In California, teen pregnancy has dropped 60% thanks to sex education.
Think about that, Texas. If you’re so concerned with women not having abortions, maybe you should take the steps to help them educate themselves about sex and pregnancy. That way they…
It’s so sad. The only thing we learned about contraceptives was that they were ineffective. I only remember being told that sex was a one way ticket to failure and misery… in a health class I shared with a pregnant girl. We had more than one abstinence only presentation that relied on pictures of herpes-afflicted genitals and dead fetuses to scare us out of having sex. Not once did they even acknowledge the existence of our raging hormones and what we ought to do about them. Only that sex is a process used strictly for procreation. I thought I was dirty and sick for wanting to have sex because it might feel good. They kept us in the dark and then released us into the world where the momentary shock factor of those images faded but our ignorance of safe sex endured. Not only does abstinence-only education give rise to unwanted pregnancy, it also engrains a (mostly religious) stigma in the minds of all children that can stunt their growth. It creates feelings of shame about even the very normal and healthy DESIRE to have sex, and that shame can manifest in self-destructive thoughts and behaviors later in life, especially for women, who are held to a double standard of “purity.” More than anything, I encourage you to talk about sex. ASK QUESTIONS! I didn’t learn a damn thing about contraceptives until I stepped on a college campus and finally had the courage to ask questions.
I know I haven’t posted anything in a while. I’ll get around to the backlog in a bit. In the meantime, EXPLAIN THIS BULLSHIT.
This is a really good one and made me think. It’s interesting that men are not shamed as often as women for masturbating. But when it comes to sex toys, women seem to have more leeway. Let me start by saying the purchase of a sex toy differs from manual masturbation because it implies that it is a more substantive source of sexual pleasure and is often considered a substitute for actual sex.
Men are often measured by their ability to pick up women. For men, the only substantive sexual pleasure they experience should be from women. If they have to purchase something substantial to satisfy their sexual needs or “substitute” a woman, they have failed as “real men.”
Women are assumed to be able to get men at any time. So a woman who spurns the attentions of men in favor of self-pleasure is seen as independent and in control of her sexuality. She knows what she wants and is more apt at satisfying herself than men. She has self-respect and isn’t just giving herself away to all those men!
What it comes down to is women are shamed for having sex, and men are shamed for not having sex (notice the virgin-shaming in the first picture). Therefore, it is more acceptable for a woman to substitute sex with a sex toy than the other way around. Both attitudes are false and harmful symptoms of patriarchy. As are the ideas that sex toys are necessarily a substitute for sex or that the amount of sex one has determines his/her worth and character.
The ‘sex-ratio hypothesis’ holds that an oversupply of women in college campuses in the United States gives men there considerably more power in romantic and sexual relationships, which translates into lower levels of relationship commitment, less favorable treatment of women by men, and a more sexually permissive climate whereby women receive less in exchange for sex… What scholars describe as ‘hook-up culture’ may actually be a simple and passive result of this demographic trend - the growing gender imbalance on campuses - rather than any active change in Western sexual culture… If the current ratio remains intact for long, 26 out of 100 college-educated women will have to marry down the educational scale if they want to marry at all. It’s not surprising, then, that the sexual decisions of women are looking more like those of men; it’s a strategic and rational approach in a sexual and marital economy where women are increasingly competing with each other for the affections of increasingly rare high-quality men who are willing to commit.
Mark Regnerus and Jeremy Uecker, Pre-Marital Sex in America
Let’s talk about sex!
I never had someone I could talk about sex with. It wasn’t until recently that I even thought about sex as something that I could be a part of. My parents raised me to believe it was some alien activity that only disgusting, subhuman women did. And for most of my life I believed I was cut from superior moral fabric because I didn’t have sex while simultaneously loathing myself for wanting to.
To all the young women who are going through this, you are not subhuman, you are not irresponsible, you are not disgusting. You are not a “slut.” You are a human being. And just like anything else, understanding the implications of being sexually active won’t come easily or immediately. There is no magic answer; sexual preferences are different for everyone: How much emotional value should I put into sex? Does “my first time” mean something special to me? Do I need to be in a relationship to have sex? Do no-strings-attached hook ups work for me? How sensitive should my partner be of my feelings? How much sex is too much?
These are all questions for you to answer for yourself, and unless you are harming yourself or others, what you do with your body is not a reflection of your character. You will do things you realize you are not comfortable with, but just like riding a bike, you will fall down a few times before finding your balance. Many of my girl friends come to me to talk candidly about sex free of judgment, and I want to extend that to my followers as well. I know how antagonistic the world is to women who are open about their sex lives. My ask box is always open if you have questions, comments or concerns. I’m here for you!
There are a host of clear cases in which one person sexually uses another precisely because the former employs deception in a way that undermines the informed character of the latter’s consent to sexual interaction. Consider this example. One person A has decided, as a matter of personal prudence based on past experience, not to become sexually involved outside the confines of a loving relationship. Another person, B, strongly desires a sexual relationship with A but does not love A. B, aware of A’s unwillingness to engage in sex without love, professes love for A, thereby hoping to win A’s consent to a sexual relationship. B’s ploy is successful; A consents. When the smoke clears and A becomes aware of B’s deception, it would be both appropriate and natural for A to complain, “I’ve been used.
Thomas A. Mappes, “Sexual Morality and the Concept of Using Another Person”
A sorority girl and fraternity guy from my school were photographed having public sex at a party.
The photograph has circulated and become a scandal. But only for the woman and her sorority, not for the man and his fraternity.
Can someone please explain this to me?
And the count is now 5 out of 5.
100% of the guys that have expressed any interest in me and pretended to be my friend have ended up attempting to manipulate me into having sex with them.
I miss high school where next to no one liked me but the ones who did liked me for my personality.