Abstinence is a crock

[mawilson 2,133]

Your glass is full of holes, and you know it. Im not talking about abstinence. Im talking about common sense. Everybody around you is dyin of this disease and your inclination is to go poke someone. Condoms arent gonna do alot, whats your answer for oral sex?

Good point. I'd like to know the answer as well.

[jundp 191]

How long has HIV/AIDS been around? hmmmm. Have you ever heard the old theory of word of mouth? Give these poor folks some credit. Let me run through a scenario for ya.

Dr. says: your brother just died of aids.

Bro of victim: What is aids

Dr.: An std passed by sex.

Billions of dollars later. hmm. I think there might have been some pamphlets printed somewhere along the way.

Let me run through a scenario for ya: most people in the sub-Saharan area of Africa who are dealing with the majority of cases of HIV/AIDS don't have easy access to a doctor. Not only may they have to travel for a day or more (by foot) to reach a village with a clinic (which may or may not have a full time doctor) but they also have to deal with a major taboo about the disease. Many of the people who have HIV/AIDS don't know it until it's too late. They are also not randomly out there poking anyone, as often it is spread b/n husband and wife, and from mother to child. Thus the cycle perpetuates. They do not have access to contraceptives and they do not have access to the life-saving or disease-suppressing medicine (that can be made for less than a dollar,but that which pharmaceutical companies sell for $40/pill or more). What they do have is access to Church run programmes (sometimes) about abstinence. And it's not working.

And there may have been government printed pamplets along the way, but I highly doubt they were printed by any AU government, and I highly doubt that the average sub-Saharan African has access to these pamphlets or has the ability to even read them.

How's that for a scenario?

Oh and before you say it, my comments aren't based on emotion. Though, as stated before and mocked by you, I do actually have basic human compassion and the ability to see the world outside of my bubble.

Its a kid thing. And is a very old play ground joke. Just cuz you dont understand it, doesnt mean Im not speaking plain english. It simply means your not from here. Which is no fault of yours of course.

Please keep this in mind when trying to understand me or anyone else.

Sorry to go totally off topic here, but didn't you call me "juvenile" in another thread because I spoke up about something I felt strongly for, you didn't like it, you called me "angry" and I replied that I wasn't angry? And because of that I was called juvenile?

Pot? Kettle....

[mawilson 2,133]

They are also not randomly out there poking anyone, as often it is spread b/n husband and wife, and from mother to child. Thus the cycle perpetuates.

How can AIDS spread from husband to wife if they weren't born with it - unless they sleep around with other people?

"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife?" Isn't the Church supposed to teach them about the sins of adultery and promiscuity?

[jundp 191]

They are also not randomly out there poking anyone, as often it is spread b/n husband and wife, and from mother to child. Thus the cycle perpetuates.

How can AIDS spread from husband to wife if they weren't born with it - unless they sleep around with other people?

"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife?" Isn't the Church supposed to teach them about the sins of adultery and promiscuity?

Well, good point

I guess what I meant to say is that it's not as though they are out there whoring. People can marry more than once. I realize that if they have HIV/AIDS it's not the wisest thing to do, but it does happen. And the disease has been around long enough that it's possible to have been born HIV positive and spread it that way.

Sure the church is supposed to teach them that, but then again, this is the same church that removed a priest because he was giving condoms to people so they WOULDN'T spread the disease further. Just because the church is supposed to teach it doesn't mean that it works (or that all the people are Catholic) which goes back to the original point of this thread, which is that teaching abstinence alone isn't enough.

[thetreble 19]

Understandable. But doesn't/didn't britain have one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in the developed world? I think in the UK it is more societal/historical than anything. Media is much more open and I have always gotten the impression that sex is much more widely acceptable in teens in the UK. Just my opinion though.

Have you spent any time in the UK or are you just saying this off the cuff? The US rate is still much higher than the UK.

I don't know if any 13 year old is really raging to have sex.

You must be joking. Have you spent ANY time watching TV lately? Or with any teenagers?

I have two things to say. 1. Don't over react. It was just a post and in my opinion, it was put in a pretty nice manner. Don't get defensive. I have spent substantial time in the UK yes. I have family there and friends there. I also watch english tv at home (in canada and the Us) and I have spent time watching it there. The US rate is higher than the UK. That is why i said the UK had ONE of the highest teen pregnancy rates in the developed world. Why would you be so defensive over something like that? It has nothing to do with you personally.

2. I am not joking. I know 13 year olds whose bodies are not begging them to have sex because they need the pleasure. I was 13 once (wasn't that long ago) so I would like to think that not 100% of kids 9-13 are in dire need of sex. Yes, I do watch tv and things have changed a lot. I realize media influence is out there and more present than ever. However, there are parents out there who have done a good job with their kids. And not every kid turns 12 or 13 and is like, alright, I want to have sex now.

[no name 1]

Understandable. But doesn't/didn't britain have one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in the developed world? I think in the UK it is more societal/historical than anything. Media is much more open and I have always gotten the impression that sex is much more widely acceptable in teens in the UK. Just my opinion though.

Have you spent any time in the UK or are you just saying this off the cuff? The US rate is still much higher than the UK.

I don't know if any 13 year old is really raging to have sex.

You must be joking. Have you spent ANY time watching TV lately? Or with any teenagers?

I have two things to say. 1. Don't over react. It was just a post and in my opinion, it was put in a pretty nice manner. Don't get defensive. I have spent substantial time in the UK yes. I have family there and friends there. I also watch english tv at home (in canada and the Us) and I have spent time watching it there. The US rate is higher than the UK. That is why i said the UK had ONE of the highest teen pregnancy rates in the developed world. Why would you be so defensive over something like that? It has nothing to do with you personally.

2. I am not joking. I know 13 year olds whose bodies are not begging them to have sex because they need the pleasure. I was 13 once (wasn't that long ago) so I would like to think that not 100% of kids 9-13 are in dire need of sex. Yes, I do watch tv and things have changed a lot. I realize media influence is out there and more present than ever. However, there are parents out there who have done a good job with their kids. And not every kid turns 12 or 13 and is like, alright, I want to have sex now.

Thank you for your lecture but you brought the UK into it, as if their liberal media = higher teen pregnancies & more acceptable sex (your words).

I am simply saying that is obviously not true as the US has a higher teen preganancy rate & much more conservative media.

2. You said you didn't know if ANY 13 year olds were 'raging to have sex', not 9-13. Huge difference.

[thetreble 19]

Thank you for your lecture

You're welcome.

[no name 1]

Thank you for your lecture

You're welcome.

Can't dispute the truth, eh?

[thetreble 19]

I would actually but I just don't want to argue with you. I'm not going to get my panties in a bunch over someone on the internet who can't take other people's point of view or opinion. I'm a shades of grey person, lovely and I think you are more of a "wrong" or "right" person so what is the point?

[no name 1]

I would actually but I just don't want to argue with you. I'm not going to get my panties in a bunch over someone on the internet who can't take other people's point of view or opinion. I'm a shades of grey person, lovely and I think you are more of a "wrong" or "right" person so what is the point?

Well, that sure wasn't a 'shades of grey' observation wasn't it?

You came into this thread making all kinds of judgements, you get questioned about said statements & now it's my fault?

[thetreble 19]

Making ALL kinds of judgments? I made TWO posts in this 11 page thread. And they weren't judgments at all...I'm sorry. But from my experience, my family and friends in the UK are much more liberal in their attitudes than we are here in North America so that is why I made that comment. Also, family members of mine in the UK were much more knowedgeable about sex than I was at a young age and their parents really didn't enforce any rules on the subject. It is possible I made a generalization, but I did not judge. I didn't come out swinging saying there is a direct correlation between british television and teen pregnancy. I put two comments in the same sentence because that is how they came out. They were IN FACT two SEPARATE comments on how I personally view british media and british attitudes towards sex. I am entitled to that opinion.

When I said "I didn't know if ANY 13 year old was raging to have sex." that seems fine to me. I DON'T know if any thirteen year old is raging to have sex because I don't know!!! I admitted that I wouldn't know because I'm not 13, I don't have 13 year old friends, and I simply don't have any data on it. I don't see how me admitting I don't know if 13 year olds are really salivating to have sex is wrong.

If you can't take my opinion as my personal interpretation of things than that is not my problem.

Edited August 7, 2007 by thetreble

[Queen Jenn 0]

I agree that sex education is the best way to deal with the problem. Just saying to someone "be abstinent" doesn't do a whole lot of good if they don't know WHY abstinence is encouraged.

AND, after reading other posts - it IS possible to get through your 20's and remain abstinent. It's a choice. I chose to follow the guidelines of my religion and I am saving myself for marriage (and so is my SO, who happens to be from sub-saharan africa).

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

The Dutch are far more permissive than the UK but have one of the lowest teenage pregnancy rates in the world. The reason: comprehensive sex education.

I worked for a Marie Stopes clinic for almost 2 years - lots of very young kids 12-13 coming in pregnant and confused. The youngest was 10. The things they didn't know was shocking.

[MaRob 0]

Let me run through a scenario for ya: most people in the sub-Saharan area of Africa who are dealing with the majority of cases of HIV/AIDS don't have easy access to a doctor. Not only may they have to travel for a day or more (by foot) to reach a village with a clinic (which may or may not have a full time doctor) but they also have to deal with a major taboo about the disease. Many of the people who have HIV/AIDS don't know it until it's too late. They are also not randomly out there poking anyone, as often it is spread b/n husband and wife, and from mother to child. Thus the cycle perpetuates. They do not have access to contraceptives and they do not have access to the life-saving or disease-suppressing medicine (that can be made for less than a dollar,but that which pharmaceutical companies sell for $40/pill or more). What they do have is access to Church run programmes (sometimes) about abstinence. And it's not working.

And there may have been government printed pamplets along the way, but I highly doubt they were printed by any AU government, and I highly doubt that the average sub-Saharan African has access to these pamphlets or has the ability to even read them.

How's that for a scenario?

Oh and before you say it, my comments aren't based on emotion. Though, as stated before and mocked by you, I do actually have basic human compassion and the ability to see the world outside of my bubble.

We went to Cameroon twice for Medical missions, and we did AIDS education, which emphasized abstinence, citing even the falacy of using condoms (since an HIV virus is a lot smaller than a sperm). Condoms have an 85% effectiveness of stopping the HIV virus when the condom is used properly. That means there is a 15% chance that it won't work!! The doctors on the trip compared this to playing Russian Roulette, with a 1 in 6 chance that you will pull the trigger with the bullet in it. We wouldn't dare say that playing Russian Roulett is "Safe", but condoms solve the worlds problems.

Also, there are lots of misinformation and folk tales in Cameroon regarding AIDS. In some areas of the country, they believe that if someone has AIDS that they can be cured by having sex with a virgin.. thus spreading the virus around. The young people there also have a saying thinking that AIDS is an American invention (specifically AIDS stands for Americas Idea of Destroying Sex) to keep them from having fun...

There is a lot of misinformation, but to tell a child that we don't expect you to be able to control yourself, IMO, they will not think it is possible, and won't even strive for it.

I agree that sex education is the best way to deal with the problem. Just saying to someone "be abstinent" doesn't do a whole lot of good if they don't know WHY abstinence is encouraged.

AND, after reading other posts - it IS possible to get through your 20's and remain abstinent. It's a choice. I chose to follow the guidelines of my religion and I am saving myself for marriage (and so is my SO, who happens to be from sub-saharan africa).

me too.. 23 years old, and a virgin until I am married... it is possible.. teach how to use condoms, but the morals not to have to...

oh.. and heres some more information about condoms and HIV for those interested

"According to the studies, "condoms provided an 85% reduction in HIV/AIDS transmission risk when infection rates were compared in always versus never users" What about the remaining 15%? Is that percentage all right for you? Since the condom has not been sufficiently proven to be effective in preventing some of the common STDs listed above, there is an added risk of infection with HIV if there is an STD present. In view of the findings of the report, the CDC has made some changes in its fact sheet, which says amongst other things that "The surest way to avoid transmission of sexually transmitted diseases is to abstain from sexual intercourse, or to be in a long-term mutually monogamous relationship with a partner who has been tested and you know is uninfected. For persons whose sexual behaviors place them at risk for STDs, correct and consistent use of the male latex condom can reduce the risk of STD transmission. However, no protective method is 100 percent effective, and condom use cannot guarantee absolute protection against any STD ... In order to achieve the protective effect of condoms, they must be used correctly and consistently. Incorrect use can lead to condom slippage or breakage, thus diminishing their protective effect. Inconsistent use, e.g., failure to use condoms with every act of intercourse, can lead to STD transmission because transmission can occur with a single act of intercourse".

It should be realized that the initial use for condoms was to prevent pregnancy. Still, couples who depend on this method as their only way of preventing pregnancy report some unintended pregnancy within one year of use. This can be as high as 14% during "typical" use. Some studies have found condom failure rates in protecting against pregnancies for teenagers to be as high as 22.5 %. If one remembers that a woman can only get pregnant within some days in the month, and that the HIV virus is much smaller than the human sperm cell, it boggles the imagination on what may be the case with HIV transmission when compared with the pregnancy rate. The HIV virus is about 0.1 micron in size (compared with up the head of a spermatozoon which measures 5 x 3 microns). Latex has some naturally occurring flaws (pores) which are of the order of 5 microns (Source: C.M. Roland, Ph.D., Editor, Rubber Chemistry and Technology and Head of the Polymer Properties Section, Naval Research Laboratory, in a Letter entitled "Do You Want to Stake Your Life On A Condom?" published in Washington Times, April 22, 1992). The HIV virus does not easily pass through because the effects of surface tension (the virus doesn’t usually move in isolation but suspended in fluids) can make it impermeable even in the presence of holes bigger than it when friction, corrosion or pressure forces are not in play. Also, condoms are usually "double-dipped", i.e. most or all of the voids of one layer are covered by the second layer, making it impossible to see holes in the condoms when they are stretched and viewed under the electron microscope. Unfortunately, the various stresses which affect a condom when in use viz - lateral stress, pressure stress, shear stress, friction and corrosion cannot be simulated while using the electron microscope.

Condoms are usually subjected to air-burst and water leak tests. Curiously enough, they are not subjected to FRICTION tests. Even the medication for vaginal candidiasis which is common in women can also cause deterioration of the condom. Exposure to petroleum jelly, body creams and other oils can also affect the condom. They can also be snagged at by fingernails or rings.

The main possibility, however, with transmission even with condom use lies in the failure rate from bursting, tearing or slipping off. Based on the results from 15 studies involving the use of 25,184 condoms, "Contraceptive Technology" found out that 5.36 % of all of the condoms broke and 3.67% of them partially or completely slipped off, a total of 9.13 %. (Robert A. Hatcher, et. al. Contraceptive Technology (17th Revised Edition) [New York: Ardent Media, Inc., 1998]. Table 16-3, "Prospective Studies of Condom Breakage and Slippage," pages 330 to 332.)

Condoms, we are told, should be kept in a cool, dry place. This is due to the fact that they are sensitive to heat and cold. For such a fragile "life-saver", one would expect that condoms should be transported under conditions that portray their importance. Instead, some samples taken of up to 72,000 trucks used for distributing condoms showed that the back sections of some of those trucks were so hot that eggs could be fried in them. (Collart, D. Ph.D., Clark Atlanta University: "Condoms: A Users Right To Know", Impact, Issue 3, 1-2 (1993)) I am unsure if the situation has changed favourably since then. How certain are those who buy condoms that they are not purchasing an already-spoilt product.

And by the way, some tests administered for strength and leaks are used to spot-check a batch of condoms as opposed to testing the condoms individually. If you just happen to be unlucky to use a condom from a batch that had fewer amount of defective condoms noticed from those selected, you may also place yourself in a vulnerable position to contract HIV if there are more defective ones. When all these facts are put into consideration, the fact of condoms offering "safe-sex" begins to look suspect. It would really be interesting to know the number of people who will continue using condoms if the information above related to its effectiveness were to be put on condom packets. If cigarette packs have a warning label attached to them, why shouldn’t condoms share a similar fate?"

http://www.independentngonline.com/?c=72&a=16683

[Dr_LHA 3]

me too.. 23 years old, and a virgin until I am married... it is possible.. teach how to use condoms, but the morals not to have to...

This is the problem with teaching abstinence, it stems from religion. I personally don't believe that having sex before marriage is immoral, and neither does the majority of the population I'm guessing. In fact the only way having sex before marriage is immoral is if a religion tells you it is. We have this thing called the separation of church and state, which means our kids should not be taught things purely on the basis of religion at school, which includes not teaching sex education based on religious values. So I don't think you can in all good conciousness teach that sex is immoral to students without bringing the bible into it (or the Koran or whatever).

Edited August 7, 2007 by Dr_LHA