True Love Waits (Until Someone with a Clue Teaches Sex Ed)

[Apocalypse]

There are perks to not masturbating early or too often...if you do it too much it desensitizes and it'll be harder to get off with normal sex and blowjobs.

[Pekka]

Well, you can teach that too. That if you masturbate too often, and you keep a brake in between, it feels better because excessive masturbating makes you more desensitized. But it doesn't desensitize you forever. But chronic masturbating naturally makes it less of a deal and not so pleasurable as it could be, because you're doing it too often. I don't see why that can't be taught as well. If you can't talk about sex in school or with parents, then who are you going to talk about it with and learn? History channel? Porn movies? No no.. you need someone who talks the truth and doesn't make it a grim reaper thing.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Pekka
Well, you can teach that too. That if you masturbate too often, and you keep a brake in between, it feels better because excessive masturbating makes you more desensitized. But it doesn't desensitize you forever. But chronic masturbating naturally makes it less of a deal and not so pleasurable as it could be, because you're doing it too often. I don't see why that can't be taught as well. If you can't talk about sex in school or with parents, then who are you going to talk about it with and learn? History channel? Porn movies? No no.. you need someone who talks the truth and doesn't make it a grim reaper thing.

That's it. I'm bidding Finland for my next post.

You may or may not remember, Pekka, that when Clinton's first Surgeon General, Jocelyn Elders, proposed teaeching kids about masturbation in a neutral, medically-sound fashion just as you propose, she was actually hounded from office by the GOP (and was not defended by Clinton, the Gutless Wonder).

Really, stay in Europe. Hot American women visit there all the time.

[Wycoff]

Originally posted by Apocalypse
There are perks to not masturbating early or too often...if you do it too much it desensitizes and it'll be harder to get off with normal sex and blowjobs.

Hey, this is waaaaay off topic, but I notice that you go to college in Lexingtion, VA. Do you go to VMI or Washington & Lee. Just curious.

[Drake Tungsten]

Yep, and those are pretty big ones.

I'd add the potential for emotional harm/exploitation - especially if we're talking about sex between, say, an older man and a high school girl (although that's not to say there can't be exploitation & harm done if the situation was reversed, but that's the most common version).

Safe sex, while clearly superior than unsafe sex, is not foolproof. There remains danger, and that's something kids should know (in addition to how to use a condom).

Sex is not the problem but sex can be part of the problem. Yes, divorce and the collapse of the family structure are partly respsonsible for the social decay. But in many cases, sex (ie, adultery, promiscuity) played a role in causing the divorce or the collapse of the family. So, irresponsible sexual behavior can contribute to some of the social problems we face today. The whole point of abstinence programs is to try to teach young people to be more sexually responsible. "Safe sex" classes don't do that. Teaching young people that it is ok to have sex whenever they want and with whomever they want, as long as they wear a condom does not inculcate responsible behavior.

I'm no fan of abstinence-only programs, but what you say is true...

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Apocalypse
There are perks to not masturbating early or too often...if you do it too much it desensitizes and it'll be harder to get off with normal sex and blowjobs.

yeah, right

[Dis]

Originally posted by MrFun



yeah, right

and Mr. Fun knows. He masturbates 6 times a day.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Well, there's the danger of hooking up with someone who doesn't know what he's doing, and getting the impression that sex is boring and painful.

Well, you must have got better, she did marry you after all.








Sorry... you jumped into that one with both feet, comrade.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Oerdin


Latex condoms are very effective. If someone's using a lamb skin condom then my guess is they had one of these miseducation, abstinence only sex ed courses.

Large scale surveys show that groups that use condoms "all the time" still have a pregnancy rate about one-third to one-half that of groups using no birth control. I believe that if you read the fine print of those studies claiming an astounding better than 90% efficacy rate you'll find that the authors meticulously tossed out all cases of preganacy in their test group that they determined to have suffered "slippage", "breakage", and "poor technique". Specifically the authors will focus just on the portion of the test group that got pregnant and grill them until they can find a reason to toss most of them out. This is bad study design, in fact it's unethical.

[Wycoff]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Hell, they scared me into not even masturbating till I was 17. So many missed orgasms.

WHAT??? I started when I was 12, and I was religious! You must have been a very gullible kid. I feel sorry for you.

[Drake Tungsten]

Large scale surveys show that groups that use condoms "all the time" still have a pregnancy rate about one-third to one-half that of groups using no birth control.

Please, tell me you're lying...

[mrmitchell]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

Is it? All I hear from the nay side is that this obviously cannot be true.

TORONTO - A study from the University of Toronto reveals that 99% of all fundementalist pro-life Canadians are closeted homosexuals!

Is it? Prove they ain't. I don't want to hear you say "it OBVIOUSLY can't be true."

[Drake Tungsten]

C'mon, mrmitchell, at least quote the study correctly.

TORONTO - A study from the University of Toronto reveals that 99% of all Canadians are closeted homosexuals!

The research on this study was impeccable, by the way. U of T...

[Drake Tungsten]

BTW, the debunking begins...

Sullivan is actually turning out to be a useful source of information today. Who would've thunk it?

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove


Large scale surveys show that groups that use condoms "all the time" still have a pregnancy rate about one-third to one-half that of groups using no birth control. I believe that if you read the fine print of those studies claiming an astounding better than 90% efficacy rate you'll find that the authors meticulously tossed out all cases of preganacy in their test group that they determined to have suffered "slippage", "breakage", and "poor technique". Specifically the authors will focus just on the portion of the test group that got pregnant and grill them until they can find a reason to toss most of them out. This is bad study design, in fact it's unethical.

Ok, I'm not worried about getting another man pregnant. But I guess this applies the same with STD risk with condoms.

But then again, I have not had any condom accidents over the years.