Thanks to reader Kelsey for bringing this to our attention, who was introduced to a new magazine for teens, J4G (Just for Girls/Just for Guys), on a recent senior trip.
The publication is described by the Human Life Alliance as "this extremely marketable, cutting edge magazine will cause your friends to want to get their own copy. The colorful graphics will catch their attention, and the thought provoking stories and facts on the inside will challenge them to change the way they think about sex outside of marriage."
These "facts" are actually (and not surprisingly) tons of misinformation cloaked in teen rhetoric. One example is a advice column type section with Dr. Mary Paquette, who she contends that abortion causes infertility, breast cancer and ruins girls lives. The feature also ends with a section called "My Choice," where there is what seems to be a biographical note of a teen who put her baby up for adoption, saying, "I thank God every day that I don't have to visit the memory of an aborted baby, the grave of an innocent life."
Funny thing is that right under the note signed "Molly" is the note: advertising supplement. In fact, every single "personal story" in the magazine is labeled with those two small words at the bottom; meaning, the magazine doesn't want to be held accountable for the stories, meaning they're not verifiable. Which is just shady.
The "Inside Scoop on Guys" section talks about the importance of dressing modestly and not tempting the "visual" nature of men, while the "Just for Guys" section of the magazine tells the boys to be a "knight in shining armor" and "fight the 'dragon' of sexual temptation while their ladies watch in wonder and admiration." Not to mention that both sections, of course, have the apparently popular duct tape experiment.
And this is just the tip of the iceberg. You can read the whole magazine here.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Abstinence-only teen magazine pitched to students.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/7588
"Cutting edge?"
More like, a tale as old as time.
Because teenagers are like racoons - anything colorful gets their attention!
Also, the duct tape thing doesn't even make sense to me - I mean, I see how you don't want to get less sticky or whatever, but I care about every person I've been romantically involved with, regardless of what happened sexually, and I'm proud to take something with me from those relationships. Those men weren't trash cans. For that matter, I feel that way about close women friends too.
Yeah, I never got the duct tape analogy either. I mean,it wasn't like I was having sex with the trashcan or someone's linty sweater. And I never thought of myself as 'used up'.
Isn't 'fighting the dragon' a euphimism for battling a heroine addiction? Like the opposite of 'chasing the dragon'? Egads, is this magazine trying to tell teen boys that they're naturally sex addicts?
This morning at school I had a discussion with a student about abstinence only education v. comprehensive, so I found it funny when I saw this posted this afternoon. I teach in south east Ohio so I could see this magazine being used in the public schools around her unfortunately.
despicable...to say the least. LoL colorful graphics... surely it will stand out because as well know the magazine racks are so sorely lacking in colorful graphics
::gag::
>>"fight the 'dragon' of sexual temptation while their ladies watch in wonder and admiration"
Sounds kind of kinky. . .
A few things:
1. What are your thoughts on the "Overcoming Rape" article on page 7?
2. Aren't you reaching quite a bit with that "advertising supplement" stuff? They are still responsible, morally, for printing things in their magazine, and the language is ambiguous, not the unambigious CYA you make it out to be.
3. Pray tell how the following are anything less than truth:
One example is a advice column type section with Dr. Mary Paquette, who she contends that abortion causes infertility, breast cancer and ruins girls lives. The feature also ends with a section called "My Choice," where there is what seems to be a biographical note of a teen who put her baby up for adoption, saying, "I thank God every day that I don't have to visit the memory of an aborted baby, the grave of an innocent life."
Abortion DOES cause infertility - those who abort are more likely to be infertile than those who do not abort.
Abortion DOES cause breast cancer. The only "study" that came out against that was systematically flawed. It examined health records of women born over a 43-year period. Problematically, it then lumped in post-abortive women with non-abortive women (as abortion was illegal and not noted in health records); that ruined about ten years of the data set. it included teenagers, solely for the purpose of ensuring that abortive women who did not have time to get breast cancer were included. Essentially, only 1/4th of the women studied had legal abortions and were of the age to get breast cancer, so the "statistically insignificant" result was a foregone conclusion, solely by study design.
Sorry. To all Feministing readers who have had abortions: Please, please, please take care of your body. Inform your doctor that you are at a higher risk. Get mammograms earlier. Get screened more often. We don't need you dying at an early age, too.
Teenagers who abort are ten times as likely to commit suicide as their never-pregnant peers. Teens who abstain are more likely to graduate from high school, go to college, and graduate from college.
If you gave a crap about what happens to women, you would at least understand the very pro-woman, feminist philosophy at work here. Sadly, you're elevating sexual pleasure above the health of women... which, last time I checked, is about as anti-feminist as you can get.
Just saying.
Please Bethany, pray tell, can you back up that half-witted claim about abortion causing infertility and breast cancer? Because I can back up the OPPOSITE. http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/abortion-miscarriage
The Nation Cancer Institute, who has none of that misogynistic dogma clogging up their brains, supports the facts. As for the infertility claim? http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_infe.htm
I mean, maybe if we're talking about pre-wade abortions I think that perhaps a coat hanger and draino might have a little something to do with uterine scarring and the such. But for now, whoever brainwashed you has some 'splainin to do.
One wonders if 'modestly' means that teenage girls should all wear long sleeves and scarves, lest their forearms and necks inspire teenage males to 'lust'.
Unfortunately even the "overcoming rape" page is a seeding of very helpful information (not your fault, don't shower, go to a medical facility immediately, report the crime) mixed with anti-abortion misinformation and abstinence-only agenda (Plan B does not cause an abortion, "second virginity" concept).
Cindy seems to have gotten over her victimization somewhat miraculously - not only is the pregnancy a precious gift, but "the worst is over!" after the rape.
There are tiny sparks of good information - unfortunately most of them are hidden by misinformation and anti-choice, pro-abstinence rhetoric.
this is the same group that put an insert advertisement in my college's newspaper a few years ago that was made to look like a special section of the paper and was filled with lies lies lies about sex education and abortion. I couldn't find any information about the group back then, the bright side was that there were a lot of people at my school who were angry about it and wrote letters to the editor calling this group out on their shady 'advertising' and bullshit.
they relied heavily on the margaret-sanger-as-eugenicist "argument" and claimed that europe and the us among others are actually underpopulated so we should all go out and have (white) babies to combat the falling birthrate.
after a little bit of digging around on their website i found a repackaged version of what they distributed, same "factoids" new layout: Trapped...
I think my "favorite" part was the graph in the guys' sections showing that scientifically all girls are psycho because of their periods (and conversely boys cannot be psycho because their hormones are steady freddies). Yay!
Also: I admit to just skimming, but did anyone find the part where I can check if my boyfriend is a lizard or not? It told me to read on to find out, but I couldn't find it. I want to know!!
"Teenagers who abort are ten times as likely to commit suicide as their never-pregnant peers. Teens who abstain are more likely to graduate from high school, go to college, and graduate from college."
Do you have links to back up these stats?
Plus, even if the former is true, might there be a causal link between, say, slut-shaming, guilt-tripping crap perpetuated by pro-lifers and depression? Actually, if the latter is true too, I'd still suggest a societal cause rather than a mere 'if you get an abortion you'll die!'/'if you have sex you'll never graduate!' non-reason.
On the first page, they say that the "Human Life Alliance has distributed copies [of their publications] in more than 55 different countries on all seven continents." Because, you know, all those scientists down in Antarctica really need abstinence-only education. Or perhaps they gave them to the penguins. Because penguins are known for their promiscuity...
If this magazine was handed to any girl/guy at my school they would be falling over themselves with laughter.
oenophile,
We don't allow medically inaccurate and misleading on our thread either. Post about this again and I'll ban you.
oenphile,
What studies are you citing that say abortions cause infertility and breast cancer? Botched abortions can cause infertility, but then Roe vs. Wade came along.
“To all Feministing readers who have had abortions….” Are you serious? Because Feminism makes us uninformed about our bodies whereas your ant-choice rhetoric masqueraded as concern is shedding light on our misconceptions?
And of course, this reader pool MUST be more likely to have had an abortion, right.
JUST SAYIN.
oh god, I couldn't make it past pg. 4 of this load of bull....
Regarding birth control:
"implantation happens 5-9 days after conception when the BABY tries to implant in the uterus" (emphasis mine)
I knew to stop reading but it really sucks hard core that this is the info so many teens are getting!
oenophile, I have some news for you: pregnancy also has lots of scary health risks, so why aren't you telling women to avoid pregnancy? You know, since you care so much for women's health and stuff. Because women want to have babies? What about the women who *don't* want to have babies? Why aren't they allowed to "risk their health" for their reproductive desires but it's ok for women who choose to have babies to do so?
I will refer to other commenters who are running down links that refute your claims; read up on your science and quit being a concern troll.
Eh, sounds like a messed up magazine, but I honestly don't think its any worse than Cosmo's 11476 ways to please your man.
How gross is the warfare imagery on the boys' side? Staying abstinent is like fighting a dragon! Be cool like the guys in Lord of the Rings! Flex for the cover photo! *vomit*
Actually, women who have their first child early have a higher incidence of breast cancer.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WC2-49PYMC3-4&_user=10&_coverDate=12%2F31%2F2003&_alid=750931238&_rdoc=3&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_cdi=6726&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_ct=13&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=7ca417bf5600de93bd01f061b2f1cdae
Delay babeez to save your boobies!*
*In all seriousness, don't. There are just too many factors at play. Do what is right for you.
Oenphile:
You are out of your mind. Did you just google and "abortion and breast cancer" and click on the first link you saw? Try critical thinking skills and look at an actual cancer web site like, I dunno, THE AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY? "Research studies, however, have not found a cause-and-effect relationship between abortion and breast cancer." http://www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/content/CRI_2_6x_Can_Having_an_Abortion_Cause_or_Contribute_to_Breast_Cancer.asp
Or the NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE: "The newer studies consistently showed no association between induced and spontaneous abortions and breast cancer risk." http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/abortion-miscarriage
Even the questionable WebMD site has articles on the actual research. So take your absurd and fallacious claims and your "but the patriarchy protects us!" rhetoric, and go volunteer at Planned Parenthood for some education. Sheesh.
On the Q & A page, she allots 2 whole sentences to choosing to parent; 3 sentences to adoption; and no fewer than TWELVE sentences to dissuading someone (who doesn't even mention that she's considering it - in this wonderfully genuine letter) from choosing abortion.
Each options deserves equal gravity. None of them are easy. I can't see a url in there for teens who decide to continue their pregnancies. This is typical of the anti-choice movement - they want to prevent abortion but they don't care about kids who are born (or the women who give birth to them).
Fortunately, not many teens will read this mag.
This magazine really creeps me out! It is condescending to both boys and girls, while it fabricates information about contraceptives. Did anyone read the Dr. Mary Paquette Q and A's? I was especially disturbed by her saying that women shouldn't use the pill because it can abort the "baby" trying to implant on the uterine wall. It's one thing to say that abstinence is a good option, especially at young ages, but to mislead teens into thinking that condoms and the pill are ineffective and that abortion can lead to miscarriages, premature birth and infertility is just a scare tactic. Not to mention the infamous "Post-Abortion Syndrome" that Dr. Matt Paquette brings up (in the Just for Boys side) that apparently affects men and women alike. I don't doubt that women can have a variety of emotions before and after an abortion depending on how they feel about it, but lying to teens is flat out unethical. I sincerely hope that the teens who read this have access to real information. Oh wait, abstinence-only programs are teaching the same things...
Am I being dense, but I'm sure Oenphile was actually refuting Bethany's claims that abortion causes breast cancer and infertility?
A bit superficial, but I can't get over the hysterically stereotypical design. Girls love pink, lavender, and soft lines! Buys need solid things like brick, concrete, and corrugated steel because it's for masculine sexual dragon fighters!
"Please Bethany, pray tell, can you back up that half-witted claim about abortion causing infertility and breast cancer?"
Well, you're definitely at far less risk of infertility and breast cancer in your 40s if you die in childbirth at 14 than if you get an abortion at 14...
Oenophile -
Completely and utterly WRONG. Legal, safe abortion does NOT cause infertility, and the breast cancer myth has been debunked *repeatedly* over the past twenty years. It also does NOT cause the woman to have a higher risk of depression. Even C. Everett Koop, who personally opposed abortion, refused to say so because it was not true.
As for the statement, "once you've been raped, the worst is over" - a dear friend of mine was dated raped thirty years ago. It permanently destroyed her ability to trust men, and seriously damaged her ability to enjoy a healthy relationship with a man, let alone a good sexual relationship. Rape has serious, permanent, lasting consequences on a woman's psyche, and that completely leaves aside the possibility that a rape victim might catch an STD (some of which *do* cause infertility).
You really need to check your research, and use sources besides anti-abortion fanatics. All it does it make you look like a fool, and I'm sure you don't want that.
My partner and I had a good laugh about second virginity.
I guess we have to stop sleeping together now, so it will be special when we get married in a year or so!
JaneL: The author of the comment is listed at the bottom of the post. So I think Absinthe was actually trying to respond to oenphile's claims. As far as I can tell, Bethany hasn't posted anything about abortion/infertility claims.
My God, they've covered every talking point, haven't they? Girls are crazy, needy, and gullible, and boys are hormone driven buffoons who, despite their superior logic and power, occasionally need girls to protect them from themselves.
My favorite part was the "what does this gender mean?" page where the women said, "do you respect me?" and the guys heard, "blah blah blah."
Great, so a young girl gets raped, decides maybe she doesn't want to carry a pregnancy which resulted from rape to term, and then some dumbass abstinence magazine comes along and tells her, "The rape is the worst part, the baby you give birth to afterwards isn't so bad! Oh, and don't forget that Plan B is an abortion pill and that you're a baby killer if you take that pill, even if you were raped."
I can only imagine (as I have never been sexually assaulted) that a woman who has been raped has been through enough emotional, psychological, and physical harm as it is without being told that she's immoral and selfish if she decides she doesn't want to carry a pregnancy by her rapist to term (in fact, no woman should be told that she's selfish for making the choice to have an abortion, regardless of how she came to be pregnant.)
The rest of the magazine irked me too (especially the modesty section, ugh), and it's a shame that this sort of misinformation will be distributed to teenagers who might actually believe this stuff if they have not had comprehensive sex education in the past.
Oh, and by the by, Oenophile, since wyou're quoting education statistics, you really ought to look up the education adn income levels of teenagers that HAD babies.
My favorite parts:
- Item number seven on the suggested list of "come-backs" for girls when their boyfriends want to have sex with them: "You'll have to ask my parents."
- Condoms break "frequently" and the pill kills babies. Oh, and it'll depress you and give you zits.
- Women who have abortions are "haunted" and try to block out the memory. Then they get breast cancer, and their uterus never works right again. The end!
- Guys are "visual," and basically, if he can see you, he wants to do you. Good to know.
- The Lord of the Rings reference.
- The promise to the boys that if they keep it in their pants till their wedding night, they too can have the "fireworks-filled honeymoon of their dreams." Ew.
- THE HORMONE CHART. It mocks itself.
- "My girlfriend is pregnant... I'm thinking of telling her to get an abortion."
- "Post-abortion syndrome affects men as well as women."
- "Girlfriend Pregnant? Need Help? Call This Number..."
- "I haven't had sex yet, but my friend said there is some sort of pill that a girl can take to stop a pregnancy from happening. What is that all about?"
"You are referring to emergency contraception." NOT the birth control pill, dammit! You are NOT referring to that! And, of course, it "can cause an abortion."
- To convince guys not to sexually assault girls, they say this: "Don't mess with your future." And they follow it with legal information, plus the tip to "avoid situations where you could be wrongly accused." What the hell is that supposed to men?
- The porn page. I love how they discuss it as if it's a drug and end by pleading with sex addicts to get help. WTF?
Teenagers who abort are ten times as likely to commit suicide as their never-pregnant peers.
And what about pregnant teenagers who carry to term? And in which way does the causation go? Maybe more troubled teens are more likely to have sex in the first place ... but that doesn't mean that avoiding sex will magically save you from suicide if you are troubled.
Teens who abstain are more likely to graduate from high school, go to college, and graduate from college.
Speaking as someone who was abstinant as a teenager (and not entirely by choice), I can say the causation is exactly reversed here (at least at the level of graduating from college). It is that teens who are more oriented towards achieving future goals simply are too geeky, dorky or nerdy to score when they are still in HS. ;)
Just finished reading the magazine ... Damn, that was depressing. The Pill "aborts" foetuses? Dressing modestly? And that section about how female hormones are out of control whilst male ones are pretty steady - don't get me started. And the stuff about "purity" is just plain disheartening. It makes me think of a quote by the amazing feminist writer Angela Carter: "Where does a woman's honour reside then? In her vagina or in her spirit?"
Because the honeymoon every man dreams of is full of "fireworks" like "OW OW OW STOP I THINK I'M BLEEDING"
I always thought that encouraging girls to wait until their wedding night was a sort of cruel thing to do. Isn't it something you want to enjoy?
"Oh, and by the by, Oenophile, since wyou're quoting education statistics, you really ought to look up the education adn income levels of teenagers that HAD babies."
...and don't forget the educational and income levels of women who neither abstained from sex nor got pregnant while teenagers.
"- Item number seven on the suggested list of "come-backs" for girls when their boyfriends want to have sex with them: 'You'll have to ask my parents.'"
What if she actually doesn't want sex with him but fears a breakup, says "You'll have to ask my parents," and then for whatever reason (such as him convincing his parents to make an offer) her parents do give him "permission"...?
"Because the honeymoon every man dreams of is full of 'fireworks' like 'OW OW OW STOP I THINK I'M BLEEDING'
"I always thought that encouraging girls to wait until their wedding night was a sort of cruel thing to do. Isn't it something you want to enjoy?"
OTOH, isn't having sex something you want to enjoy whether it's on the wedding night or not and whether it's your first time or not? Encouraging girls and women to wait until sex to put anything in our vaginas (instead of taking our time getting more comfortable with penetration) seems to be the cruel part.
Personally, I'd rather try to avoid painful sex (I know I can't guarantee that it would never happen :( ) in the first place than rush to get it over with. I'm glad that I've had access to tampons, sex toys, pap smears, the vaginal wand option when I needed sonograms of my ovaries, etc. and especially that my parents didn't raise me to think putting my fingers inside was sinful. :)
I'm 25, and I just got married in April. I. Can't. Imagine. being a virgin at this point in my life. Are they also encouraging kids getting married younger? How does this idea even work?!
Oh wait..it doesn't.
Dropping in from post production hell (new job, but long hours) I believe it works in that WOMEN marry younger (thought they probably say "kids" so they don't seem so misogynistic) in that women will either forgo college and we all go back to the "high school sweetheart" era where women were married right out of high school, or they do some college and still get married at a young age while their husbands are the "bread winners". That way, the woman is less educated and less likely to divorce her husband thus forcing them both to stay in an unhealthy marriage. What all of this is is trying to get back to this fictional 1950s that existed in their fevered imaginations and on TV.
oenophile,
We don't allow medically inaccurate and misleading on our thread either. Post about this again and I'll ban you.
I see that oenophile hasn't been back here yet to back up her claims when usually she's quick to respond to criticism (usually just with insults and "you're sucking out your baby's brains!" but still.) What's the matter, oenophile, can't back up your claims with medically ACCURATE information?
That magazine is ridiculous and like someone already stated I'd think todays teens who aren't raised by fundamentalists would laugh at this and throw it in the trash. They're really only preaching to the choir here.
"I'm 25, and I just got married in April. I. Can't. Imagine. being a virgin at this point in my life."
nitpick: I can, but I'm way less lucky and skilled at dating than you are. :/
"...What all of this is is trying to get back to this fictional 1950s that existed in their fevered imaginations and on TV."
When it's not trying to get back to even earlier stuff. Some people crack down on premarital sex by cracking down on having sex, some people crack down on it by cracking down on being premarital. o_O
"I thank God every day that I don't have to visit the memory of an aborted baby, the grave of an innocent life."
yeah, god really had a lot to do with that. maybe (s)he could have stopped the sperm that to you pregnant in the first place, right?
Aha!
I found something good about the magazine.
It's one of the few teen magazines I've seen that doesn't have an endless parade sexualized images of girls and has a relatively diverse set of models featured in terms of body types and ethnicities.
Now if they could just fix everything else..
this is magazine absolutely discusting! correct if i'm wrong, but from what i've seen, most magazines marketed towards teenage girls give correct information regarding sex.
"you deserve more dignity and respect than having guys chase after you because they're after your body."
i deserve more dignity and respect than being called a slut for wearing v-neck shirts, thanks.
"...modesty also helps girls to have positive self-esteem and self-respect."
SO UNTRUE. i respect myself because i a) allow myself to feel comfortable in my clothing choices and the way i chose to present myself and b) surround myself (with friends and family) who respect me despite what i wear, whether it be a v-neck shirt and tight jeans or an ankle-length, long-sleeved, turtleneck dress
and Ariane, from the pictures included on the page about dressing modestly, i get the feeling that they DO think girks should cover up their forearms and ankles.
and the Q&A section is so sad!
"i found out i have herpes. i'm scared. will i ever be able to get married?"
although marriage isn't right for a lot of people, and i'm sure feministing readers will agree but all i can say is that it's disgusting that this girl has been taught that she is absolutely worthless now, as a prospective significant other and, ultimately, as a person.
it's also sad that, in the dating tips section, it sates that you shouldn't go on dates in quiet and secluded spots, or go over to a boyfriends house. it sucks that we live in such a rape culture in which we are told that we cannot even feel intimacy with a significant other over fear of being raped.
and i agree with what others posted, it sucks that they've snuck in useful information with complete bullshit "facts."
and i hate the "hollywood is sending you messages that there's something wrong with you if you're still a virgin."
there's nothing wrong with me because i'm a virgin, NOR is there anything wrong my friends who have already had sex. the same way there is nothing "wrong" with me for being gay, or being overweight.
and sex for pleasure is NOT free of any emotional, physical, or mental consequences. albeit not all consequences are negative, but it's not as if you have sex and don't procreate IT'S LIKE IT NEVER HAPPENED. except, wait, no no it did happen. and now you are a disgusting, worthless person who will never make a good wife. well fuck, hypocrisy at its greatest.
and oh my god, apparently we are all "abstiniphobic." the only thing i fear is that too many people (well really, ANYONE) my age will read this magazine and believes its "factoids" to be truth.
I hate how these anti-choice zealots can openly endorse such a low standard of their beliefs and not get exposed for it, while the pro-choice rationalists are always defending their cases. It should be the other way around.
OMG and the girl on the cover is wearing a keffiyeh! The terror!
Just kidding, had to get that out. The whole Rachel Ray/Michelle Malkin thing still on my mind!
one of my personal favorite parts is on the guys' list of ways to combat come-ons. "Shake head from side to side (Universal)." um...no? that actually is the affirmative gesture in a lot of cultures. not that i was expecting the best fact-checking from human life alliance.
also, i so seriously doubt that drs. mary and matt paquette are honestly two different people, much less actual doctors. unless they just happen to be two malicious anti-choice loons with alliterative first names who waited until their wedding night to have hot bloody fake doctor sex!
Obviously these magazines are screwed up, and clearly biased.
However, am I the only one who found the "fighting the dragon of temptation" line reading like a euphemism (albeit wordy) for masturbation. And then the whole "while their ladies watch in admiration and wonder" thing sealed the deal.
Taming the dragon, that's definitely a new one.
"I'm 25, and I just got married in April. I. Can't. Imagine. being a virgin at this point in my life."
How nice for you. Those of us who have battled depression and self-esteem for years due to childhood weight problems that resulted in verbally abusive classmates may not have the luxury of not imagining something like that. You're very lucky to not have anything in your past that makes intimacy or trust difficult for you. It would be nice if we could stay away from the condescension just a tad, though. It's bad enough that I have to repeatedly hear it from some of my friends.
Did anyone else see the term "abstiniphobic" in the guys' magazine? WTF?!
I am 36 years and at this point still a 'virgin'. Different reasons for that, rape at 13, been shy througout my teens and early 20's etc. But one of the big things was believing everything that was told in church. I must tell you keeping myself for that one perfect man has not helped me one little bit and could have even made me very depressed. But rage is growing in me because i start to realize that these magazines, church meetings etc, etc, most of the times are meant to keep the girls unknowing of all the pleasures of the world. No more, things like this dont work, marriages dont work because of the girl being a virgin when she marries. Marriage works because both partners love and respect eachother and respect should entail everything, it shouldnt matter if you have had a sexual partner before. It should matter how you are as a person.
Ah well, magazines and articles like this made me decide to finally live and enjoy life!
I LOVE the fact that they used the term factoid...
According to the OED, " A. n. Something that becomes accepted as a fact, although it is not (or may not be) true; spec. an assumption or speculation reported and repeated so often that it is popularly a simulated or imagined fact."
Oh, semantics.
"Because the honeymoon every man dreams of is full of 'fireworks;." Comments like these always concern because it seems like it put so much pressure for that first time to be special. Even if it doesn't hurt (and it does hurt for a lot of women the first time), it's going to at least be awkward since neither one knows yet exactly how to make sure the other feels good. I've never known anyone whose first time was just perfect. Not that it's always terrible, just not "fireworks". It just seems so horrible to think of two people waiting for so long to have sex and building it up until it's something huge, and then it being not so great. I can just imagine both parties feeling devastated and perhaps not realizing that it can get better. And probably not having a clue how to make it better.
Did anyone else notice that their Hollywood section for the girls references the show Friends? How long ago did that show go off the air? Surely there's a more recent pop. culture phenomenon they could use to connect with teens? I really can't imagine any teenager enjoying reading that magazine.
Anyone notice at the top of the page its "Just for Girls" but then the other magazine is "Just 4 Guys"?
Sorta makes it seem like there are only four guys who care about the boy's magazine.
Better advice for guys (and girls).
Don't take your advice from magazines who claim to have a secret formula (or formulas) that'll work on any relationship and with any person.
People who claim to be moral yet spread lies and misinformation to teenagers?
I can't remember is this hypocrisy or irony or both?
Abstinence works 100% of the time. It is the best way to prevent sexually transmitted infections or diseases.
Also, SociologicalMom gave a reference to a website and stated, "Actually, women who have their first child early have a higher incidence of breast cancer." We looked at this website and it said the exact opposite of SociologicalMom's claim. In fact, it said, "It is generally accepted that early first childbirth is associated with reduced risk of developing breast cancer" (see sciencedirect.com link in SociologicalMom's comments). Additional questions or comments about our abstinence magazine, "Just for Girls/Just for Guys," can be directed to feedback@humanlife.org. We stand by our documentation and invite you to peruse the citations provided in our publication and on our website.
- Human Life Alliance Staff
Human Life Alliance Staff:
Most of us here would agree that abstinence is the best choice for young people. What your organization seems to be missing is these points:
It's a choice that young people must make themselves, not one that can be pushed upon them by adults.
To make an informed choice about their bodies, teens need to be given as much information as possible.
Studies have shown time and time again that when teenagers are given the facts about sexuality, safer sex, and so on, more of them actually do choose abstinence.
Your organization would have a lot more success if it treated young adults like, well, young adults.
HLA:
Oh, for Christ's sake with your "100%" crap.
Abstinence works 100% of the time if used correctly 100% of the time. Just like with every other method of birth control, that pesky little tagline underscores a larger issue: correct and consistent use. Kids who say they're going to be abstinent don't always remain abstinent, or don't remain fully abstinent ("exceptions" like oral/anal sex). And study after study proves you can't bully or scare teens into using abstinence 100% of the time - and times they forgo that method of birth control, they're unlikely to use another (like a condom), no thanks to misleading publications like yours. You're not doing anybody a noble service by lying to teenagers, even if you think the ends justifies the means.
Abstinence only sex education is equivalent to giving teens a car, telling them not to drive, but handing them the keys anyway and refusing to teach them to use stop signs and seat belts. In fact, it's like telling teens NOT to use seatbelts and stop signs because they're not "100% effective."
Apply your logic to your own life: if something has risks, don't do it? Um, I don't see any adults out there refusing to drive because of the high possibility you will get in a car accident, and I certainly don't see you forgoing traffic laws and safety measures like seatbelts and airbags because they're not "100% effective" at preventing injury or death.
Life has inherent risks. Nobody is 100% safe, even sitting in their house. Managing life's risks means simply educating people and give them the resources to be as safe as possible and protect themselves against the bad stuff.
And for the record, when people get in car accidents, nobody suggests they "deserve" their injuries because they had the audacity to participate in the activity. If anything, we criticize them for not driving safely (speeding, no seat belt, etc.), but we don't blame them simply for driving. Why is sex any different?
Human Life Alliance Staff:
In regards to your comment about breast cancer:
First, that link was posted by Ismone, not SociologicalMom. Also, if you read the full study, it says
"Despite early first childbirth having a protective effect on the risk of developing breast cancer, there is accumulating evidence that early first delivery is associated with a reduced survival in breast cancer
patients"
So yes, you are correct that the incidence of breast cancer is lower for women who give birth at a young age, they are just more likely to die from it. However, as far as I could tell, the study did not take into account socioeconomic factors, and I wonder if that would have any effect on the results.
In any case, I doubt many women plan to have children in order to lower their risk of breast cancer, so I won't analyze this anymore.
Also, I went to your website and clicked on the abstinence link, and found this statement:
"Studies show that individuals who delay sexual activity until they are married have greater self-esteem, enjoy a higher standard of living, and are more likely to experience a happy marriage."
But there were no references given, so I cannot comment on your documentation. I assume you want me to look through your "Links and Resources" page, but most of these go to anti-choice websites, and the few pages with "facts" are at best one-sided, completely ignoring the problems with abstinence-only education. You can search around feministing if you want to find articles showing that abstinence-only education doesn't work, what it was like before abortion was legal, etc.
"works" meaning what? as birth control?
When used correctly, sure. But my BC works 99.9% of the time when used correctly. .1% is worth the risk to experience intimacy with my loved one without getting pregnant before i'm ready. also, it's easier to use correctly than abstinence, at least if you have a boyfriend/girlfriend and like sex.
To ShifterCat
I agree with you when you say that “It's a choice that young people must make themselves.” Parents cannot watch their teens 24 hours a day. However, I disagree with saying that it is “not one that can be pushed upon them by adults.” Do you consider education “pushing?” Why would we not encourage our teens to live the healthiest life possible? This is why we “push” “say no to drugs” rather than teaching “safer drug use” along with “say no to drugs.”
Youth (including teens), look up to older people as examples. If we encourage them to make healthy choices (saving sex for marriage), they will be more likely to choose abstinence. When we have expectations for teens, they gravitate toward meeting them. What is it saying when a teen receives a condom in the classroom? Our magazine focuses on why it is a good thing to wait to have sex until marriage. It is important that teens know the consequences of sex outside marriage (including STI and STD information), but it is also important to give positive reinforcement. For instance the first article is titled, “Why Wait?” not “Don’t have sex or you will die.” By highlighting the positive reasons to wait, we are treating teens with respect by “talking with them,” versus “talking down to them.” Thank you for stating “Most of us here would agree that abstinence is the best choice for young people.” I fully agree with you on that. Abstinence is the best choice.
To TheSoyMilkConspiracy
Part of successful abstinence education programs (of which there are many) is giving a proper definition of what true abstinence means = “Abstinence” means “refraining from all sexual activity, including oral sex.” Abstinence, including no mutual genital contact, works 100% of the time.
As for the car example, apply your logic to smoking and drugs. We shouldn’t be pushing our “Just say no to drugs” teaching on students. They can decide for themselves what they want to do. They’re going to do it anyway (and who can deny them the pleasure) so we should teach them “safe” smoking, drinking, and drug use, even though it could kill them. We should also hand out cigarettes with filters and directions on where to get clean needles and untainted cocaine.
Our magazine isn’t about avoiding sex. We want to encourage teens to eventually get married and have lots of great sex with their spouse. The University of Chicago did a study on who has the best sex lives. Hmm… guess what? Monogamous Christian women have the best sex lives. Several studies showed that women who engage in early sexual activity and those who have had multiple partners are less apt to express satisfaction with their sex lives than women who entered marriage with little or no sexual baggage. See citation below for both of these statistics.
William Mattox Jr., "Aha! Call It the Revenge of the Church Ladies," USA Today, 11 February, 1999 (www.usatoday.com). Free Abstract http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/USAToday/access/38897964.html?dids=38897964&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS&type=current&date=Feb+11%2C+1999&author=William+R.+Mattox+Jr.&pub=USA+TODAY&edition=&startpage=15.A&desc=Aha!+Call+it+the+revenge+of+the+church+ladies
To ShifterCat
I agree with you when you say that “It's a choice that young people must make themselves.” Parents cannot watch their teens 24 hours a day. However, I disagree with saying that it is “not one that can be pushed upon them by adults.” Do you consider education “pushing?” Why would we not encourage our teens to live the healthiest life possible? This is why we “push” “say no to drugs” rather than teaching “safer drug use” along with “say no to drugs.”
Youth (including teens), look up to older people as examples. If we encourage them to make healthy choices (saving sex for marriage), they will be more likely to choose abstinence. When we have expectations for teens, they gravitate toward meeting them. What is it saying when a teen receives a condom in the classroom? Our magazine focuses on why it is a good thing to wait to have sex until marriage. It is important that teens know the consequences of sex outside marriage (including STI and STD information), but it is also important to give positive reinforcement. For instance the first article is titled, “Why Wait?” not “Don’t have sex or you will die.” By highlighting the positive reasons to wait, we are treating teens with respect by “talking with them,” versus “talking down to them.” Thank you for stating “Most of us here would agree that abstinence is the best choice for young people.” I fully agree with you on that. Abstinence is the best choice.
To TheSoyMilkConspiracy
Part of successful abstinence education programs (of which there are many) is giving a proper definition of what true abstinence means = “Abstinence” means “refraining from all sexual activity, including oral sex.” Abstinence, including no mutual genital contact, works 100% of the time.
As for the car example, apply your logic to smoking and drugs. We shouldn’t be pushing our “Just say no to drugs” teaching on students. They can decide for themselves what they want to do. They’re going to do it anyway (and who can deny them the pleasure) so we should teach them “safe” smoking, drinking, and drug use, even though it could kill them. We should also hand out cigarettes with filters and directions on where to get clean needles and untainted cocaine.
Our magazine isn’t about avoiding sex. We want to encourage teens to eventually get married and have lots of great sex with their spouse. The University of Chicago did a study on who has the best sex lives. Hmm… guess what? Monogamous Christian women have the best sex lives. Several studies showed that women who engage in early sexual activity and those who have had multiple partners are less apt to express satisfaction with their sex lives than women who entered marriage with little or no sexual baggage. See citation below for both of these statistics.
William Mattox Jr., "Aha! Call It the Revenge of the Church Ladies," USA Today, 11 February, 1999 (www.usatoday.com). Free Abstract http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/USAToday/access/38897964.html?dids=38897964&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS&type=current&date=Feb+11%2C+1999&author=William+R.+Mattox+Jr.&pub=USA+TODAY&edition=&startpage=15.A&desc=Aha!+Call+it+the+revenge+of+the+church+ladies
To ShifterCat
I agree with you when you say that “It's a choice that young people must make themselves.” Parents cannot watch their teens 24 hours a day. However, I disagree with saying that it is “not one that can be pushed upon them by adults.” Do you consider education “pushing?” Why would we not encourage our teens to live the healthiest life possible? This is why we “push” “say no to drugs” rather than teaching “safer drug use” along with “say no to drugs.”
Youth (including teens), look up to older people as examples. If we encourage them to make healthy choices (saving sex for marriage), they will be more likely to choose abstinence. When we have expectations for teens, they gravitate toward meeting them. What is it saying when a teen receives a condom in the classroom? Our magazine focuses on why it is a good thing to wait to have sex until marriage. It is important that teens know the consequences of sex outside marriage (including STI and STD information), but it is also important to give positive reinforcement. For instance the first article is titled, “Why Wait?” not “Don’t have sex or you will die.” By highlighting the positive reasons to wait, we are treating teens with respect by “talking with them,” versus “talking down to them.” Thank you for stating “Most of us here would agree that abstinence is the best choice for young people.” I fully agree with you on that. Abstinence is the best choice.
To TheSoyMilkConspiracy
Part of successful abstinence education programs (of which there are many) is giving a proper definition of what true abstinence means = “Abstinence” means “refraining from all sexual activity, including oral sex.” Abstinence, including no mutual genital contact, works 100% of the time.
As for the car example, apply your logic to smoking and drugs. We shouldn’t be pushing our “Just say no to drugs” teaching on students. They can decide for themselves what they want to do. They’re going to do it anyway (and who can deny them the pleasure) so we should teach them “safe” smoking, drinking, and drug use, even though it could kill them. We should also hand out cigarettes with filters and directions on where to get clean needles and untainted cocaine.
Our magazine isn’t about avoiding sex. We want to encourage teens to eventually get married and have lots of great sex with their spouse. The University of Chicago did a study on who has the best sex lives. Hmm… guess what? Monogamous Christian women have the best sex lives. Several studies showed that women who engage in early sexual activity and those who have had multiple partners are less apt to express satisfaction with their sex lives than women who entered marriage with little or no sexual baggage. See citation below for both of these statistics.
William Mattox Jr., "Aha! Call It the Revenge of the Church Ladies," USA Today, 11 February, 1999 (www.usatoday.com). Free Abstract http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/USAToday/access/38897964.html?dids=38897964&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS&type=current&date=Feb+11%2C+1999&author=William+R.+Mattox+Jr.&pub=USA+TODAY&edition=&startpage=15.A&desc=Aha!+Call+it+the+revenge+of+the+church+ladies
To ShifterCat
I agree with you when you say that “It's a choice that young people must make themselves.” Parents cannot watch their teens 24 hours a day. However, I disagree with saying that it is “not one that can be pushed upon them by adults.” Do you consider education “pushing?” Why would we not encourage our teens to live the healthiest life possible? This is why we “push” “say no to drugs” rather than teaching “safer drug use” along with “say no to drugs.”
Youth (including teens), look up to older people as examples. If we encourage them to make healthy choices (saving sex for marriage), they will be more likely to choose abstinence. When we have expectations for teens, they gravitate toward meeting them. What is it saying when a teen receives a condom in the classroom? Our magazine focuses on why it is a good thing to wait to have sex until marriage. It is important that teens know the consequences of sex outside marriage (including STI and STD information), but it is also important to give positive reinforcement. For instance the first article is titled, “Why Wait?” not “Don’t have sex or you will die.” By highlighting the positive reasons to wait, we are treating teens with respect by “talking with them,” versus “talking down to them.” Thank you for stating “Most of us here would agree that abstinence is the best choice for young people.” I fully agree with you on that. Abstinence is the best choice.
To TheSoyMilkConspiracy
Part of successful abstinence education programs (of which there are many) is giving a proper definition of what true abstinence means = “Abstinence” means “refraining from all sexual activity, including oral sex.” Abstinence, including no mutual genital contact, works 100% of the time.
As for the car example, apply your logic to smoking and drugs. We shouldn’t be pushing our “Just say no to drugs” teaching on students. They can decide for themselves what they want to do. They’re going to do it anyway (and who can deny them the pleasure) so we should teach them “safe” smoking, drinking, and drug use, even though it could kill them. We should also hand out cigarettes with filters and directions on where to get clean needles and untainted cocaine.
Our magazine isn’t about avoiding sex. We want to encourage teens to eventually get married and have lots of great sex with their spouse. The University of Chicago did a study on who has the best sex lives. Hmm… guess what? Monogamous Christian women have the best sex lives. Several studies showed that women who engage in early sexual activity and those who have had multiple partners are less apt to express satisfaction with their sex lives than women who entered marriage with little or no sexual baggage. See citation below for both of these statistics.
William Mattox Jr., "Aha! Call It the Revenge of the Church Ladies," USA Today, 11 February, 1999 (www.usatoday.com). Free Abstract http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/USAToday/access/38897964.html?dids=38897964&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS&type=current&date=Feb+11%2C+1999&author=William+R.+Mattox+Jr.&pub=USA+TODAY&edition=&startpage=15.A&desc=Aha!+Call+it+the+revenge+of+the+church+ladies
Humanlifealliance, this magazine does not educate young people. It lies to them, both implicitly and explicitly. Having an abortion doesn't make you more likely to develop breast cancer, nor does it mean you'll be forever "haunted" by the experience. The birth control pill does not kill babies. Condoms fail 2% of the time when used correctly, not 24% (I didn't see that particular myth on any of the sample magazine pages, but it's elsewhere on the website).
I think it's kind of hilarious that you think the practice of making condoms available in school is the source of the expectation that teenagers -- or teenage boys, at least -- will have sex. I think it's kind of hilarious that you think projecting gender stereotypes onto your audience and feeding them medically inaccurate information rather than trusting them with the truth is "treating them with respect." I think it's kind of hilarious that you think having protected sex is about the same as shooting heroin with a clean needle.
Several studies showed that women who engage in early sexual activity and those who have had multiple partners are less apt to express satisfaction with their sex lives than women who entered marriage with little or no sexual baggage.
Maybe they just have higher standards.
Humanlifealliance-
It would be much easier to take into consideration your source if it wasn't USA Today. If you going to claim something like that as a fact, please back it up with a peer-reviewed journal. There are already a number of things I could see wrong with the study...
Humanlifealliance-
It would be much easier to take into consideration your source if it wasn't USA Today. If you going to claim something like that as a fact, please back it up with a peer-reviewed journal. There are already a number of things I could see wrong with the study...
Misspelled commented at June 11, 2008 7:25 PM: "I think it's kind of hilarious that you think having protected sex is about the same as shooting heroin with a clean needle."
Which reminds me, you know how some people claim "we tell kids to never do drugs, so we should also tell them to abstain instead of using contraceptives?" If they think drug use and sex are so similar, then do they tell their daughters and sons to never have sex in their entire lives or do they tell their daughters and sons to save heroin and cocaine for marriage?
Exactly, Mina. When people classify sex with drugs and cigarettes and other things that are inherently damaging, and make it out to be dirty and dark and unholy and wrong, it just makes it that much weirder when they reach the "besides, your wedding night will be SO FREAKIN' AWESOME and the rest of your life will be filled with WILD AND CRAZY SEX and you and your perfect future husband/wife will be SO CLOSE and SO HAPPY and have SO MANY WONDERFUL WONDERFUL ORGASMS" part of the conversation. Suddenly the worst thing you could possibly do becomes the foundation of a beautiful relationship -- reminiscent of the "Statutory rape allegation? When's the wedding?" school of thought.
humanlifealliance: I have a problem with, "Waiting until marriage." I agree with giving kids ALL THE FACTS -- including abstinence, if that's what they decide, and the facts of what to do if they DO decide to have sex.
Not everyone wants to get married. I'm 26 and still have no desire to get married. Should I remain a virgin forever because I don't want to get married? I'm an adult! I have a healthy, active sex life.
Also, saving yourself until marriage doesn't mean you won't get an STD. There are plenty of lying, cheating partners around.
HumanLifeAlliance: Thank you for your replies.
As Mina and Misspelled pointed out, there's a huge flaw in comparing safer sex with "safer drug use". Most people are going to have sex at some point in their lives; comparatively few are going to use hard drugs.
However, there is an interesting parallel if you compare sex with a drug that's as old as civilization itself: alcohol. A study done in Canada showed that young people whose parents treated alcohol as no big deal -- "social drinkers" who might offer their teen a finger or two of wine on special occasions -- tended to drink responsibly when they came of age; on the other hand, parents who tried to reinforce the "booze is bad!" standard tended to raise kids who'd go binge-drinking the minute they hit 19 or left home. (My own experience confirms this.)
Likewise, a lot of kids who've had the abstinence-only message pounded into them refuse to take responsibility for their sexual activities, instead saying things like, "It just happened," "I couldn't control myself," or "No, of course I didn't have a condom... carrying one would have meant admitting to myself that I might break my TLW pledge." On the other hand, teens who are given the message, "Wait until you feel ready, don't let anyone else determine that for you, and take responsibility for your own body and your partner's," will tend to follow that advice.
I myself am a textbook example of both of these. My parents cook with wine and serve it on special occasions; I've never once had the urge to drink until I threw up or passed out. Likewise, my school* gave me information about birth control and told me to trust my feelings; I waited until I'd found someone special, and then the two of us took it slow. When, at 17, I felt ready for vaginal intercourse, I got a prescription for the Pill, waited a month, and had him use a condom as well. Some years after that, we moved in together, to see whether we could live in close quarters without driving each other crazy. It worked out, so we got married. Our seventh anniversary is coming up... factor in the years we were dating, and that makes for 17 years.
I would never have stayed with a partner who didn't respect my judgment, or who refused to learn about contraception. I also would never have stayed with someone who insisted on getting legally tied to me before testing our sexual compatibility. I am a sex education success story.
*There were very few pregnancies at my pro-sex-ed Canadian high school. I recall only one in my year.
Our magazine isn’t about avoiding sex. We want to encourage teens to eventually get married and have lots of great sex with their spouse.
Hey, guess what, HLA? Along with what marileec said about not everyone wanting to get married, and marriage not being this magic cure-all for STIs...
Some people CAN'T get married because some people are gay and/or have same-sex partners. And, well, as much as you'd like to pretend these folks don't exist, they do. And they're some of the teens you're preaching to. And they deserve to have a happy and healthy sex life, just like everybody else.
And some MARRIED couples don't want to have kids (or more than they already have), for many different reasons. Shocking, I know, but what do you suggest THEY do? The only 100% way to avoid pregnancy is abstinence, right? Birth control methods have all kinds of terrible side effects and aren't effective and "cause abortions," right? So there you go, married couples: stop doin' it! Oh right, I forgot marriage is a magic shield that protects you from all the possible unwanted outcomes of sex. Doye.
Oh and, from the looks of it, ya'll aren't so good at that whole "'till death do us part" thing:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/14/weekinreview/14pamb.html
I am a product of amazing, active parents who taught me about sex - EVERYTHING about sex - when I was very, very young. I came to them to discuss all my sexual issues as a teen and young adult and felt comfortable doing so because they always gave me accurate, non-judgmental information. They told me they would rather I wait until I was mature enough to have sex and explained the value in waiting, but never expected me to "wait for marriage" (for many reasons). I told my mom and dad I needed to go on birth control BEFORE I entered into my first sexual relationship, which they provided for me (along with condoms for additional pregnancy and STI protection), and they didn't judge or shame me, and made sure I knew how to use these things correctly. My sex ed in high school was similar. I had a medically factual, abstinence-encouraging-but-not-demanding, comfortable, supportive, sexual upbringing.
As a result, I have had many partners and led a sexually satisfying life free of exploitation, always being careful to be as safe as possible. As another commenter already stated, the risks of sex are risks I'm willing to take. Education combined with the fact that my parents didn't instill sexual shame and guilt in me that would have prevented me from communicating with my partners about what we need to do to protect ourselves has kept me 100% STI, pregnancy, and abortion free.
I am in NO way intending to stigmatize or insult those who do have STIs or have experienced unplanned pregnancies and/or abortions, btw, but merely explaining that, well, it's entirely possible to be sexually active, happy, healthy, and safe outside the confines of misogynistic and/or religious theory.
And...hey red states...how's that abstinence thing working out for YOU?:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/12/6/145758/107
As for the car example, apply your logic to smoking and drugs. We shouldn’t be pushing our "Just say no to drugs" teaching on students. They can decide for themselves what they want to do. They’re going to do it anyway (and who can deny them the pleasure) so we should teach them "safe" smoking, drinking, and drug use, even though it could kill them. We should also hand out cigarettes with filters and directions on where to get clean needles and untainted cocaine.
Seriously?! I find it really, really offensive that you equate sex with drug use/abuse. Sex is a biological occurrence that people have for health, pleasure, and proliferation of the species. Sexuality is inherent in each person from the minute they're born and everyone is sexual (even if they're not sexually active). Fucking is natural - poisoning your body with chemicals is not. There is no "healthy" way to do drugs, but there are healthy ways to have sex (even if we disagree on what those ways are). On top of that, commenters here have already explained the health and physical benefits of regular orgasms.
I have one question for you, HLA: If you're so concerned with that "100% effective pregnancy and STI protection" thing, why aren't you encouraging masturbation? Masturbation carries absolutely NO risk of STIs or pregnancy, has no "emotional side effects," and you get to have an orgasm! Everybody wins! Masturbation is also a guaranteed way to improve your sex life - there's obvious value in knowing your own body and its responses, which will come in handy when you're pleasing your husband on that wedding night! So why aren't you out there telling teens to jerk off?
Remember kids, sex is a dirty, disgusting, shameful thing, and you should save it for someone you love! *eyeroll*
marileec commented at June 12, 2008 1:50 PM: "Also, saving yourself until marriage doesn't mean you won't get an STD. There are plenty of lying, cheating partners around."
Saving sex for marriage won't always protect you from unwanted pregnancy either. Even among partners who don't lie and cheat, there are plenty who don't want to constantly have new babies and are still fertile...
TheSoyMilkConspiracy at June 13, 2008 11:50 AM: "Some people CAN'T get married because some people are gay and/or have same-sex partners."
...and because, for whatever reason, they can't move to Massachusetts or California or one of the nation-states that recognizes same-sex marriage (Norway just joined that group: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/06/12/Norway_approves_same-sex_marriage_law/UPI-24941213290843/ )
TheSoyMilkConspiracy at June 13, 2008 11:50 AM: "Sex is a biological occurrence that people have for health, pleasure, and proliferation of the species."
Very good points about having sex for pleasure and proliferation of the species. Unfortunately, saying it's for health reminds me of the way I heard some guys insist "if you don't have sex with me then I'll get sick from blue balls!!!" when their dates refuse sex.
Just a quick note for Mina to point out that even though same-sex partners can get married in certain states, they're still excluded from the 1,138 federal rights that heterosexual married couples receive. State-approved marriage for queer folk, though a step in the right direction, still isn't equality. But good points about privilege and the fact that you'd have to travel to get married if you didn't live in one of the gay marriage approved states.
Also, just because some assholes may use the fact that sex is healthy to try to coerce women into having sex doesn't make it any less true. I'm so glad I'm not a teenager anymore, though!
"I heard some guys insist "if you don't have sex with me then I'll get sick from blue balls!!!" when their dates refuse sex."
Something is stopping them from jerking off?
TheSoyMilkConspiracy commented at June 14, 2008 11:29 AM: "Just a quick note for Mina to point out that even though same-sex partners can get married in certain states, they're still excluded from the 1,138 federal rights that heterosexual married couples receive."
Thanks for clarifying that! Now I wonder if any other nations have this situation (a regional government recognizing same-sex marriage while the national government doesn't).
TheSoyMilkConspiracy commented at June 14, 2008 11:29 AM: "But good points about privilege and the fact that you'd have to travel to get married if you didn't live in one of the gay marriage approved states."
...and you'd have to migrate (that's way more costly than just travelling, right?) if you want your marriage to be officially recognized where you live even after the wedding.