I'm having trouble understanding MajorKong's point. He complains about the quality of US education, then falls back on fundamental Christian "abstinence". We've all seen how well that worked for the Roman Catholic clergy. If the RC Church can't motivate priests to keep their pants on, do you really expect parents to be able to motivate healthy teenage boys? A few hundred thousand years of evolution says otherwise.

Maybe I'm old and cynical, but I think MajorKong is really expressing his dislike of the current US education system by following his preacher's line on sex education. I have to agree with him about their education system (assuming that is his point). It may not be the end of ALL civilization, but I think history will show the downfall of the US civilization was largely the result of their illogical refusal to fund public education, or set minimum performance standards for the system.

Our UK readers may not know that in many US States the only requirements to teach the lower grades are a high school diploma (roughly equivalent to your O standards) and passing an interview.

I am shocked by this. In most civilised countries teachers are expected to have a university degree in their subject plus additional training in educational psychology, human development, educational philosophy, special needs and educational theory. In other words a little bit of everything at a university level. No wonder there is such a problem with the American school system. Of course well qualified and educated people such as myself don't come cheap, so if you don't value education you aren't going to pay professionals to work in it.

Can you please provide links to show that what you are saying is true about the education required of teachers in America?? I think you must be mistaken.

---

Reality Internet Personality

Vasectomy is even more effective.

Agreed. I think charities like Oxfam would do a great deal to help the world's famine problems if they offered free vasectomies rather than just handouts of clothes and similar.

Here is the problem with free vasectomies.

You have 10 men and 1 fertile female.

9 men (90%) get vasectomies.

She still gets pregnant.

That is a really insulting thing to say about women. Think about what you just wrote there.

Women are people, they are capable of rational thought and being discriminating. I am quite sure that most women don't sleep with everyman they come across. I'd be willing to bet money on that.

Insulting?

I am sorry you are stuck in some Victorian mind set regarding women.

Men wanting sex, do not ALWAYS act rational, nor are discriminating.

This is not insulting towards men.

Women wanting sex, do not ALWAYS act rational, nor are discriminating.

This is not insulting towards women.

Please enter the 21st Century.

Your comment implied that the woman would sleep with all the men as if just because there is one women all the men would automatically have the right to sleep with her. Its almost as if she didn't have a choice in the matter. I am absolutely positive that women don't sleep with a man just because he exists, although a fair number of men seem to think that this is the way it should be.

So just because there are 10 men and one women it doesn't mean that the women will sleep with all 10 men however much they might expect her to. I am sorry you think that is the way things are. You must find it confusing when women turn you down.

---

Reality Internet Personality

I'm having trouble understanding MajorKong's point. He complains about the quality of US education, then falls back on fundamental Christian "abstinence". We've all seen how well that worked for the Roman Catholic clergy. If the RC Church can't motivate priests to keep their pants on, do you really expect parents to be able to motivate healthy teenage boys? A few hundred thousand years of evolution says otherwise.

Maybe I'm old and cynical, but I think MajorKong is really expressing his dislike of the current US education system by following his preacher's line on sex education. I have to agree with him about their education system (assuming that is his point). It may not be the end of ALL civilization, but I think history will show the downfall of the US civilization was largely the result of their illogical refusal to fund public education, or set minimum performance standards for the system.

Our UK readers may not know that in many US States the only requirements to teach the lower grades are a high school diploma (roughly equivalent to your O standards) and passing an interview.

---

I know some stupid parents as well. Still doesn't change that it *is* the 'parents responsibility' to prepare their own children for adult-hood.

Perhaps those 'parents' just shouldn't be parents.

Life has no easy answers.
This is one of the tough questions.

Maybe they shouldn't be parents but the simple fact is that they are. And that means its useless to wish that they weren't parents.

What is left? Hmm... Lets see...

Not much other than abstinence.

Okay, so you are arguing that abstinence leads to safer sex than teaching children how to use condoms. We got statistics on how effective that is.

And the results are

abstinence is utterly useless
From the report:

This assessment of the impact of formal sex education programs on teen sexual health using nationally representative data found that abstinence-only programs had no significant effect in delaying the initiation of sexual activity or in reducing the risk for teen pregnancy and STD. In contrast comprehensive sex education programs were significantly associated with reduced risk of teen pregnancy, whether compared with no sex education or with abstinence-only sex education, and were marginally associated with decreased likelihood of a teen becoming sexually active compared with no sex education

See? Abstinence doesn't do a damn, comprehensive sex education does. You are dead wrong.

Oh look, here is another fact sheet with a nice summary of all the scientific evidence that says how utterly wrong you are

I'm sorry if I sound harsh, but right now you are pretty much claiming the earth is flat. You are that wrong.

Male condom—Worn by the man, a male condom keeps sperm from getting into a woman’s body. Latex condoms, the most common type, help prevent pregnancy, and HIV and other STDs, as do the newer synthetic condoms. “Natural” or “lambskin” condoms also help prevent pregnancy, but may not provide protection against STDs, including HIV. Typical use failure rate: 18%.

http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/unintendedpregnancy/contraception.htm

The US Govt. Center for Disease Control and Prevention says it is 18%...

I think the 18% failure rate refers to the 'natural' condoms. They also don't protect you against STD's unlike the latex and other synthetic condoms.

EDIT: I was wrong, the 18% refers to overall typical use failure rate. AKA, what happens when you don't follow the instructions correctly and you misuse the condom. Perfect use failure rate is actually around 2%. If anything, this only highlights the vital nature of sexual education. People need to learn how to correctly and safely use a condom or otherwise its not nearly as safe as it can be.

Exactly. Sex education in schools, which includes how to use contraceptives properly is very important. Its not just condoms, the pill can be less effective if someone has been drinking excessively, or is on antibiotics.

Those condom safety numbers were clearly wrong. Condoms when used correctly are very effective. Apart from anything else, speaking as someone who reacts very badly to the pill I'd have a lot more children than I do if condoms were only 80% effective.

Ok Es99...

We feel the same when it comes to the importance of sex education. Where we differ is that you insist that it MUST be done in public schools and I say it has NO business in public schools but is the parent's responsibility.

Another difference that we have on this matter is your insistence that the condom is very effective (based apparently on your own anecdotal evidence) and my quotation of statistics (with citing of the source) to try to show that it is not as effective as you might think.


You dispute the CDC's (the USA's public health institute, a branch of the USA's Federal Government's "Department of Health and Human Services") statement that condoms have a 'typical use' failure rate of 18%.

Is it that it is the USA's Federal Government saying it that puts you off? Or is it that it is a 'typical use' statistic (you know, the way most people use them)?

A little more research led me to this site:

http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/publicat/ttm-pm/contraception-eng.php

The Canadian Public Health Agency.

"Barrier" Methods
Condom

protects against pregnancy and most STI
88% effective in preventing pregnancy if used consistently and correctly

You are correct when you say that 'correct use' does reduce the failure rate of condoms. 'Typical use -> 18% failure rate' down to 'Consistent and correct use -> 12% failure rate.'

However, I would not call a 12% failure rate 'very effective'.

The consequences of an unintended pregnancy, especially in teenagers and very young adults are severe, both in dollar cost and in human misery.

The consequences of STDs are very high as well in dollar cost and in human misery. The highly antibiotic-resistant newer strains of older non-resistant STDs... HIV, which trashes the human immune system and the infected need *expensive* medication to survive... HPV which causes cancer of the cervix in women, and has also been shown to cause oral/throat cancer in both genders... Herpes... All incurable, and the list goes on and on.

Remember, if pregnancy is possible during an 'encounter', so is STD transmission. That turns this issue into a Public Health Issue.

In light of the greater than 1 out of 10 failure rate on condoms when *correctly* used, teaching children and very young adults that 'condom use' = 'safe sex' is wrong. The School distributing free condoms to the kids is equivalent (in the kids' eyes) to the School giving the kids permission, indeed the commandment to go out and bump uglies... 'just use the condom like we taught you!'... Blargh!

Well, then, what works? Other barrier contraceptives? Not that much better than condoms. Hormonal contraceptives? While they are better at preventing pregnancy than the barrier methods, they do not provide ANY protection against STDs. Various other methods such as withdrawal or the rhythm method? Not very good for pregnancy prevention (condoms are better), and no protection against STDs.

What is left? Hmm... Lets see...

Not much other than abstinence.

The unwarranted intrusion into Parental Responsibility, based on untruths, in my opinion borders on criminal negligence. The schools need to stick to what they are there for and are failing miserably at (at least here in the USA)... Teaching academic subjects such as 'The 3 Rs' (Reading, wRiting, and aRithmetic.) Having high school graduates being functionally illiterate and unable to do basic arithmetic is a National Disgrace of the highest magnitude.

With schools like these, the end of civilization is nigh.

Simon here posted the rates of effectiveness and there is some difference in how those statistics are reported. The figure that the NHS gives in 98% effective. Which means that in one year 2 out of 100 women will get pregnant using condoms. That is a pretty good rate of protection if you ask me. Certainly a lot better than using none. The Canadian data does not say what those percentages mean.

Just because you teach a teenager how to use a condom it doesn't mean that they will go out and start having lots of sex. What will happen is that they will continue to do what they were going to do anyway and do it safer. This is the reality. I suggest you spend an evening at parent-teacher interviews before you insist that sex education be left in the hands of parents. There is a wide variety of parents out there just as there is a wide variety of students.

I agree with you that the American school system is in a shameful state. Did you know that in some states teachers get not much above minimum wage? Considering the qualifications and level of professionalism required I am not surprised they are doing a half-arsed job. Add to that all the standardised testing going in in US schools its really is a mess. However, the appalling standard of US education has nothing to do with teaching teenagers how to get through the hormonal years without getting pregnant.

I would be interested to see how you are going to teach a teenager abstinence without teaching them what sex is and why abstinence (which I agree, is the ideal option, but if wishes were horses beggars would ride)is the best way not to get pregnant. You are going to have to teach them first what sex is. You are going to have to teach them how they can get pregnant and you are going to have to teach them how to have sex safely because the reality is they are teenagers. The more you forbid something the more likely they are going to do it. Its a developmental process they go through as they separate from the parent. Its what they do and our jobs as parents is to ride the wave with them and try to get them out the other end without too much damage. The more you try to control them the worse the outcome.

If you are the parent of a teenager, whatever you forbid they will do. You may never find out about it unless it goes wrong, but 88% of teenagers will do it.

That is why telling them to "keep it in their pants" is the worst possible way you could possibly think of to keep a teenager from getting pregnant.

---

Reality Internet Personality

MajorKong I'll have to disagree with, "but is the parent's responsibility", I know some pretty stupid parents who just don't seem to have a clue and some of them are getting on.

Cheers.

I know some stupid parents as well. Still doesn't change that it *is* the 'parents responsibility' to prepare their own children for adult-hood.

Perhaps those 'parents' just shouldn't be parents.

Life has no easy answers.
This is one of the tough questions.

The schools need to stick to what they are there for and are failing miserably at (at least here in the USA)... Teaching academic subjects such as 'The 3 Rs' (Reading, wRiting, and aRithmetic.) Having high school graduates being functionally illiterate and unable to do basic arithmetic is a National Disgrace of the highest magnitude.

With schools like these, the end of civilization is nigh.

Exactly the same in the UK. Kids falling out of school at 16, thick as two short planks, without the basics. Then finding that not only are they unemployed, they are unemployable.

Exactly the point I was trying to make before the "Great Condom Rupture"!

You'd think the issue was the teaching methods in getting through to the children are the result of education issues, not the subjects being taught. Sex Ed or safe sex are not the problems with the education system. Effective teaching is, and I say that with personal experience.

The schools need to stick to what they are there for and are failing miserably at (at least here in the USA)... Teaching academic subjects such as 'The 3 Rs' (Reading, wRiting, and aRithmetic.) Having high school graduates being functionally illiterate and unable to do basic arithmetic is a National Disgrace of the highest magnitude.

With schools like these, the end of civilization is nigh.

Exactly the same in the UK. Kids falling out of school at 16, thick as two short planks, without the basics. Then finding that not only are they unemployed, they are unemployable.

Exactly the point I was trying to make before the "Great Condom Rupture"!

MajorKong I'll have to disagree with, "but is the parent's responsibility", I know some pretty stupid parents who just don't seem to have a clue and some of them are getting on.

Cheers.

The schools need to stick to what they are there for and are failing miserably at (at least here in the USA)... Teaching academic subjects such as 'The 3 Rs' (Reading, wRiting, and aRithmetic.) Having high school graduates being functionally illiterate and unable to do basic arithmetic is a National Disgrace of the highest magnitude.

With schools like these, the end of civilization is nigh.

Exactly the same in the UK. Kids falling out of school at 16, thick as two short planks, without the basics. Then finding that not only are they unemployed, they are unemployable.

Male condom—Worn by the man, a male condom keeps sperm from getting into a woman’s body. Latex condoms, the most common type, help prevent pregnancy, and HIV and other STDs, as do the newer synthetic condoms. “Natural” or “lambskin” condoms also help prevent pregnancy, but may not provide protection against STDs, including HIV. Typical use failure rate: 18%.

http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/unintendedpregnancy/contraception.htm

The US Govt. Center for Disease Control and Prevention says it is 18%...

I think the 18% failure rate refers to the 'natural' condoms. They also don't protect you against STD's unlike the latex and other synthetic condoms.

EDIT: I was wrong, the 18% refers to overall typical use failure rate. AKA, what happens when you don't follow the instructions correctly and you misuse the condom. Perfect use failure rate is actually around 2%. If anything, this only highlights the vital nature of sexual education. People need to learn how to correctly and safely use a condom or otherwise its not nearly as safe as it can be.

Exactly. Sex education in schools, which includes how to use contraceptives properly is very important. Its not just condoms, the pill can be less effective if someone has been drinking excessively, or is on antibiotics.

Those condom safety numbers were clearly wrong. Condoms when used correctly are very effective. Apart from anything else, speaking as someone who reacts very badly to the pill I'd have a lot more children than I do if condoms were only 80% effective.

Ok Es99...

We feel the same when it comes to the importance of sex education. Where we differ is that you insist that it MUST be done in public schools and I say it has NO business in public schools but is the parent's responsibility.

Another difference that we have on this matter is your insistence that the condom is very effective (based apparently on your own anecdotal evidence) and my quotation of statistics (with citing of the source) to try to show that it is not as effective as you might think.


You dispute the CDC's (the USA's public health institute, a branch of the USA's Federal Government's "Department of Health and Human Services") statement that condoms have a 'typical use' failure rate of 18%.

Is it that it is the USA's Federal Government saying it that puts you off? Or is it that it is a 'typical use' statistic (you know, the way most people use them)?

A little more research led me to this site:

http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/publicat/ttm-pm/contraception-eng.php

The Canadian Public Health Agency.

"Barrier" Methods
Condom

protects against pregnancy and most STI
88% effective in preventing pregnancy if used consistently and correctly

You are correct when you say that 'correct use' does reduce the failure rate of condoms. 'Typical use -> 18% failure rate' down to 'Consistent and correct use -> 12% failure rate.'

However, I would not call a 12% failure rate 'very effective'.

The consequences of an unintended pregnancy, especially in teenagers and very young adults are severe, both in dollar cost and in human misery.

The consequences of STDs are very high as well in dollar cost and in human misery. The highly antibiotic-resistant newer strains of older non-resistant STDs... HIV, which trashes the human immune system and the infected need *expensive* medication to survive... HPV which causes cancer of the cervix in women, and has also been shown to cause oral/throat cancer in both genders... Herpes... All incurable, and the list goes on and on.

Remember, if pregnancy is possible during an 'encounter', so is STD transmission. That turns this issue into a Public Health Issue.

In light of the greater than 1 out of 10 failure rate on condoms when *correctly* used, teaching children and very young adults that 'condom use' = 'safe sex' is wrong. The School distributing free condoms to the kids is equivalent (in the kids' eyes) to the School giving the kids permission, indeed the commandment to go out and bump uglies... 'just use the condom like we taught you!'... Blargh!

Well, then, what works? Other barrier contraceptives? Not that much better than condoms. Hormonal contraceptives? While they are better at preventing pregnancy than the barrier methods, they do not provide ANY protection against STDs. Various other methods such as withdrawal or the rhythm method? Not very good for pregnancy prevention (condoms are better), and no protection against STDs.

What is left? Hmm... Lets see...

Not much other than abstinence.

The unwarranted intrusion into Parental Responsibility, based on untruths, in my opinion borders on criminal negligence. The schools need to stick to what they are there for and are failing miserably at (at least here in the USA)... Teaching academic subjects such as 'The 3 Rs' (Reading, wRiting, and aRithmetic.) Having high school graduates being functionally illiterate and unable to do basic arithmetic is a National Disgrace of the highest magnitude.

With schools like these, the end of civilization is nigh.

......we all know about bored housewives that look forward to the window cleaner calling, and the postman always rings twice etc....

Pool boys, lawn mowing boys, paper boys,...

I could tell yous some stories.... but I won't, other than to say that my younger years were very interesting. :-p

Though I will say that I know of more women who cheat than men.

Cheers.

I am sure a lot of the respectable women you know have secrets you would never have suspected

Oooh I hope so, could be in with a chance myself :-) Tropic of South London, Leslie Thomas eat your heart out!

People of my generation usually have their own property bought and paid for. In a case of a divorce it would be likely that the woman would either get the property or the lions share of the proceeds if sold. We don't go into pre-nups because we expect things to fail, and we want to protect our assets.

.... All you are really saying is that women are better at it then men. ...

All I can say is that necessity is the mother of invention. I am sure a lot of the respectable women you know have secrets you would never have suspected, and they've learnt to be better at keeping secrets than men because they have more to lose than men. Especially your generation.

As things become more equal things will get better as people can be more honest before they enter into relationships in the first place.

---

Reality Internet Personality

Well Es, we all know about bored housewives that look forward to the window cleaner calling, and the postman always rings twice etc, then again how many men ring up to say they are working late and nip off early .... All you are really saying is that women are better at it then men. My inner mojo is telling me to leave it there before I get handbagged :-))

Not a fact and not true at all.

Anecdotal maybe, but in all my social circles over 50 years it has been that way.

As far as you are aware. There is more stigma associated with women who sleep around than for men that do, so they tend to be more discreet about it.

---

Reality Internet Personality

Not a fact and not true at all.

Anecdotal maybe, but in all my social circles over 50 years it has been that way.

Fact: A surprising amount of men are raising children that aren't their own even though they think they are.

Ah, now that is a different matter altogether. 40 years ago I knew a senior nurse in the Blood Transfusion Service. Most people don't know that the two parents blood groups can only produce a certain number of blood groups in their offsrping. She said we often have to do family blood tests for various reasons, and there are sometimes discrepancies which meant that the child could not possibly be the assumed fathers. These days anyone can get simple and cheap DNA tests done, but how many suspect that they need to?

It is an accepted statistic that women tend to go for the same type of partner more than once, so provided the child looks like their assumed dad, there is no reason for suspicion. I'm sure that I've read somewhere that possibly 15% of all children have different biological fathers, but it is suppressed for obvious reasons.

In Canada a man is on the hook and will be made to pay or there will be consequences.

The upside of this is that men are having to be a bit more thoughtful about where they sow their seed so to speak.

Quite right too in both matters. It should be the same here.

I think a number of issues are getting all confused here.

Fact - Practising safe sex by using condoms can limit the spread of STD's.

Fact - Male vasectomies and Female birth control pills can limit pregnancies.

Fact - A moral code of conduct can supplement both the above.

Sure, but you might find it difficult to get an agreement as to what a moral code of conduct is.

Fact - Men are much more likely to sleep around than women are.

Not a fact and not true at all.

Fact: A surprising amount of men are raising children that aren't their own even though they think they are.

Fact: If men are sleeping around then they are sleeping with women..unless you are saying that men are more likely to have gay sex then women, then I understand your point, but you'd need to provide data.

Fact: Biologically both sexes are programmed to cheat. That is why sperm from two different men will actually fight each other. If women didn't sleep around then that would never have evolved.

To back up my assertion in the last point, if a woman gets an unwanted pregnancy, the man involved can often just walk away. The woman is left with the choice of an abortion or having an unwanted child as a single parent.

In the UK where the child support laws are a joke that may be true. In Canada a man is on the hook and will be made to pay or there will be consequences.

The upside of this is that men are having to be a bit more thoughtful about where they sow their seed so to speak.

---

Reality Internet Personality

I think a number of issues are getting all confused here.

Fact - Practising safe sex by using condoms can limit the spread of STD's.

Fact - Male vasectomies and Female birth control pills can limit pregnancies.

Fact - A moral code of conduct can supplement both the above.

Fact - Men are much more likely to sleep around than women are.

To back up my assertion in the last point, if a woman gets an unwanted pregnancy, the man involved can often just walk away. The woman is left with the choice of an abortion or having an unwanted child as a single parent.