Book on women's sex 'hookups' draws fire

[LiberalNation]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070309/ap_en_ot/hooking_up;_ylt=Ar2STQeQuL2G3SixaRvXH.IDW7oF

NEW YORK - During a class discussion on adolescence, a high school teacher recently asked her students whether they go on dates. We don't "date," the 12th-graders reported. We "hook up."

If you're in your 40s, "hooking up" might mean catching a friend downtown for lunch. But to people in their teens or 20s, the phrase often means a casual sexual encounter — anything from kissing onwards — with no strings attached.

Now a new book on this not-so-new subject is drawing fire in some quarters for its conclusion: That hookups can be damaging to young women, denying their emotional needs, putting them at risk of depression and even sexually transmitted disease, and making them ill-equipped for real relationships later on.

For that, Laura Sessions Stepp, author of "Unhooked" and a writer for The Washington Post, has been criticized as a throwback to an earlier, restrictive moral climate, an anti-feminist and a tut-tutting mother telling girls not to give the milk away when nobody's bought the cow.

The author "imagines the female body as a thing that can be tarnished by too much use," wrote reviewer Kathy Dobie in Stepp's own paper, and suggested that Stepp was, in one part, trying to "instill sexual shame." For Meghan O'Rourke, literary editor at Slate.com, Stepp is "buying into alarmism about women," and making sex "a bigger, scarier, and more dangerous thing than it already is."

Stepp argues these critics have misconstrued her ideas.

True, she regrets that "dating has gone completely by the boards," replaced by group outings that lead to casual encounters. True, she regrets that oral sex "isn't even considered sex anymore." But she isn't saying girls should not have sex; just that they should have it in the context of a meaningful connection: "I am saying that girls should have choices."

Too often, Stepp argues, girls and young women say proudly that they like the control "hookups" give them — control over their emotions, their schedules, and freedom to focus on things like schoolwork and career (the students she profiles in her book are high achievers).

But she says they frequently mistake that freedom for empowerment. "I often hear girls say things like, 'We can be as bad as guys now,'" she says. "But I don't think that's what liberation is all about."

Stepp says her book stems from an experience she had almost 10 years ago. She and other parents were summoned to her son's middle school. The principal informed them that all year long, a dozen girls — ages 13 or 14 — had been performing oral sex on several boys in the class. (Her own son was not involved.) Stepp wrote about the sex ring in a front-page article for the Post, which led to further research.

She's had her share of positive feedback, including from educators and from young women like those in her book.

One 18-year-old student, who calls herself a feminist, e-mailed her to say she had approached the book warily, but came to believe it "will change the way my generation views sex."

Contacted later by telephone, the student, Liz Funk, said she agreed with Stepp's contention that "real relationships among college students don't really exist anymore."

"If I or my friends had the opportunity for real relationships, we'd take it," says Funk, who attends school in New York City. "But my generation hasn't really been conditioned for it." Hookups, she adds, which she rejected for herself long ago but some of her friends still embrace, "are like Thanksgiving for guys. They don't have to do anything to get sex!" And she bemoans the amount of time fellow students can spend on hookups: "It can be like a full-time job."

Another student, at a small women's college in South Carolina, says the "hookup culture" is not all that pervasive, in her experience.

"I'm aware of it," said Grace Bagwell, 22, a senior at Converse College in Spartanburg, S.C.. "But it's untrue to say women aren't having meaningful relationships at this point. I've been in one for three years, and I have a lot of friends who are getting married or are engaged."

Sociologist Kathleen Bogle has also studied hooking up, which she says dates back to the '80s. She has a book, "Hooking Up," coming out this fall.

"I argue that we shouldn't look at this from a moralistic viewpoint — as in, our youth is in decline — and we shouldn't celebrate it either, in a 'Sex in the City' light," says Bogle, who hasn't read Stepp's book. She also believes that it's wrong to assume women aren't hoping for something more from their hookups.

"It's a system for finding relationships — and there isn't really an alternate system," says Bogle. "It feels like it's the only game in town, and if you don't do it, you're left out." She did find that after college, there was a transition back to traditional dating.

The debate over hooking up — how prevalent, how harmful — was neatly displayed not long ago in a high school classroom in Virginia. Nancy Schnog, who teaches a course in adolescence to 12th-graders, was discussing Stepp's findings.

"She hit the nail on the head," one girl said, according to Schnog. "She perfectly described our social climate." Many agreed, but an equally vocal faction argued the opposite. "This is totally overblown," said another girl. "Why do adults always stereotype our generation so negatively?"

At the University of Maryland, Robin Sawyer, who teaches a course on sexuality, finds Stepp's book pretty much on target.

"Men have always hooked up," says Sawyer. "What you are seeing now is a desire of women to act in a masculine way, without being judged a whore." He also finds that the "hookup" vocabulary softens the impact of the behavior. "'I hooked up with someone' sounds a lot better than 'I had oral sex with someone whose name I don't even know,'" says Sawyer, who is mentioned in Stepp's book.

"Can you generalize from a few women? If you can find a criticism, it is probably that," Sawyer said. "But her thesis is pretty accurate. This is not your grandparents' generation."

[Dilloduck]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070309/ap_en_ot/hooking_up;_ylt=Ar2STQeQuL2G3SixaRvXH.IDW7oF

NEW YORK - During a class discussion on adolescence, a high school teacher recently asked her students whether they go on dates. We don't "date," the 12th-graders reported. We "hook up."

If you're in your 40s, "hooking up" might mean catching a friend downtown for lunch. But to people in their teens or 20s, the phrase often means a casual sexual encounter — anything from kissing onwards — with no strings attached.

Now a new book on this not-so-new subject is drawing fire in some quarters for its conclusion: That hookups can be damaging to young women, denying their emotional needs, putting them at risk of depression and even sexually transmitted disease, and making them ill-equipped for real relationships later on.

For that, Laura Sessions Stepp, author of "Unhooked" and a writer for The Washington Post, has been criticized as a throwback to an earlier, restrictive moral climate, an anti-feminist and a tut-tutting mother telling girls not to give the milk away when nobody's bought the cow.

The author "imagines the female body as a thing that can be tarnished by too much use," wrote reviewer Kathy Dobie in Stepp's own paper, and suggested that Stepp was, in one part, trying to "instill sexual shame." For Meghan O'Rourke, literary editor at Slate.com, Stepp is "buying into alarmism about women," and making sex "a bigger, scarier, and more dangerous thing than it already is."

Stepp argues these critics have misconstrued her ideas.

True, she regrets that "dating has gone completely by the boards," replaced by group outings that lead to casual encounters. True, she regrets that oral sex "isn't even considered sex anymore." But she isn't saying girls should not have sex; just that they should have it in the context of a meaningful connection: "I am saying that girls should have choices."

Too often, Stepp argues, girls and young women say proudly that they like the control "hookups" give them — control over their emotions, their schedules, and freedom to focus on things like schoolwork and career (the students she profiles in her book are high achievers).

But she says they frequently mistake that freedom for empowerment. "I often hear girls say things like, 'We can be as bad as guys now,'" she says. "But I don't think that's what liberation is all about."

Stepp says her book stems from an experience she had almost 10 years ago. She and other parents were summoned to her son's middle school. The principal informed them that all year long, a dozen girls — ages 13 or 14 — had been performing oral sex on several boys in the class. (Her own son was not involved.) Stepp wrote about the sex ring in a front-page article for the Post, which led to further research.

She's had her share of positive feedback, including from educators and from young women like those in her book.

One 18-year-old student, who calls herself a feminist, e-mailed her to say she had approached the book warily, but came to believe it "will change the way my generation views sex."

Contacted later by telephone, the student, Liz Funk, said she agreed with Stepp's contention that "real relationships among college students don't really exist anymore."

"If I or my friends had the opportunity for real relationships, we'd take it," says Funk, who attends school in New York City. "But my generation hasn't really been conditioned for it." Hookups, she adds, which she rejected for herself long ago but some of her friends still embrace, "are like Thanksgiving for guys. They don't have to do anything to get sex!" And she bemoans the amount of time fellow students can spend on hookups: "It can be like a full-time job."

Another student, at a small women's college in South Carolina, says the "hookup culture" is not all that pervasive, in her experience.

"I'm aware of it," said Grace Bagwell, 22, a senior at Converse College in Spartanburg, S.C.. "But it's untrue to say women aren't having meaningful relationships at this point. I've been in one for three years, and I have a lot of friends who are getting married or are engaged."

Sociologist Kathleen Bogle has also studied hooking up, which she says dates back to the '80s. She has a book, "Hooking Up," coming out this fall.

"I argue that we shouldn't look at this from a moralistic viewpoint — as in, our youth is in decline — and we shouldn't celebrate it either, in a 'Sex in the City' light," says Bogle, who hasn't read Stepp's book. She also believes that it's wrong to assume women aren't hoping for something more from their hookups.

"It's a system for finding relationships — and there isn't really an alternate system," says Bogle. "It feels like it's the only game in town, and if you don't do it, you're left out." She did find that after college, there was a transition back to traditional dating.

The debate over hooking up — how prevalent, how harmful — was neatly displayed not long ago in a high school classroom in Virginia. Nancy Schnog, who teaches a course in adolescence to 12th-graders, was discussing Stepp's findings.

"She hit the nail on the head," one girl said, according to Schnog. "She perfectly described our social climate." Many agreed, but an equally vocal faction argued the opposite. "This is totally overblown," said another girl. "Why do adults always stereotype our generation so negatively?"

At the University of Maryland, Robin Sawyer, who teaches a course on sexuality, finds Stepp's book pretty much on target.

"Men have always hooked up," says Sawyer. "What you are seeing now is a desire of women to act in a masculine way, without being judged a whore." He also finds that the "hookup" vocabulary softens the impact of the behavior. "'I hooked up with someone' sounds a lot better than 'I had oral sex with someone whose name I don't even know,'" says Sawyer, who is mentioned in Stepp's book.

"Can you generalize from a few women? If you can find a criticism, it is probably that," Sawyer said. "But her thesis is pretty accurate. This is not your grandparents' generation."


Too often, Stepp argues, girls and young women say proudly that they like the control "hookups" give them — control over their emotions, their schedules, and freedom to focus on things like schoolwork and career (the students she profiles in her book are high achievers).

But she says they frequently mistake that freedom for empowerment. "I often hear girls say things like, 'We can be as bad as guys now,'" she says. "But I don't think that's what liberation is all about."

Here we go with control again.

[avatar4321]

But she says they frequently mistake that freedom for empowerment. "I often hear girls say things like, 'We can be as bad as guys now,'" she says. "But I don't think that's what liberation is all about."

since when do women get power from not withholding sex? what is liberating about the emotional schizophrenia that comes from casual sex?

[Dilloduck]

since when do women get power from not withholding sex? what is liberating about the emotional schizophrenia that comes from casual sex?

Easy---males go nuts trying to satisfy hormonal urges. Females find the constant aggresssion so annoying that they simply give it to them, thus depriving them of any sense of "winning" .

[Hobbit]

The author "imagines the female body as a thing that can be tarnished by too much use," wrote reviewer Kathy Dobie in Stepp's own paper, and suggested that Stepp was, in one part, trying to "instill sexual shame." For Meghan O'Rourke, literary editor at Slate.com, Stepp is "buying into alarmism about women," and making sex "a bigger, scarier, and more dangerous thing than it already is."

Whether you want to admit it or not, the female body IS something that tarnishes with use. Nobody wants the town slut. The girl who always 'gives it away' on the first date will likely never marry anyone who truly respects her. There's also a reason slutty girls are described as 'loose.' No, it's not fair that guys who have lots of sex are viewed as 'studs' while girls who do the same thing are viewed as whores. It is, however, a fact of life.

[Dilloduck]

Whether you want to admit it or not, the female body IS something that tarnishes with use. Nobody wants the town slut. The girl who always 'gives it away' on the first date will likely never marry anyone who truly respects her. There's also a reason slutty girls are described as 'loose.' No, it's not fair that guys who have lots of sex are viewed as 'studs' while girls who do the same thing are viewed as whores. It is, however, a fact of life.

I think the claim is that time are a-changing and women who engage in sex as casually as male would are no longer viewed by thier peers as sluts.

[Abbey Marie]

I think the claim is that time are a-changing and women who engage in sex as casually as male would are no longer viewed by thier peers as sluts.

From what my high-schooler tells me, they still are viewed as sluts.

[Dilloduck]

From what my high-schooler tells me, they still are viewed as sluts.

No doubt some still view them that way--I think the TREND is heading away from that label, hence the article.

[avatar4321]

I think the claim is that time are a-changing and women who engage in sex as casually as male would are no longer viewed by thier peers as sluts.

Then I don't know why they are talking to, because I've never seen a guy who didn't treat them as sluts. Heck, too many men nowadays treat every woman as a slut. It's actually quite sickening.

[Dilloduck]

Then I don't know why they are talking to, because I've never seen a guy who didn't treat them as sluts. Heck, too many men nowadays treat every woman as a slut. It's actually quite sickening.

Pre-marital Sex doesn't have NEARLY the stigma that it did a few decades ago. I'm not saying that's good nor bad. It's just a social reality. You have never seen a man who didn't treat a woman as a slut ???? Can you elaborate on that?

[Abbey Marie]

No doubt some still view them that way--I think the TREND is heading away from that label, hence the article.

That trend may be wishful thinking on the part of some libs. They always seem to want to go the more-promiscuous, "anything goes" route And it may be true that the main stream media portrays things that way, seeing as they are liberal and all. But the reality of what people think of girls who behave this way, though they may not feel as free to say it today, is apparently still negative. Some things will never change.

[Dilloduck]

That trend may be wishful thinking on the part of some libs. They always seem to want to go the more-promiscuous, "anything goes" route And it may be true that the main stream media portrays things that way, seeing as they are liberal and all. But the reality of what people think of girls who behave this way, though they may not feel as free to say it today, is apparently still negative. Some things will never change.

So you're saying that while pre and extra-marital sex are on the rise, society continues to view it with the same moral disdain as it did 20 years ago ?

[Abbey Marie]

So you're saying that while pre and extra-marital sex are on the rise, society continues to view it with the same moral disdain as it did 20 years ago ?

Are we talking pre-marital sex between adults in a relationship, or casual sexual acts performed by high school girls who will do whatever with whomever on the first "non-date"? Because all this time, I thought it was the latter.

[Dilloduck]

Are we talking pre-marital sex between adults in a relationship, or casual sexual acts performed by high school girls who will do whatever with whomever on the first "non-date"? Because all this time, I thought it was the latter.

Either one but the inference here is somehow high school girls are pressured by peers into having casual sex but at the same time THIER society considers them sluts for doing so?

[gabosaurus]

Whether you want to admit it or not, the female body IS something that tarnishes with use. Nobody wants the town slut. The girl who always 'gives it away' on the first date will likely never marry anyone who truly respects her. There's also a reason slutty girls are described as 'loose.' No, it's not fair that guys who have lots of sex are viewed as 'studs' while girls who do the same thing are viewed as whores. It is, however, a fact of life.

Hey Jethro, let's go down to the cement pond. Ellie May might be wearing one of them string bikini things! Maybe we can see something!
Nah, if Granny finds out, she'll pin mah ears back with a rollin pin!

[Nienna]

Casual sex is just the biggest lie to women and girls. Females are taught to lie to themselves about their own needs. Women and men get some different things out of sex, but the sexual revolution taught women that they had to deny their own identities as females and embrace the male view of sex. It's disgusting, and demeaning to women.

[Said1]

Maybe they thought detachment would be a good thing to teach young women? They probably thought it would make dealing with men (boys) a bit easier instead of teaching them to hold out until they find someone who respects them and their values...at least a llittle.

[Dilloduck]

Casual sex is just the biggest lie to women and girls. Females are taught to lie to themselves about their own needs. Women and men get some different things out of sex, but the sexual revolution taught women that they had to deny their own identities as females and embrace the male view of sex. It's disgusting, and demeaning to women.

How are women taught to lie to themselves about thier needs ? Are all women needs the same and satisfied in the same way?

[gabosaurus]

How are women taught to lie to themselves about thier needs ? Are all women needs the same and satisfied in the same way?

Of course not! Only the conservatives and fundies lie about themselves and their needs.
The rest of us have vibrators and detachable shower heads. :laugh2:

[Nienna]

How are women taught to lie to themselves about thier needs ? Are all women needs the same and satisfied in the same way?

dillo... I thought we hashed this out.
ALL women do not have EXACTLY the same needs, and have different things that they enjoy. But there are some basic, fundamental things that are the same in normal, healthy women. Just as normal, healthy men have some of the same needs/views about sex.

[Dilloduck]

dillo... I thought we hashed this out.
ALL women do not have EXACTLY the same needs, and have different things that they enjoy. But there are some basic, fundamental things that are the same in normal, healthy women. Just as normal, healthy men have some of the same needs/views about sex.

but who is lying to them and telling them thier needs are not what they think they are ?

[Nienna]

http://www.breakpoint.org/listingarticle.asp?ID=6061

[Dilloduck]

http://www.breakpoint.org/listingarticle.asp?ID=6061

no thats who is trying to convince them otherwise .

[Insein]

Whether you want to admit it or not, the female body IS something that tarnishes with use. Nobody wants the town slut. The girl who always 'gives it away' on the first date will likely never marry anyone who truly respects her. There's also a reason slutty girls are described as 'loose.' No, it's not fair that guys who have lots of sex are viewed as 'studs' while girls who do the same thing are viewed as whores. It is, however, a fact of life.

Not neccassarily. Before, sluts would never have been able to get married. Sluts were for fun but never to marry. Now the sluts are getting married by guys who naively think theyll change once they settle down. Sexual Revolution and Rise in Divorce rate coincide. So i think our culture is unfortunately changing for the worse.

[Dilloduck]

Not neccassarily. Before, sluts would never have been able to get married. Sluts were for fun but never to marry. Now the sluts are getting married by guys who naively think theyll change once they settle down. Sexual Revolution and Rise in Divorce rate coincide. So i think our culture is unfortunately changing for the worse.

So the solution would be to get women to stop having sex until they are married?

[Nienna]

So the solution would be to get women to stop having sex until they are married?

The solution is for women to understand themselves and CHOOSE to stay chaste until marriage.

[Dilloduck]

The solution is for women to understand themselves and CHOOSE to stay chaste until marriage.

In the times of Jesus, didn't people marry at a much younger age? Very near to the time that they reached puberty?

[LiberalNation]

WHat if they don't want to. All woman do not have the same feelings on the issue. You can't judge everyone by yourself, your town, or your religion.

[Nienna]

In the times of Jesus, didn't people marry at a much younger age? Very near to the time that they reached puberty?

SO? Morality doesn't change with the ages. Nor does basic human nature or need. Roman culture at the time of Jesus was very similar to American culture today: sexual perversion and sex without restrictions. Roman culture embraced hedonism, yet many Romans turned from this and found fulfillment in Christianity.

Women have always been women and men have always been men from the beginning of the world, not just since the time of Christ.

[LiberalNation]

SO? Morality doesn't change with the ages. Nor does basic human nature or need.
maybe not morality but if your having sex/marrying as soon as your body would naturally tell you it wanted it there is less denying yourself and less risk of you "sinning".

[Nienna]

WHat if they don't want to. All woman do not have the same feelings on the issue. You can't judge everyone by yourself, your town, or your religion.

If they don't want to, of course, they won't. Period. However, what's wrong with encouraging women? Showing them the benefits of this "alternative lifestyle" called chastity? Why are liberals so against its being taught?

Who has the most to lose? Look at who is promoting promiscuity: abortion supporters, birth control supporters. People who stand to gain money if women continue in promiscuity. How much do you think supporters of chastity make as a result of women being chaste? Then, who has the most OBJECTIVE interest in the women, themselves?

[Dilloduck]

SO? Morality doesn't change with the ages. Nor does basic human nature or need. Roman culture at the time of Jesus was very similar to American culture today: sexual perversion and sex without restrictions. Roman culture embraced hedonism, yet many Romans turned from this and found fulfillment in Christianity.

Women have always been women and men have always been men from the beginning of the world, not just since the time of Christ.

I was referring to length of time that people were asked to restrain from acting on biological urges.

[Nienna]

maybe not morality but if your having sex/marrying as soon as your body would naturally tell you it wanted it there is less denying yourself and less risk of you "sinning".

So, marry. That option is still open. Besides, why is self-denial a BAD thing?

[LiberalNation]

How much do you think supporters of chastity make as a result of women being chaste? Then, who has the most OBJECTIVE interest in the women, themselves?
Controlling the sex lives of others based on their own morality wether it is in the best intrest of said people. A blanket morality forced on everyone by societal pressure with those who don't toe the line facing societies wrath.

[LiberalNation]

So, marry. That option is still open. Besides, why is self-denial a BAD thing?
Because you can't at 13 anymore, it's against the law.

[Dilloduck]

So, marry. That option is still open. Besides, why is self-denial a BAD thing?

What about imposed age of consent ?

[Insein]

So the solution would be to get women to stop having sex until they are married?

The solution would be for men to NOT marry the sluts. Treat the sluts as sluts and the good girls as good girls. Today the sluts are treated like good girls and the good girls are left high and dry because of the sluts.

I'm not saying that its like that everywhere, but at least 1 or 2 people in the social groups Ive met lately have had a guy that was married too or is going to marry a slut (chick that slept with 8 or more guys before him.)

[Dilloduck]

The solution would be for men to NOT marry the sluts. Treat the sluts as sluts and the good girls as good girls. Today the sluts are treated like good girls and the good girls are left high and dry because of the sluts.

I'm not saying that its like that everywhere, but at least 1 or 2 people in the social groups Ive met lately have had a guy that was married too or is going to marry a slut (chick that slept with 8 or more guys before him.)

your kidding ! Are you proposing we revert to some kind of stone age virginity test?

[avatar4321]

If they don't want to, of course, they won't. Period. However, what's wrong with encouraging women? Showing them the benefits of this "alternative lifestyle" called chastity? Why are liberals so against its being taught?

Who has the most to lose? Look at who is promoting promiscuity: abortion supporters, birth control supporters. People who stand to gain money if women continue in promiscuity. How much do you think supporters of chastity make as a result of women being chaste? Then, who has the most OBJECTIVE interest in the women, themselves?

Who gets hurt by women being chaste? Easy: Men who want to use women without taking responsibility for their actions. That is exactly why liberals are against it.

[avatar4321]

Controlling the sex lives of others based on their own morality wether it is in the best intrest of said people. A blanket morality forced on everyone by societal pressure with those who don't toe the line facing societies wrath.

A lack of morality, especially sexual morality, in even a fragment of society can quickly lead to the destruction of a people.

[avatar4321]

Because you can't at 13 anymore, it's against the law.

No one should be having sex age 13 so what's the problem?

[LiberalNation]

Chaste is an old word, who uses it anymore. how about abstinent so younger people will know what you're talking about. Off topic but that just came to my mind

[LiberalNation]

No one should be having sex age 13 so what's the problem?

People have sex at 13. It's simple reality.

[Said1]

Chaste is an old word, who uses it anymore. how about abstinent so younger people will know what you're talking about. Off topic but that just came to my mind
Blah. Blah.

[avatar4321]

Chaste is an old word, who uses it anymore. how about abstinent so younger people will know what you're talking about. Off topic but that just came to my mind

I do. In fact, chaste is a far superior word than abstinence. It's why ive used it since i was a kid.

[avatar4321]

People have sex at 13. It's simple reality.

It's a reality that people murder others as well, does that mean we shouldnt be teaching them not to murder?

[LiberalNation]

No but it doesn't mean we should close are eyes and expect them not to murder therefor making no provision for when they do. IE morning after pill, allow them to marry if you wana take the morality route, whatever.

[LiberalNation]

I do. In fact, chaste is a far superior word than abstinence. It's why ive used it since i was a kid.

Well in 15 years when people don't know what your talking about don't be suprised. I've never even seen the word used, only knew the meaning by the topic and the fact that it sounds like chastity.

[gabosaurus]

You can preach about abstinence and hide the facts of life all you want. In five years, you will be a grandparent.
To the less educated teens, 1 + 1 = 3. Because hormones and temptation will always talk louder than parents.

[avatar4321]

You can preach about abstinence and hide the facts of life all you want. In five years, you will be a grandparent.
To the less educated teens, 1 + 1 = 3. Because hormones and temptation will always talk louder than parents.

which is exactly why you neet to teach them chastity. Because otherwise they are less educated.

[LiberalNation]

which is exactly why you neet to teach them chastity. Because otherwise they are less educated.
as well as methods of birthcontrol and protection.

[Insein]

your kidding ! Are you proposing we revert to some kind of stone age virginity test?

No. I'm merely saying that men should treat the good girls (ones that don't act like sluts) with higher respect then they do the sluts. Right now, the sluts have more respect then the good girls. Its like bizarro world. Paris Hilton is a hero but women that don't "put out" on the first date are garbage.

[SassyLady]

You can preach about abstinence and hide the facts of life all you want. In five years, you will be a grandparent.
To the less educated teens, 1 + 1 = 3. Because hormones and temptation will always talk louder than parents.

Do you really think previous generations had no "hormones and/or temptation"? Hate to burst your bubble Gabby but since time began there have been hormones and temptation.......Our "liberalnation" attitude has strapped a parents ability to be effective in teaching children what is right and wrong. My mother told me that if I didn't keep my legs crossed she would take the hide right off my backside and more. I believed her and it definitely kept me from worrying about the "morning after" or being thought of as a "slut". She made sure I hear her loud and clear.

[avatar4321]

Do you really think previous generations had no "hormones and/or temptation"? Hate to burst your bubble Gabby but since time began there have been hormones and temptation.......Our "liberalnation" attitude has strapped a parents ability to be effective in teaching children what is right and wrong. My mother told me that if I didn't keep my legs crossed she would take the hide right off my backside and more. I believed her and it definitely kept me from worrying about the "morning after" or being thought of as a "slut". She made sure I hear her loud and clear.

Sounds like you had a good mother.

[gabosaurus]

There has always been premarital sex as well. Kids were less open about it than they are now. How many of you lied about it to your parents? Everyone?
You either had it or you couldn't get it.

Of course, the double standard has always been there. The guy who has multiple sexual experiences is a stud. The girl who does the same is a slut.
The guys are empowered because they can't get pregnant. Thus, guys have always been free to spin tall tales and apply pressure. Because if the girl gets pregnant, it's her fault, not his.

It's been true since the beginning of time -- Guys are dogs. They don't care whose butt they sniff. They just want a place to bury their bone.

[5stringJeff]

Fortunately, there are parents who have a less fatalistic view of it than you do, and continue to teach their kids that sex before marriage has unpleasant, even dangerous consequences.

[Abbey Marie]

There has always been premarital sex as well. Kids were less open about it than they are now. How many of you lied about it to your parents? Everyone?
You either had it or you couldn't get it. ...


That statement is so untrue, I can't believe you believe it. Do you really think that everyone who abstains does so because they can't have sex?

[Nienna]

Of course, the double standard has always been there. The guy who has multiple sexual experiences is a stud. The girl who does the same is a slut.
The guys are empowered because they can't get pregnant. Thus, guys have always been free to spin tall tales and apply pressure. Because if the girl gets pregnant, it's her fault, not his.

It's been true since the beginning of time -- Guys are dogs. They don't care whose butt they sniff. They just want a place to bury their bone.

If you truly believe that guys are dogs, WHY would you be against STRONGLY warning girls to keep away from them and their "bones" with abstinence education?

In reality, women aren't the only ones who benefit from remaining chaste, and many men AND woman make this choice. There are many upstanding young men who choose to remain chaste themselves and also to show respect enough for women to not take advantage of their offers.

[Said1]

It's been true since the beginning of time -- Guys are dogs. They don't care whose butt they sniff. They just want a place to bury their bone.

So that holds true with respect to the 'dog' you supposedly married? Lots of republican arse to sniff at those 'conventions'. :laugh2:

[avatar4321]

That statement is so untrue, I can't believe you believe it. Do you really think that everyone who abstains does so because they can't have sex?

Please, sex really isn't that difficult to get. I've gotten open offers from a number of women before. Some I dated a bit and some that just want me.

I still remain chaste. Although, sometimes I hate saying no:) But I choose my destiny, not my hormones.

[gabosaurus]

There will always be a voluntarily chaste minority. The majority will make a vow of chastity when they are 14, then start having sex two or three years later.
I am not saying that all men and women are looking for sex all the time. One of my best friends was a virgin until she was married at the age of 22. Her husband was also a virgin, at the age of 25.
Had nothing to do with religion or upbringing, either. Just a personal choice that kids (and later adults) make.
You can't legislate morality. Nor can you force it on anyone. Each person makes his or her choice when the time comes.

[Dilloduck]

There will always be a voluntarily chaste minority. The majority will make a vow of chastity when they are 14, then start having sex two or three years later.
I am not saying that all men and women are looking for sex all the time. One of my best friends was a virgin until she was married at the age of 22. Her husband was also a virgin, at the age of 25.
Had nothing to do with religion or upbringing, either. Just a personal choice that kids (and later adults) make.
You can't legislate morality. Nor can you force it on anyone. Each person makes his or her choice when the time comes.


but that's so boring----it's much more fun trying to make the other side change it's mind !:laugh2:

[gabosaurus]

At least we know what you did while the storms were battering Austin last night. :cheers2:

[Dilloduck]

At least we know what you did while the storms were battering Austin last night. :cheers2:

not really hard to predict my presence here----might have another round tonight, Hope so---everything started blooming !!!

[avatar4321]

There will always be a voluntarily chaste minority. The majority will make a vow of chastity when they are 14, then start having sex two or three years later.
I am not saying that all men and women are looking for sex all the time. One of my best friends was a virgin until she was married at the age of 22. Her husband was also a virgin, at the age of 25.
Had nothing to do with religion or upbringing, either. Just a personal choice that kids (and later adults) make.
You can't legislate morality. Nor can you force it on anyone. Each person makes his or her choice when the time comes.

But how would they even know they had the choice if we listened to you liberals and dont teach them?