# Sex education in public schools



## Bodieva1 (Apr 26, 2011)

I was curious to see everyone's thoughts about sex education in public schools. Currently the majority of sex education programs in public schools are abstinence-only until marriage programs. I, personally am I huge advocate for ending those programs and providing comprehensive sexuality programs. These programs start in kindergarten and contiue through 12th grade, providing age-approprate medically accurate information to students. Abstinence is the number one topic, but other topics that are discussed are contraception, STDs, sexuality, puberty, healthy relationships, reproductive health, etc. Abstinence-only until marriage programs only discuss abstinence and suggest that any sexual behavior before marriage is morally unacceptable and invitably harmful. Which I feel is misleading. Also, these programs have been proven in congressional studies that they are ineffective in lowering teenage pregnancies and STD infections, as well as lowering the rate of sexually active teenagers. They have also shown where these programs do not provide medically accurate information. What are your thoughts and why? 

Let's try to keep our minds open and civil when responding. :happy: This can be a very heated topic, I have found myself in typing yelling matches over it. :angry::laughing:


----------



## amon91 (Feb 1, 2011)

Shouldn't be abstinence-only. If you don't teach people the whole story, they'll just figure it out for themselves, and we all know how badly that has failed.


----------



## JMoney (Apr 16, 2011)

uhh so if I don't have a condom can i use an empty doritos bag?


----------



## Bodieva1 (Apr 26, 2011)

Well, it's not like you're getting any anyways. So, why bother even asking such a silly question? Really?


----------



## tuna (Jun 10, 2010)

Sex-ed needs to cover homosexuality, bisexuality, asexuality, trans*, genderqueerness, etc. This is my biggest issue with it (other than the obvious "abstinence-only doesn't work, you idiots" issue).


----------



## Bodieva1 (Apr 26, 2011)

Comprehensive sexuality education programs can cover all of those issues. It's the school systems discussion on what exactly they want to cover. Which should be all of those topics. They should at least acknowledge them.


----------



## TheOwl (Nov 3, 2010)

What I learned in sex ed: 
-Sex is morally wrong (so is masturbation because you're having sex with yourself).
-Condoms don't work.
-If you have sex, you will feel guilty and depressed (especially if you're female).
-If you have sex, you will get pregnant and die.

I think the classes would be a whole lot more effective against teen pregnancies and STDs if they at least taught us how to properly use a condom. In my class, the teacher basically told us not have sex because the condom will break because we won't use them properly (she left it at that. She never told us how to actually use them properly). 

Also, scare tactics don't work very well on teenagers.


----------



## Bodieva1 (Apr 26, 2011)

You definitely were taught under an abstinence-only until marriage program. Educators work under a gag order, they are only supposed to tell the failure rates of condoms. Quite frankly, they suck. They are a conservative based program that wants everything to be about morals.


----------



## Alterted_Worlds (Apr 14, 2011)

Oddly, I would have to say that sex education was one of the few subjects that were taught comprehensively at my high school. That could be because I went a pretty liberal charter school. We were taught the mechanics of sexual intercourse, different types of sexual orientation,STDs, and the mechanics and use of different types of contraception. And also some weird and frighting stories from our teachers friend in the ER. 

Actually I remember getting some type of sex ed. in elementary, middle, and high school.


----------



## cdwhite706 (Apr 16, 2011)

First I want to state that I am a Christian. Please everyone give me a break before you assume I'm the normal judge 'em and everybody is going to hell type haha. Although I'm a Christian I'm not stupid. The fact is there are many out there that do not believe they way I do or anyone else does for that matter. I do personally believe in abstinence but I also believe that for those that don't you should provide education on safe and healthy alternatives. Isn't that what we claim to be anyway as a Christian. Someone who generally cares for others. So what justice are we doing those who will not take the abstinence advice if we don't teach other precautions. Just my beliefs. I hope this makes sense.


----------



## Vivid Melody (Apr 25, 2011)

I was taught about condoms, abstinence, std's and everything in between very thoroughly in school. I was actually surprised to find out that some schools teach abstinence only and use scare tactics on kids. That's so wrong.


----------



## kemmicals (Nov 14, 2010)

Sex ed up until the age of 16 was pretty much all puberty based in our (Catholic) school.
Grade 11s had a guest speaker who taught us about STIs and he made it pretty clear his abstinence only views.
In grade 12 we had a guest speaker who the school claimed would teach us all about protection methods. Although it was fairly comprehensive information, it was so biased. The message pretty much was "The bar? The pill? Other hormone methods? You'll get fat, lose your sex drive and you WILL get and STI and cancer. Condoms? Among teenagers only 30% effective, they break and you WILL get pregnant+STIs. But hey, this Natural Family Planning chart could be used. It's cancer-free! And great for a husband and wife to work on together!" (nevermind the fact that it would be impossible to chart the ovulation patterns of a teenager, that you'd have to miss out on about 2 weeks of sex without any real form of protection, that it has 0 protection from STIs and is so incredibly innapropriate)
But we also cover sex ed in certain subjects like Health and Biology, and the teachers actually made sure we got the best information and were well aware of all our choices. 
But our school has absolutely no psychological type of sexual education. We had no real information on sexuality and the emotional effects that come with sex, or anything.

Abstinence only teachings have been proven not to work, and even in religious schools there really needs to be in-depth lessons on sex ed in all aspects of sex, I think.


----------



## themartyparade (Nov 7, 2010)

Aside from having comprehensive sex ed. classes which discusses STIs, protection, homosexuality and so on, I think teaching kids that you don't have to lose your virginity at a young age is also very important.

I once saw a sex education programme on tv. They had pictures of several famous musicians/artists/actresses and the kids had to guess at what age those people lost their virginity. The kids all guessed from age 14-17 and they were all pretty shocked to find out that some of those people actually lost their virginity in their early twenties.

I think that can be really helpful 'cause most teenagers seem to think that everyone loses their virginity at sixteen or younger and that you have to do so as well in order to be "cool".


----------



## JMoney (Apr 16, 2011)

Experience will usually trump education. Wait, is this a thread about careers?


----------



## sofort99 (Mar 27, 2010)

Bodieva1 said:


> I was curious to see everyone's thoughts about sex education in public schools.


Since comprehensive sex ed started in 1970, unwed teen pregnancies have increased 87%, teen abortions have risen 67%, and teen STD rates have quadrupled. (source CDC)

Comprehensive sex ed is developed primarily through Planned Parenthood, a multi billion dollar a year industry that sells abortions. They teach classes that increases the abortion rate, and makes them more money. They then give money to politicians that pass laws to give them more access to teach more classes, that increase the abortion rate further.

The same people that are for this, would immediately see through letting Marlboro or Camel cigarettes come in to teach anti-smoking classes, and when the classes caused an increase in the teen smoking rates would never accept that the solution is to have Marlboro teach more classes.


----------



## tuna (Jun 10, 2010)

sofort99 said:


> Since comprehensive sex ed started in 1970, unwed teen pregnancies have increased 87%, teen abortions have risen 67%, and teen STD rates have quadrupled. (source CDC)
> 
> Comprehensive sex ed is developed primarily through Planned Parenthood, a multi billion dollar a year industry that sells abortions. They teach classes that increases the abortion rate, and makes them more money. They then give money to politicians that pass laws to give them more access to teach more classes, that increase the abortion rate further.
> 
> The same people that are for this, would immediately see through letting Marlboro or Camel cigarettes come in to teach anti-smoking classes, and when the classes caused an increase in the teen smoking rates would never accept that the solution is to have Marlboro teach more classes.


I am not even touching this filth.


----------



## sofort99 (Mar 27, 2010)

tuna said:


> I am not even touching this filth.


Of course you wouldn't.



> The same people that are for this, would immediately see through letting Marlboro or Camel cigarettes come in to teach anti-smoking classes, and when the classes caused an increase in the teen smoking rates would never accept that the solution is to have Marlboro teach more classes.


----------



## Ben (Aug 23, 2009)

The most sex ed my high school has given me is a couple of classes during my Psychology course when we were covering conception and motivation for sex and a class during English when we got way off topic.

Granted, my school is basically run based on the opinions of the parents and the parent board, from what I can gather. The parents don't want us to get any ideas. Which is stupid because someone will inevitably turn to misleading sources for information and --bam! Pregnancy/STDs.


----------



## Psilo (Apr 29, 2009)

I remember the boys and girls in 5th grade being sequestered for their growing up videos. One time in 8th grade we had some speaker on STDs and how sex kills people or something, I don't know. All I remember is some girl my senior year asking if you can get pregnant from swallowing. I know I've heard that you can't get pregnant your first time as well. Ah well, at least there's the internet now. That's where my sex ed came from. After I graduated high school. Fun fact: I had no idea what a penis looked like until I was 18. (okay, well I've changed a few diapers in my day, but that doesn't count)

I think sex education should be a regual part of a biology/human anatomy/health whatever class. This should include the biology of sex, arousal, and pregnancy as well as birth control methods. I think it should also include the hormones and mental changes one goes through before during and after sex. This should be discussed in a safe and educate environment where kids can ask questions and get good information, not misinformation or scare tactics. There's no reason sex should be treated like this evil act that no one should even talk about. The-biological-function-that-shall-not-be-named. There are risks, but if you make the good part the mystery, of course it will seem enticing. Teenagers aren't exactly known for their great decision making skills, the least you can do is provide adequate information and resources to help them along.


----------



## Cover3 (Feb 2, 2011)

why do we feel the need to mess up our kids at an early age and ''educate'' them about something that might well just cause all other sorts of problem in them considering the fact that they're being informed so early about things they'd rather only deal with at an appropriate age?.. and considering this would have to be a state-run program, I say there's 0 chance I trust these people to teach these in public schools, my thoughts anyway..


----------

