christmas during covid, was I pimping him out too?  I mean their relationship is pretty intimate after 90 years!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Terabith said:

So, you are saying that no kids should ever do anything with any peers (because intimacy is not just about sexual encounters) until they are able to afford their own car and cell phone?  (Because at least here, a car is required to get anywhere.  My kids couldn't walk anywhere to meet a friend, and there is no functional public transit.).  

I'm really not following the logic that dropping kids at mini golf is in any way pimping them out, or even that it's an equivalency with renting them a hotel room.  

It's not.

When my 17 year old had a girlfriend, I used to drive them to our local amusement park or the mall, or whatever.   They were often with a group of people, but not always.  

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, BaseballandHockey said:

I'm having trouble with the idea that dropping my kid and his girlfriend at mini golf is "pimping them out".  

To me, that is an entirely different thing from getting them a room together at a hotel.  I can't see any inconsistency in doing one and not the other.  

This is exactly what I mean by the strict teaching of no sex before marriage due to religious beliefs potentially leading to unhealthy views on sex and relationships.

Edited by Frances
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Terabith said:

So, you are saying that no kids should ever do anything with any peers (because intimacy is not just about sexual encounters) until they are able to afford their own car and cell phone?  (Because at least here, a car is required to get anywhere.  My kids couldn't walk anywhere to meet a friend, and there is no functional public transit.).  

I agree.

I grew up in an area like you described. One regrettable outcome was that kids (often girls) who could not regularly get rides with their parents would try to find older boyfriends who had cars. So instead of having a 14 year old dating a 14 year year old and getting driven to mini-golf by a parent, you had a 14 year old dating a 17 year old and driving...well, wherever the 17 year old wanted pretty much, because the 14 year old would be pressured to go with the flow lest she be dumped by the car owner and stuck at home alone.

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, wendyroo said:

I agree.

I grew up in an area like you described. One regrettable outcome was that kids (often girls) who could not regularly get rides with their parents would try to find older boyfriends who had cars. So instead of having a 14 year old dating a 14 year year old and getting driven to mini-golf by a parent, you had a 14 year old dating a 17 year old and driving...well, wherever the 17 year old wanted pretty much, because the 14 year old would be pressured to go with the flow lest she be dumped by the car owner and stuck at home alone.

Right.  And even if a teen gets a job, they really have to get a ride from someone, because they can't get to their job at Kroger or Chick Fil A independently either.  Which makes it a vicious circle when it comes to financing their own things.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Frances said:

Wouldn’t your scenario negate her statement of “… in a committed relationship”. In my experience, most kids raised with the example of a committed relationship are not going to engage in numerous, casual serial sexual relationships. Of course there is no  guarantee, just as emphasizing no sex before marriage guarantees nothing.

I don’t understand what this means...

IMO, regentrude’s post implies she is “taking credit” for her kids’ long term relationships. She implies that this is the ideal (being in a long term relationship).

so what would she have said if the “opposite” occurred?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, pinball said:

IMO, regentrude’s post implies she is “taking credit” for her kids’ long term relationships. She implies that this is the ideal (being in a long term relationship).

so what would she have said if the “opposite” occurred?

I am not "taking credit". I was merely pointing out that different ways to raise young people can lead to successful outcomes and that parenting according to a different cultural norm does not mean dysfunction and messed up relationships.

Edited by regentrude
  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven’t been in this situation, but i don’t think I would be paying for a separate room for a teen and the teen’s “friend”. Mostly because I am too frugal. My under 18’s have always stayed in the same room as a parent. 
As far as encouraging the physical relationship of under 18’s, I didn’t have to worry about that either. I’d like to think I would have handled it the same way as I handled other issues in that age range. I’m not buying you cigarettes or alcohol, paying for a tattoo, or buying you a motorcycle. Once you are 18, and have your own money for those things, I will support any decisions (as long as they are legal) you choose to make even if they are not what I would choose.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, regentrude said:

I am not "taking credit". I was merely pointing out that different ways to raise young people can lead to successful outcomes and that parenting according to a different cultural norm does not mean dysfunction and messed up relationships.

Uh, I don’t see how this is not taking credit...but be that as it may...

seeing a *stable*  *long term* *committed* relationship  ...whatever word you use and how you define it...as a successful outcome is a cultural choice. 

So you raised you kids and it turned out they made the same cultural choice as you, and you see that as a success.

and I see now my question is hypothetical...but what if they hadn’t made the same cultural choice as you?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BaseballandHockey said:

To be clear, while I wouldn't pay for a hotel room for a teenager and their bf/gf, I don't consider that "pimping" either.  But at least there I can wrap my mind around the thought process.

I can't. 

It's pretty offensive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

21 hours ago, Melissa Louise said:

Why? 

I'm super curious. It's like my brain is missing the bit that tells me why it's inappropriate. I'm strict about some things, but with older teens who have had decent sex and relationship ed, I truly don't get what's inappropriate. 

ETA I get why if you are a family who doesn't believe in sex before marriage..but if you're a secular family who doesn't have particular views about sex being linked with marriage, why would it be inappropriate to allow older teens a sex life in their home? 

 

A lot of people feel that sex is an adult activity, with potentially serious consequences, and not appropriate for non adults. I know I feel if you are too young to vote, you are too young for sex, personally. 

My religious viewpoint, as someone who did have premarital sex and it did have negative impacts, including a pregnancy that led to an ill advised marriage....is that the Biblical stuff around it is not about being a good or bad person or holy, but that it is a safety rule just like looking both ways before crossing the street. Waiting to have sex until you are with a committed partner, both adults, capable of adult decisions and more importantly capable of dealing with any fall out of those decisions, is the ideal. Doesn't always happen, but I can promote it as an ideal. 

20 hours ago, Melissa Louise said:

Conception isn't always a possibility - waving over here, Mom of a gay kid, ahem! 

True, but there are other adult issues that surround sex, from the emotional aspect of oxytocin release to disease to being adult enough to discuss and enforce one's sexual boundaries, etc. 

5 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

Mentioned this to my husband and he was like - “we just spent a week going down to Houston and then up to Wichita and back. And WE did not get to sleep alone in our room and enjoy any conjugal time. Hell if we are paying for our kids to get some! And yeah of course all that other stuff too.”

😂🙄😁

Ok...so I"m not the only one that thought that?!?! I was like, man, I don't get a room alone with my HUSBAND on a road trip. No way is my teen getting that time!

5 hours ago, TexasProud said:

Hard no from me. But then the sex talk from me never came from a religious perspective. I gave my daughter the same sex talk my mom gave to me:

No method of birth control is 100 percent. NONE. ( Heck, my daughter was conceived while taking birth control pills.) If you do not think the current guy you are dating would make a good father, if you are not ready to be a mom and financially support a child, if you are not willing to put away your goals ( ie, going to college) to have a baby, then don't have sex. Period.  It was never, ever worth it to me to be saddled with a baby. It was hard enough being married. 

This. Don't have sex if you are not willing to deal with a pregnancy with that person. Even if you are okay with abortion, there is still going to be hard discussions and such to have. And if you are not, then you need to be ready to parent with that person. Or able to look them in the eye and talk about a disease you were just diagnosed with, etc. Or to say that particular position/action is not okay with me. 

And even if you THINK that person is who you want to have those conversations with, when you are a 16 yr old, your judgement is not...spectacular, lol. At least, most teens that is true for. Better to wait until frontal lobe develops fully. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Terabith said:

So, you are saying that no kids should ever do anything with any peers (because intimacy is not just about sexual encounters) until they are able to afford their own car and cell phone?  (Because at least here, a car is required to get anywhere.  My kids couldn't walk anywhere to meet a friend, and there is no functional public transit.).  

I'm really not following the logic that dropping kids at mini golf is in any way pimping them out, or even that it's an equivalency with renting them a hotel room.  

Wait. Are YOU suggesting that the only thing peers do is have romantic intimacy when together?! Because my kids go to all kinds of things without me and almost none of those things are of a romantic intent.   Last week I dropped of 2 teens to go play putt putt with the youth group. It was not dropping them off to have a date. I’m sure there might be crushes and such but mostly it’s a group of peers hanging out and not a date/romantic/intimate set up facilitated by mom. Bc the first is perfectly normal and acceptable and the second would be ick to me.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BaseballandHockey said:

So, when I drove my elderly GFIL to wave to his beloved sister through the window on Christmas during covid, was I pimping him out too?  I mean their relationship is pretty intimate after 90 years!

That’s just being purposely obtuse then.  Unless you are suggesting sibling intimacy is the same as romantic intimacy. In which case I’m brought back to my ick factor. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

Wait. Are YOU suggesting that the only thing peers do is have romantic intimacy when together?! Because my kids go to all kinds of things without me and almost none of those things are of a romantic intent.   Last week I dropped of 2 teens to go play putt putt with the youth group. It was not dropping them off to have a date. I’m sure there might be crushes and such but mostly it’s a group of peers hanging out and not a date/romantic/intimate set up facilitated by mom. Bc the first is perfectly normal and acceptable and the second would be ick to me.

 

Okay, I think I misunderstood.  I thought you were saying that you didn't support any kind of intimacy, including platonic emotional intimacy, in persons who could not support it.  

I apologize.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

That’s just being purposely obtuse then.  Unless you are suggesting sibling intimacy is the same as romantic intimacy. In which case I’m brought back to my ick factor. 

You know what a pimp is, right? 

It's not an appropriate way to talk about parents who make a different choice about when and where to allow older teen/young adult sex. 

I can assure you, I'm not making a profit off of any 16+ sex happening in my home. I haven't procured a sexual partner for my teens. Nor are either of the kids sleeping over in my house being trafficked or otherwise coerced. 

It's fine for you to feel icky. 

It's really not ok to compare parents like me to pimps. It's a. rude and b. minimises the criminal and unethical reality many prostituted women and children suffer. 

Edited by Melissa Louise
  • Like 6
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pinball said:

Uh, I don’t see how this is not taking credit...but be that as it may...

seeing a *stable*  *long term* *committed* relationship  ...whatever word you use and how you define it...as a successful outcome is a cultural choice. 

So you raised you kids and it turned out they made the same cultural choice as you, and you see that as a success.

and I see now my question is hypothetical...but what if they hadn’t made the same cultural choice as you?

 

I’m trying to understand your point here. What do parents who advocate for no sex before marriage do when they end up with a pregnant unmarried child or even just a teen or young adult having sex before marriage? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DawnM said:

It's not.

When my 17 year old had a girlfriend, I used to drive them to our local amusement park or the mall, or whatever.   They were often with a group of people, but not always.  

 

And that’s your choice. I would not. If they want to date at 17 - they are going to have to make it happen on their own. I’m not going to facilitate or finance it. 

3 hours ago, Frances said:

This is exactly what I mean by the strict teaching of no sex before marriage due to religious beliefs potentially leading to unhealthy views on sex and relationships.

What poop.  Saying someone ready to have a serious relationship and sexual activity should be ready to not need their mama to facilitate or finance it has nothing to do with anyone’s views on sex. I think in healthy romantic relationships of any age or type, the boundary of not needing parents to facilitate it or finance is a damn good boundary to keep.

Obviously not everyone has to agree with me. 

3 hours ago, Terabith said:

Right.  And even if a teen gets a job, they really have to get a ride from someone, because they can't get to their job at Kroger or Chick Fil A independently either.  Which makes it a vicious circle when it comes to financing their own things.  

Again. Completely off topic. Anyone who knows me on this board knows I drive my kids to jobs and schools and churches and friends and all such kinds of things at all hours of the day and night.  For nearly any intent or purpose there’s no other transit option in my city or state either.

But nope. I’m not driving them to dates. I’m not paying for anything wrt to their sexual activity or their dates.  I’m not helping to set them up.  None of that has anything at all to do with any of my kids getting jobs, buying their own cars (which 5/11 have all done btw), hanging out with their peers in a non romantic way, or a romantic way if they can manage it on their own at 16+ or for that matter with their bf or gf joining us for family events or just for a game night or dinner. 

Good grief.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Frances said:

I’m trying to understand your point here. What do parents who advocate for no sex before marriage do when they end up with a pregnant unmarried child or even just a teen or young adult having sex before marriage? 

Good question

it’s happened to board members and their kids, IIRC.

Maybe start a spin off thread?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

And that’s your choice. I would not. If they want to date at 17 - they are going to have to make it happen on their own. I’m not going to facilitate or finance it. 

What poop.  Saying someone ready to have a serious relationship and sexual activity should be ready to not need their mama to facilitate or finance it has nothing to do with anyone’s views on sex. I think in healthy romantic relationships of any age or type, the boundary of not needing parents to facilitate it or finance is a damn good boundary to keep.

Obviously not everyone has to agree with me. 

Again. Completely off topic. Anyone who knows me on this board knows I drive my kids to jobs and schools and churches and friends and all such kinds of things at all hours of the day and night.  For nearly any intent or purpose there’s no other transit option in my city or state either.

But nope. I’m not driving them to dates. I’m not paying for anything wrt to their sexual activity or their dates.  I’m not helping to set them up.  None of that has anything at all to do with any of my kids getting jobs, buying their own cars (which 5/11 have all done btw), hanging out with their peers in a non romantic way, or a romantic way if they can manage it on their own at 16+ or for that matter with their bf or gf joining us for family events or just for a game night or dinner. 

Good grief.

I guess we can agree to disagree that driving an older teen to a date, even if no sex is going to occur because say they are having dinner with family or playing mini-golf with a group of friends and then getting ice cream, is pimping them out and that view of sex and relationships is unhealthy.

Or perhaps we are using the term date to mean different things. I consider it a date if a teen goes to have dinner with family at the home of their boyfriend/girlfriend or goes out with a group of friends, not just a one on one outing. Either way, the use of the term pimping is very strange to me in regards to one’s children and their dating life.

Edited by Frances
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

You know what a pimp is, right? 

It's not an appropriate way to talk about parents who make a different choice about when and where to allow older teen/young adult sex. 

I can assure you, I'm not making a profit off of any 16+ sex happening in my home. I haven't procured a sexual partner for my teens. Nor are either of the kids sleeping over in my house being trafficked or otherwise coerced. 

It's fine for you to feel icky. 

It's really not ok to compare parents like me to pimps. It's a. rude and b. minimises the criminal and unethical reality many prostituted women and children suffer. 

I did not compare anyone but myself to pimping. 

My quote:

“I’d feel like I was pimping my kid [sic] if I facilitated or financed their intimate romances and that’s a hard hells no for me.”

If you don’t like my comment - oh well.

I don’t think it diminishes anything at all. We will just have to disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Frances said:

I’m trying to understand your point here. What do parents who advocate for no sex before marriage do when they end up with a pregnant unmarried child or even just a teen or young adult having sex before marriage? 

I have not experienced that. I do not know what *I* would do because frankly it would not be up to me anyways. I suppose what I would be willing to do would depend on what my kid would be willing to do and whether they’d want the help I’d be willing to provide.   I know I would not facilitate or pay for abortions.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

I did not compare anyone but myself to pimping. 

My quote:

“I’d feel like I was pimping my kid [sic] if I facilitated or financed their intimate romances and that’s a hard hells no for me.”

If you don’t like my comment - oh well.

I don’t think it diminishes anything at all. We will just have to disagree.

Pimping = procurement, profit, coercion, criminality. Inappropriate way to describe a functional parent - teen  choice. IMO. 

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Murphy101 said:

I have not experienced that. I do not know what *I* would do because frankly it would not be up to me anyways. I suppose what I would be willing to do would depend on what my kid would be willing to do and whether they’d want the help I’d be willing to provide.   I know I would not facilitate or pay for abortions.

I wasn’t actually wondering what people would do in such a situation. I was just trying to understand the point Pinball was trying to make about what happens when parents who are fine with teens or young adults beyond the age of consent when in a committed relationship having sex and instead of ending up in long term committed relationships, they have serial, casual, sexual encounters. In both cases it seems like the child is going against their parent’s values. I still don’t understand what her point is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Melissa Louise said:

Pimping = procurement, profit, coercion, criminality. Inappropriate way to describe a functional parent - teen  choice. IMO. 

 

I am not going to help them procure that by facilitating it or financing it. To ME, that aspect would feel icky pimpy to ME.  You are obviously free to feel differently about it for yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Frances said:

I wasn’t actually wondering what people would do in such a situation. I was just trying to understand the point Pinball was trying to make about what happens when parents who are fine with teens or young adults beyond the age of consent when in a committed relationship having sex and instead of ending up in long term committed relationships, they have serial, casual, sexual encounters. In both cases it seems like the child is going against their parent’s values. I still don’t understand what her point is.

Oh well. I don’t understand her point either.  Sorry for misunderstanding your post. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

I am not going to help them procure that by facilitating it or financing it. To ME, that aspect would feel icky pimpy to ME.  You are obviously free to feel differently about it for yourself.

I don't think you understand what procurement means. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Frances said:

I wasn’t actually wondering what people would do in such a situation. I was just trying to understand the point Pinball was trying to make about what happens when parents who are fine with teens or young adults beyond the age of consent when in a committed relationship having sex and instead of ending up in long term committed relationships, they have serial, casual, sexual encounters. In both cases it seems like the child is going against their parent’s values. I still don’t understand what her point is.

Then even-Steven...bc I don’t get your point either.

LOL

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...