What If We Admitted to Children That Sex Is Primarily About Pleasure?

[MysticSang'ha]

why do people resort right back to the being ashamed part?
who the heck is saying that?
No one.
I am simply saying that we teach our kids about sex and teach them that is is something shared with a partner the love, not just some guy that they just met and if parents do not want their kids going around having sex, that is perfectly acceptable.
What is not acceptable is telling kids that its ok for them to have sex at 13-18 years old.
There is a huge difference is teaching them to respect their bodies and making them ashamed of their bodies.

Odd how you didn't discuss the bullying part.
And yes, today's kids do treat sex like little adults.

the only ones imaging things are those thinking their kids are not having sex, and being responsible, until the girl comes home pregnant.

I stand by my perspective that I would teach my kids that abstinence is the best thing until they are adults and if the boy tells you that if you like him you will have sex with him, I would tell my daughter to tell him to get lost.

If others wish to give their kids condoms and tell them to have fun, because sex is mostly about pleasure, good for them.
Again, good for them, condoms are not 100% safe nor means they wont have sex without one, if they just happen to not have one at the time.
And if said boy of these parents dates my daughter and tries that "everyone else is doing it too" he will be looking for a new g/f, because my daughter will have respect for her body and will know she has her whole life to worry about sex, getting a good education is what kids do.
Oh yah, I live in the USA, I forgot, I mean just an education.

Maybe we are all on the same page, but it don't seem so.
I am against teen sex, they have their whole lives to worry about it.
The fact they are being pressured into sex, clearly is a problem.

Oh yah, that means they are ashamed of their bodies if they dont have sex, my bad

No, that isn't what I was saying. I was bringing up how people in general are afraid to talk to their kids about sex and sexuality, and that creates the kinds of barriers that many parents face.

Just out of curiosity though, now that it's been made clear what you would say to your daughter, what would you say to your teenage son?

 

[kashmir]

No, that isn't what I was saying. I was bringing up how people in general are afraid to talk to their kids about sex and sexuality, and that creates the kinds of barriers that many parents face.

Just out of curiosity though, now that it's been made clear what you would say to your daughter, what would you say to your teenage son?

I would say the same exact thing, how many tell their sons the complete opposite though?

And yes, parents are afraid to talk about sex, because of the very issues raised.
Do you blame them?

Over all, most parents today are not even capable of raising kids.
If they were, we wouldn't need 98million books on how to raise them, nor even need these debates.

so let me ask you, are you ok with your 13 year olds being pressured into sex?
Because its the norm, everyone does it, right?

I wonder what the studies have to say about that part.
I wonder what the studies say about 60's kids and todays kids on the pregnancy thing

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I can not count the times I been at parties in my 20's where some friends where tag teaming girls who wanted it too and I was made out to be stupid,gay, etc for not wanting to join in.

Wow. What kind of trashy people do you hang out with? Sounds like you need better friends.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I would say the same exact thing, how many tell their sons the complete opposite though?

A lot. And it's pretty crappy to know.

And yes, parents are afraid to talk about sex, because of the very issues raised.
Do you blame them?

I have a different perspective, but I do blame parents who don't talk with their kids about sex. I think it's irresponsible to ignore it.

Over all, most parents today are not even capable of raising kids.
If they were, we wouldn't need 98million books on how to raise them, nor even need these debates.

Well, I wouldn't go that far. A lot of us have survived, and a lot of kids do survive into being at least mildly productive citizens. We all have dreams of our children being the one who finds the cure for cancer, but most of us have children who are quite ordinary. LOL

so let me ask you, are you ok with your 13 year olds being pressured into sex?
Because its the norm, everyone does it, right?

No, the average age of teens losing their virginity is around 16-17. At 13, teens are quite curious, but most do not go that far. When my kids were that age, they were not interested in having sex. They were interested in heavy petting, but they showed no interest in anything past 2nd base.

It wasn't until our two oldest were 17 when they approached me about the interest, and it was a sudden and immediate interest to explore sex. Our youngest is 15, and she has had no interest at all in sex as well as our 16 year old son. Our youngest (15) was once approached online into either sexting or cyber sex, and she told him to **** off.

She has since mentioned that as much as she enjoys learning about sex, she has no desire to engage in it unless she were able to ensure she was infertile. She doesn't want any children. Ever. I applaud her desire, and haven't felt the need to "remind" her that she might change her mind in the future when it comes to motherhood. But at the moment, she has dreams of traveling the world with her friends.

Does that answer your question?

 

[Drolefille]

I wonder what the studies say about 60's kids and todays kids on the pregnancy thing

If someone would like to quote this for kashmir so he can see it, but I suspect studies are no longer valid again because this one disagrees with him too.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db89.pdf

Fewer babies were born to teenagers in 2010 than in any year since 1946. If the teen birth rates observed in 1991 had not declined through 2010
as they did, there would have been an estimated 3.4 million additional births to teens during 1992–2010.

Top Stories - Teen Pregnancy Rate Lowest in At Least 90 Years - AllGov - News

Although pregnancy rates are not available for the years before 1972, birth rates by age groups are known going back to 1917. The 2009 teen birth rate of 39.1 per 1,000 is the lowest ever. Between 1954 and 1960 the teenage birth rate was consistently above 90 per 1,000. Since 1999, each year’s rate has been below 50. Prior to 1999, the only year in which the teenage birth rate dipped that low was the Depression year of 1933.

 

[Nymphs]

If someone would like to quote this for kashmir so he can see it, but I suspect studies are no longer valid again because this one disagrees with him too.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db89.pdf


Top Stories - Teen Pregnancy Rate Lowest in At Least 90 Years - AllGov - News

Quoting for Kashmir.

 

[kashmir]

A lot. And it's pretty crappy to know.



I have a different perspective, but I do blame parents who don't talk with their kids about sex. I think it's irresponsible to ignore it.



Well, I wouldn't go that far. A lot of us have survived, and a lot of kids do survive into being at least mildly productive citizens. We all have dreams of our children being the one who finds the cure for cancer, but most of us have children who are quite ordinary. LOL



No, the average age of teens losing their virginity is around 16-17. At 13, teens are quite curious, but most do not go that far. When my kids were that age, they were not interested in having sex. They were interested in heavy petting, but they showed no interest in anything past 2nd base.

It wasn't until our two oldest were 17 when they approached me about the interest, and it was a sudden and immediate interest to explore sex. Our youngest is 15, and she has had no interest at all in sex as well as our 16 year old son. Our youngest (15) was once approached online into either sexting or cyber sex, and she told him to **** off.

She has since mentioned that as much as she enjoys learning about sex, she has no desire to engage in it unless she were able to ensure she was infertile. She doesn't want any children. Ever. I applaud her desire, and haven't felt the need to "remind" her that she might change her mind in the future when it comes to motherhood. But at the moment, she has dreams of traveling the world with her friends.

Does that answer your question?

Some are good kids, too bad it's not the mind set of all of the kids in USA at least.
You know that isn't the default position of kids today right?
You do know that bullying is a huge problem, not sure if you replied to that part yet.
Thanks for trying to find a middle area of discussion with me, I am trying too with everyone here.

as for those on my ignore, someone else just got a place added.
I ignore people for a reason, I they have no desire to communicate openly and deem being put on ignore.
I have no desire to see their posts, even relevant ones, too bad huh?
So if people wish to quote them, you get added too.

 

[Nymphs]

Some what, too bad it's not the mind set of the rest of the kids in USA at least.

You don't have proof for this claim. So it is just your opinion.

You know that isn't the default position of kids today right?

Proof?

So if people wish to quote them, you get added too.

Feel free to ignore reason, facts and studies if they don't fit your worldview -- that isn't going to change their validity.

 

[Drolefille]

"I want science but not really because it disagrees with me."

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Some are good kids, too bad it's not the mind set of all of the kids in USA at least.
You know that isn't the default position of kids today right?
You do know that bullying is a huge problem, not sure if you replied to that part yet.
Thanks for trying to find a middle area of discussion with me, I am trying too with everyone here.

Ah, no biggie. There are other members who feel similar to your perspective on statistical data. I find merit in them, but to each their own.

As far as the bullying? I've been involved with several various school districts on the bullying problem, and I even led a speech and demonstration at an elementary school assembly for a day as well as being on a panel for two other assemblies.

I've been busy.

There is a bullying problem that has bled into kids' access to the internet and social media. A lot begins there, with how large numbers of kids have easy access to another student's contact information, profile, and inbox/comment section. Schools and communities have failed to stay one step ahead of the system and technology, but they're unfortunately playing catch-up to the FB's, the Twitters, the Instagrams, the youtubes, the bloggers, and the vloggers. And these are areas that kids have mastered quickly whereas older generations have not overall.

But the best (IMO) method of addressing bullying and cyberbullying is when there exists a multi-dimensional approach with all parties involved. The teachers, students, parents, administrators, local law enforcement, city councils, community outreach programs, etc. who are roughly on the same page, find greater success in teaching potential victims to assertively communicate boundaries and in teaching potential bullies empathy and effective self-discipline.

Unfortunately, very few communities follow through with the multi-dimensional approach. Most are well-meaning, but for many the left hand never knows what the right hand is doing. I was part of the community outreach programs that was very active in several different elementary schools and one large high school. Everyone was receptive and wanted to do something, but without the web of people involved, things were largely ineffective.

 

[Riverwolf]

whats wrong with abstinence?

If you have a strong sex drive?

It's highly damaging to the psyche, which means it could easily cause stunted psychological development, bringing about all kinds of mental problems and social issues.

Sex is as basic a physical need as food, water, shelter, and socialization. Obviously denial of food and water will just kill our bodies, and denial of shelter has the potential to kill our bodies, but denial of socialization will cause all kinds of mental problems that don't directly harm the body at all. The same is true for denial of sex.

And just like all the basic needs, different people have different levels of strength in their drives to obtain them. For asexuals, sexual abstinence is just a given; it's pretty much impossible for people with strong sex drives.

For me, I have an incredibly low drive to eat, and so have to basically force myself to eat since I don't really seek it naturally, though I have almost unhealthy drives to seek/stay in shelter and drink fluids (a big reason why I don't drink alcohol and severely limit my soda intake).

Waiting until you are old enough and mature enough is the wise thing to do.

Maturity is about experience, not how many winters one has seen. Therefore, someone taught from a young age that sex exists, the effects, the risks, and ways to prevent problems (i.e., practicing safe sex) can be old and mature enough well before the age of 25 (which is about when the human brain is finished developing).

Its also better for all involved if both are mature and responsible before they fall headlong into something that they may not be ready for.

I do agree to that in concept.

It's precisely why proper sex-ed is so important; i.e., NOT teaching abstinence, but rather acknowledging that people with strong sex drives are going to have sex, regardless of what we tell them, and so it's better to teach them accurately and clearly about the risks, and the ways to avoid problems.

That this works is demonstrated by the fact that the states which teach abstinence-only sex-ed have far more frequent cases of teen pregnancy than the states which actually teach about safe sex.

 

[Riverwolf]

Pretty sure he was approving of abstinence being the most important thing to teach kids.

No, I wasn't. It's good to mention that abstinence is the safest sex of all at least once, but I don't believe for a moment that it should be more than a gentle suggestion. Better to just assume that teens are having sex and will continue to have sex, and base the lessons on that.

I wonder just how many people here that have daughters, are ok with teen boys all having sex with her.

I don't have children yet, so I can't say for certain at this point, but I'd like to think that I'd be fine(if a bit uncomfortable, but that'd be there regardless of gender) with my teenage daughter having sex with a teenage boy she chose, as long as it's safe and consensual.

Studies are using a small percent of people and do not tell the whole story.
Its that simple.

I used to think it was that simple.

Until those methods of study often ended up being entirely correct whenever they predicted behavior in, say, presidential elections, or in whether enough people will respond positively to a marketing campaign in order to make the product profitable.

And seeing as you thought I was arguing in favor of something that I absolutely do NOT believe in, your opinion against studies doesn't hold a lot of water for me.

 

[Dr. Strange]

Ummm, is it just me or should we even be discussing sex with children?

I know I am in a class of all my own, but when I make love to a woman, my mind is
on making her happy.

IDK, "pleasure" doesn't seem to be the right word for sex.
Pleasure works for masturbation, not sex.
Probably why I call it making love.
I don't really believe pleasure is the main reason we have sex either.

To me it's like saying we eat food mainly for its taste.

I agree with your first point. But, is that love? Close. As for pleasure, well pleasure exists in many forms. Understand the pain and pleasure are the same sense. Love and sex are totally opposite. Where love expresses care for another it does not equate to sex. Sex is not sin nor is sin defined as sex. Sex is agression, not love. For straight couples, the man is aggressive and the woman is submissive. I am not denigrating women here. The physical act of accepting and penetrating. There is a lot in the Bible that supports this idea; men owned women. Think that love was what the OT talked about? Think again.

 

[Dr. Strange]

If you have a strong sex drive?

It's highly damaging to the psyche, which means it could easily cause stunted psychological development, bringing about all kinds of mental problems and social issues.

Sex is as basic a physical need as food, water, shelter, and socialization. Obviously denial of food and water will just kill our bodies, and denial of shelter has the potential to kill our bodies, but denial of socialization will cause all kinds of mental problems that don't directly harm the body at all. The same is true for denial of sex.

And just like all the basic needs, different people have different levels of strength in their drives to obtain them. For asexuals, sexual abstinence is just a given; it's pretty much impossible for people with strong sex drives.

For me, I have an incredibly low drive to eat, and so have to basically force myself to eat since I don't really seek it naturally, though I have almost unhealthy drives to seek/stay in shelter and drink fluids (a big reason why I don't drink alcohol and severely limit my soda intake).



Maturity is about experience, not how many winters one has seen. Therefore, someone taught from a young age that sex exists, the effects, the risks, and ways to prevent problems (i.e., practicing safe sex) can be old and mature enough well before the age of 25 (which is about when the human brain is finished developing).



I do agree to that in concept.

It's precisely why proper sex-ed is so important; i.e., NOT teaching abstinence, but rather acknowledging that people with strong sex drives are going to have sex, regardless of what we tell them, and so it's better to teach them accurately and clearly about the risks, and the ways to avoid problems.

That this works is demonstrated by the fact that the states which teach abstinence-only sex-ed have far more frequent cases of teen pregnancy than the states which actually teach about safe sex.

There is more that could be added to what you've said but not necessary. You've done a great job of explaining sex to young children. Parents should be trained to talk to their children too. Everything said or done has a consequence and a responsibility. I taught my kids that and told them that sex was not sinful. Folks, it is one's mindset that makes something we do, sinful.

 

[Dr. Strange]

I know for a brute fact that what is taught to kids about sex means everything.
Kids have enough stuff to worry about, let them be kids for as long as possible.
If a parent wishes to raise lil sex objects, that is their choice.

Sex is not about just pleasure, pleasure is a spin off of making love.
Just as the wonderful taste of food is a spin off of eating it when we are hungry.

I must remind others here, there is no right or wrong answer to this subject.
What one feels about this, is just as valid as what the opposing feels.

I would not say that, teaching kids about sex, is teaching them to be little sex objects. Teaching kids to have sex is different than teaching them about sex. Children that walk in on parents having sex, whether it is Dad feeling up Mom or, catching them in bed or the shower requires an honest explanation. I'd say that it is healthy for kids to see this in their parents. It is upon the parents to see that their kids understand that sex is good and when the children grow up that they do not harbor negative ideas about sex.

 

[Dr. Strange]

Anywhere between 5-10 yrs of age.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about explaining the whole process of sex and sexuality to these kids. But from that very young age a lot of kids have questions. My experience was that I started to learn about what sex was from other kids and then I asked my mum about what I had heard. She was always very good at explaining things to me in a simple way that was appropriate for my age. If it wasn't for my mother being able to talk about this with me, I would have had a very perverted idea of sex.

Age appropriate is good.

What about mothers breast feeding their babies until they are as old as four years of age? An infant will loose their memory of Mom's nipples but a four year old will remember and always look for Mom's nipples. A child then associates the nipple with nourishment and would not hesitate to reach for the breast even after breastfeeding has stopped. I've seen young children reach in a strange woman's blouse to find the breast. A child's innocence is very fragile.

 

[Drolefille]

Age appropriate is good.

What about mothers breast feeding their babies until they are as old as four years of age? An infant will loose their memory of Mom's nipples but a four year old will remember and always look for Mom's nipples. A child then associates the nipple with nourishment and would not hesitate to reach for the breast even after breastfeeding has stopped. I've seen young children reach in a strange woman's blouse to find the breast. A child's innocence is very fragile.

There's nothing un-innocent about that. You teach a child not to reach for other womens' breasts. Kids are going to do socially inappropriate things, all kids, and you teach them how to be socially appropriate as part of parenting.

There's nothing wrong with extended breastfeeding as long as it is reasonable.

 

[psychoslice]

Because of the immaturity of the kids today, I think it would only cause more child births and more problems.

 

[Drolefille]

Because of the immaturity of the kids today, I think it would only cause more child births and more problems.

And yet comprehensive sex education actually decreases teenage pregnancy. You're arguing we have to lie to kids and that they're not smart enough to see through that.

 

[Dr. Strange]

There's nothing un-innocent about that. You teach a child not to reach for other womens' breasts. Kids are going to do socially inappropriate things, all kids, and you teach them how to be socially appropriate as part of parenting.

There's nothing wrong with extended breastfeeding as long as it is reasonable.

What is reasonable? The problem with your reply is that you leave out defining what you are talking about.