NationStates Jolt Archive

I've travelled extensively in my day. I've been around a time or two. I;ve noticed that in many countries sexual mores and what is or is not pornography is a lot more relaxed than here in the US.

I've also noticed that attitudes towards sex differ outside the US. Here, however, sex is seen as naughty, or bad and any deviation from the act (i.e. doing anything but attempting to procreate) is horrifying and shocking. Add to this that the populace of the US has a teen pregnancy problem, more than likely due to our reluctance to discuss sex with our children.

Art is easily slandered and said to be "pornographic" in the US as well, especially modern art and performance art.

My point is this, why is the US such a prude when it comes to sex and all that goes along with it?

Is religious fundamnetalism? A feeling that we are better than others if we make sex a bad thing?

I notice that in countries with relaxed laws regarding sex and nudity that they don't have the "sex-based" problems we have here.

Why is that? Could it be that if we had a more open discussion about sex that we would be liberated? Or perhaps if we allowed public nudity and had more exposure to a more relaxed attitude toward "naughty" stuff would things get better or worse?

Might I suggest that you look back to the history of yuor country (from the initial Puritans to subsequent waves of other groups "yearning to be free" - often due to their strict religious codes) before you wonder why you are more uptight than many other countries.... because it becomes pretty darn obvious when viewed in that light.


Of course, what most history books in the US leave out is that the Puritans did NOT sail to the US to avoid persecution. No, they had done that part of their journey already when they escaped England for the Netherlands.


They then fled the Netherlands for the New World because the Dutch were so damned liberal that they feared for the corruption of their children....



So, this Thanksgiving don't forget to take a moment and praise the initial settlers for helping to keep America sexually repressed for over three centuries and counting!

;)

I used to assume it was our Puritan background until I learned that the Puritans were far more open about sex, especially premarital sex, than I'd ever suspected. And while I haven't done any extensive reading on this, my suspicion now is that it dates back to a relatively recent period--perhaps the Depression era or just after WWII when the national community began to get smaller thanks to mass communication and preachers were able to get more of an audience thanks to the radio and television. There are signs from earlier, of course--the commission set up to essentially censor film from sexuality in the 30s I believe (my memory is really weak on this right now, so forgive any errors, please) was an early indicator, as was the move to censor works of literature like Ulysses under the auspices of obscenity are a couple of examples.

And it seems to me that there's probably a connection to the so-called "communist menace." By casting open sexuality as akin to communism, politicians were able to put forward this idea of the christian, moral USA as an opponent to the "godless commies." Of course, in order to have moral christians, you have to condition your people to think that sex is bad.

Of course, I could be wrong about all this--I'm just free-associating off the top of my head. Interesting question, though.

Damn! Thanks for bringing it up, I meant to but in my typing frenzy forgot. Another possible reason, but what is the solution.

*Sighs*

Most Christians don't view sex as an act as bad.

And it's not that America feels that sex is bad, the majrotiy views being too open sexually as a bad thing.

hmmm, I think you might have to predate the great depression as such things as the Temperance movement had it's start in the Second GReat Awakening (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Great_Awakening) - which stretches back to the early 1800's, and not so coincidentally also came primarily out of the New England region, although it linked up with the growing Mormon and Jehova Witnesses communities, and others.


What are the odds that New Englanders read romanticized notions of what the pilgrims stood for and narrowly redefined it across areas like sexuality?

Dunno.


Clearly though, gettin' yerself churched up was all the rage for a while then in a way that still has a huge impact on American society.

Damn! Thanks for bringing it up, I meant to but in my typing frenzy forgot. Another possible reason, but what is the solution.
I tend to think that in terms of social acceptance of sexuality, time cures all ills, up to a point. Assuming my statement above is accurate (and I'm not sure of that myself), look at the drastic moves toward sexual acceptance that have taken place in significant parts of the US in the last 50 years--women's rights and opportunities have improved dramatically, and in most parts of the country, gays are able to live openly without much fear of legal retribution. Porn is a multi-billion dollar industry and pretty much the only business that's a lock to make money online year after year.

We still have a long way to go--teen pregnancy and STD rates are pandemic compared to Europe, and our abortion rate is high compared to them as well, and we've got a group of people who preach abstinence only that has far too much power in this country. But those are recent setbacks in a movement that's been going consistently forward for nearly half a century now.

*Sighs*

Most Christians don't view sex as an act as bad.

And it's not that America feels that sex is bad, the majrotiy views being too open sexually as a bad thing.

Okay...that kind of contradicts itself.

In the US, the majority of people are Christians. So if the majority views "being too sexual" (which you need to define or qualify some how) as a bad thing, then wouldn't it be that that majority is Christian?

Damn! Thanks for bringing it up, I meant to but in my typing frenzy forgot. Another possible reason, but what is the solution.

The solution?


Stop being so damned repressed!


:p

Okay...that kind of contradicts itself.

In the US, the majority of people are Christians. So if the majority views "being too sexual" (which you need to define or qualify some how) as a bad thing, then wouldn't it be that that majority is Christian?

Yeah, but you fail to see my point. Christians don't say "OMG WTF SEXX00RS IS BAD, DONT HAVES IT", most view it as a completely natural and beautiful thing.

Being too sexual, however, is bad. Like sexual/pornographic scenes on TV, waaay too many sexual partners, etc.

The solution?


Stop being so damned repressed!


:p

Point taken. I don't feel repressed...but then I am not society in general, and since the issue isn't "pressing" no one cares. They rarely link things like STD's, teen pregnancy, and the like to the undereducation of people in regard to sex and sexuality.

I really think that the free love movement scared the crap out of a lot of people and so they went to the other extreme.

Yeah, but you fail to see my point. Christians don't say "OMG WTF SEXX00RS IS BAD, DONT HAVES IT", most view it as a completely natural and beautiful thing.

Being too sexual, however, is bad. Like sexual/pornographic scenes on TV, waaay too many sexual partners, etc.

That's the point, where is the line drawn about what is sexual and shown on TV and what is pornographic?

Pornography to me is when something is done for the soul purpose of the sexual act. But a scene in a show of two people having sex, where the two people are following some sort of plot line where this shouldn't/should have happened is not.

I am not a big fan of TV so please excuse the example. And not because it's overly sexual, but more because it is the same crap again and again.

I really think that the free love movement scared the crap out of a lot of people and so they went to the other extreme.

Good point Smunkee...who I recently read was a rocker...

America doesn't like sex? Um ok look at it like this...95% of the net is American porn..... sex is thriving even in churches...I mean sure it is looked down mainstream but deep down every american is a sex fiend... so yeah

With some insanely extreme christian fundamentalists that say for shame when you do anything fun is a wrong attitude that were still trying to get over. Remember it's not all christians and far from all christians. Brazil's Carnival should be enough proof for that. If everything about sex was instantly changed, as in more art containing nudity was suddenly realized not to be pornographic just because of a breast, at first things might get worse. For a generation or two as this new found freedom is abused. But after that initial destabilization and kids are raised with it and don't feel its anything special then the 'sex based' problems could be largely reduced. But hey I say keep it naughty, more fun that way.

America doesn't like sex? Um ok look at it like this...95% of the net is American porn..... sex is thriving even in churches...I mean sure it is looked down mainstream but deep down every american is a sex fiend... so yeah

Not 95%...only about 75% is american, 10% European and 15% other (whatever that means).

The point is that you even brought up the term "sex fiend". Why is looking at naked women or men fiendish? Would there be a porn industry if people were naked all the time?

*Sighs*

Most Christians don't view sex as an act as bad.

And it's not that America feels that sex is bad, the majrotiy views being too open sexually as a bad thing.
It is the American idea of what is "too open" that is under discussion.

Americans are so uptight about sex, it's almost a national mental illness. They fly into a tizzy at the mere glimpse of a middle-aged woman's tit, but privately they engage in the most disgusting sexual excesses. They argue in favor of wholesale censorship of the arts while spending billions of dollars buying porn. If we were to go along all the current arguments of latter day puritans about child-safe arts/education/communications/etc, there eventually wouldn't be any children because no one would know how to make them.

I think it stems mostly from the latter half of the 19th century, and I blame a combination of Victorianism, keeping up with the Joneses syndrome, xenophobia, and elitism.

1. The Victorians were so uptight, they wouldn't even say the word "leg" in mixed company. Also, the British Victorians were the symbol of social, political, economic success internationally (the Americans of their day) and were widely immitated, especially by upwardly mobile America where the nouveau riches were eager to do whatever the winners were seen to do. Meanwhile, the Victorian period could arguably be called the golden age of child pornography and fetishism. By copping Victorian habits, Americans were coping Victorian hang-ups, too.

2. During the same period, new waves immigration were coming in from Catholic countries, notably Ireland and Italy. The already established German and English Americans still harbored the inter-religious tensions that had existed between their countries, and also felt a kind of white-on-white racism against the newcomers. A common accusation was that Catholics were sex maniacs who popped out babies constantly in a popish plot to populate the world.

3. Finally, after the Catholic immigrants had settled in and started climbing the social ladder, those same accusations of sexual excess were made by the middle classes against both the poor and the rich. Thus Americans fell into a habit that had been going around the world ever since the middle class was invented.

The whole of the 20th century, we see a see-saw battle between puritanism and permissiveness in the US. I'm on the permissive side. After all, the classic definition of a puritan is someone who is "haunted by the thought that someone, somewhere, might be having a good time."

The reason sex is considered bad in the US is because of the tendency to keep making an issue out of it. It's like racism. The reason racism is such a problem is because everyone keeps pointing out how bad it is. If people stopped pointing out racism, it would cease to be an issue.

The same thing with sexuality. If people stopped making such an issue out of it, it would cease to be a problem.

I think you're missing the biggest point of Americans being hysterical about just everything.

It's quite stupid, really. Whenever breasts are shown, Americans instantly go like "OMG IT'S NUDITY, BAD FOR OUR CHILDREN, EXECUTE THE GUILTY!" However, when violence featuring splashing brains to the walls is shown, nobody says a word against.

I'm currently having human biology course in school. We are shown many pictures of naked human beings. Soon I'll have 'deeper' sex education, with even more naked human beings shown. It would be ridiculous to try to hide these kinds of things. Humans are sexual beings and naturally lust for sex to preserve their own race. What's so bad about it?

And goddamnit, come on, breasts are just milk storages. Yes, of course, they have an use for sexual pleasure (at least for men), but I don't see why that would be a reason to hysterically try erase them from all media.

As the last line, I'll say that I'm a Christian.

I'm not in the US, but I think sex is bad.

Having said that, I don't have the fear that pervades some of the US, nor do I have something against nudity. That's irrational and yes, mostly in the US.

Would there be a porn industry if people were naked all the time? No, because you'd never have come to America 'cos your ancestors would have frozen to death in Europe.

Americans are so uptight about sex, it's almost a national mental illness.

Are you an American? If not, please do not pretend you know anythign about us. When the boob was shown on TV duing the Super Bowl, a "record" 500,00 complaints came in. Whic his roughly, 1/6 of a percent of Americans. Which means 99.84% of Americans didn't see it or care enough to complain.

Of the 50 - 100 million people who watch the Super Bowl, that's less than a percent. Please do not blame the other 99% for the retardedness of that 1%.

And Americans love Sex. Girls Gone Wild? The multi billion dollar a year porn business? Please. We love sex. You people have to stop paying attention to the Vocal Fundies. They do not represent all of us.

I've travelled extensively in my day. I've been around a time or two. I;ve noticed that in many countries sexual mores and what is or is not pornography is a lot more relaxed than here in the US.

I've also noticed that attitudes towards sex differ outside the US. Here, however, sex is seen as naughty, or bad and any deviation from the act (i.e. doing anything but attempting to procreate) is horrifying and shocking. Add to this that the populace of the US has a teen pregnancy problem, more than likely due to our reluctance to discuss sex with our children.

Art is easily slandered and said to be "pornographic" in the US as well, especially modern art and performance art.

My point is this, why is the US such a prude when it comes to sex and all that goes along with it?

Is religious fundamnetalism? A feeling that we are better than others if we make sex a bad thing?

I notice that in countries with relaxed laws regarding sex and nudity that they don't have the "sex-based" problems we have here.

Why is that? Could it be that if we had a more open discussion about sex that we would be liberated? Or perhaps if we allowed public nudity and had more exposure to a more relaxed attitude toward "naughty" stuff would things get better or worse?
It seems to be a holdover from both Puritanism and Victorianism, elements of which were later incorporated into Fundamentalism, which is at war with human nature in the "you can look, but don't touch" approach to sexuality.

Ever heard of a thing called public imago?

Ever heard of a thing called public imago?
Yes, but I don't think it holds much water in a milticultural society like the US.

Good point Smunkee...who I recently read was a rocker...
was being the operative word here. I am still in a band (of sorts) with my two year old and my four year old. We got a gig at Thanksgiving this year. :D

Religious Puritanism is at the root of it,

American culture was strongly influenced by christian puritans, just cultures in the middle east are influenced and informed by islamic puritans.

Religious Puritanism is at the root of it,

American culture was strongly influenced by christian puritans, just cultures in the middle east are influenced and informed by islamic puritans.
Well, except that the Puritans weren't all that uptight about sex. They were uptight about a lot of stuff, but surprisingly, premarital sex wasn't near the top of their list. Extramarital sex was a big deal, but nor premarital sex.

The problem isn't the American people. It's the man, man. The religious right is a very powerful institution. Ever since those puritain days of old the churches have had a disproportionatly high amount of control in this country. Separation of church and state? That was because the Church of England and the RCC were too "liberal" for the Calvinists who settled here. They wanted more power. 200+ years later, and the vast majority of americans are reduced to acting like 13 year old boys sneaking a look at the bras in the JC Penny catalog under the sheets of their bed. It is the few people who hold to those outdated extremist views that sex is "bad" who ruin it for the rest of us, because their voice has the weight of the institution behind it.

Being too sexual, however, is bad. Like sexual/pornographic scenes on TV, waaay too many sexual partners, etc.
That's a value judgement, kids.

Now if he'd said the effects of STDs were bad, that'd be a factual judgement.

The problem isn't the American people. It's the man, man. The religious right is a very powerful institution. Ever since those puritain days of old the churches have had a disproportionatly high amount of control in this country. Separation of church and state? That was because the Church of England and the RCC were too "liberal" for the Calvinists who settled here. They wanted more power. 200+ years later, and the vast majority of americans are reduced to acting like 13 year old boys sneaking a look at the bras in the JC Penny catalog under the sheets of their bed. It is the few people who hold to those outdated extremist views that sex is "bad" who ruin it for the rest of us, because their voice has the weight of the institution behind it.
Well, I trust you're speaking for yourself, because no one, and certainly not the remnants of the Church of England, has ever "spoiled" sex for me. :D

Americans are so uptight about sex, it's almost a national mental illness. They fly into a tizzy at the mere glimpse of a middle-aged woman's tit, but privately they engage in the most disgusting sexual excesses. They argue in favor of wholesale censorship of the arts while spending billions of dollars buying porn. If we were to go along all the current arguments of latter day puritans about child-safe arts/education/communications/etc, there eventually wouldn't be any children because no one would know how to make them.

I think it stems mostly from the latter half of the 19th century, and I blame a combination of Victorianism, keeping up with the Joneses syndrome, xenophobia, and elitism.

1. The Victorians were so uptight, they wouldn't even say the word "leg" in mixed company. Also, the British Victorians were the symbol of social, political, economic success internationally (the Americans of their day) and were widely immitated, especially by upwardly mobile America where the nouveau riches were eager to do whatever the winners were seen to do. Meanwhile, the Victorian period could arguably be called the golden age of child pornography and fetishism. By copping Victorian habits, Americans were coping Victorian hang-ups, too.

2. During the same period, new waves immigration were coming in from Catholic countries, notably Ireland and Italy. The already established German and English Americans still harbored the inter-religious tensions that had existed between their countries, and also felt a kind of white-on-white racism against the newcomers. A common accusation was that Catholics were sex maniacs who popped out babies constantly in a popish plot to populate the world.

3. Finally, after the Catholic immigrants had settled in and started climbing the social ladder, those same accusations of sexual excess were made by the middle classes against both the poor and the rich. Thus Americans fell into a habit that had been going around the world ever since the middle class was invented.

The whole of the 20th century, we see a see-saw battle between puritanism and permissiveness in the US. I'm on the permissive side. After all, the classic definition of a puritan is someone who is "haunted by the thought that someone, somewhere, might be having a good time."
Not to put too fine a point on this, but ... bullshit! You know nothing about America or Americans, this much is obvious. :p

I really think that the free love movement scared the crap out of a lot of people and so they went to the other extreme.

Xenophobia denotes a phobic attitude toward strangers or of the unknown (SRC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenophobia) ):gundge:
:: cough cough ::

I wasnt around then, but I'd bet your right, youth today seems to be leaning away from it though.. i mean, go to a junior highschool/high school and look at what the chicks.. and even the dudes wear! at the school i went to for 2 years till i moved/ you didnt even look twice if you saw half a boob or someones pants at mid-thigh its common... ( :rolleyes: )

Thoughts?

Well, I trust you're speaking for yourself, because no one, and certainly not the remnants of the Church of England, has ever "spoiled" sex for me. :D
I don't know--have you ever had sex with an Anglican? :D

Xenophobia denotes a phobic attitude toward strangers or of the unknown (SRC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenophobia) ):gundge:
:: cough cough ::

I wasnt around then, but I'd bet your right, youth today seems to be leaning away from it though.. i mean, go to a junior highschool/high school and look at what the chicks.. and even the dudes wear! at the school i went to for 2 years till i moved/ you didnt even look twice if you saw half a boob or someones pants at mid-thigh its common... ( :rolleyes: )

Thoughts?

the trend really scares me as a parent. Someone bought my 4 year old a pair of pants with the word "hottie" on the rearend. Why in the heck would a 4 year old need something to draw attention to thier rearend?! I don't let her wear them. Of course it wasn't much of a fight, her grandma tried to buy her a bikini this summer and my daughter said "that's just trashy grandma, you aren't supposed to show your belly to everyone!!"

The same thing with sexuality. If people stopped making such an issue out of it, it would cease to be a problem.
I agree here, but...

It's like racism. The reason racism is such a problem is because everyone keeps pointing out how bad it is. If people stopped pointing out racism, it would cease to be an issue.
No! Racism is an inherently bad thing. It wouldn't go away, just like sex wouldn't go away, but rather than be a good and natural part of society, racism will hurt people.
Not making an issue out of racism will only not solve the problem, it most certainly wouldn't make it go away.

I've travelled extensively in my day. I've been around a time or two. I;ve noticed that in many countries sexual mores and what is or is not pornography is a lot more relaxed than here in the US.

I've also noticed that attitudes towards sex differ outside the US. Here, however, sex is seen as naughty, or bad and any deviation from the act (i.e. doing anything but attempting to procreate) is horrifying and shocking. Add to this that the populace of the US has a teen pregnancy problem, more than likely due to our reluctance to discuss sex with our children.

Art is easily slandered and said to be "pornographic" in the US as well, especially modern art and performance art.

My point is this, why is the US such a prude when it comes to sex and all that goes along with it?

Is religious fundamnetalism? A feeling that we are better than others if we make sex a bad thing?

I notice that in countries with relaxed laws regarding sex and nudity that they don't have the "sex-based" problems we have here.

Why is that? Could it be that if we had a more open discussion about sex that we would be liberated? Or perhaps if we allowed public nudity and had more exposure to a more relaxed attitude toward "naughty" stuff would things get better or worse?


I'm not sure where you're from. I'm an American, and my wife and I regularly have sex together outside of marriage - and we've met MANY people who do the same.

Are you an American? If not, please do not pretend you know anythign about us. When the boob was shown on TV duing the Super Bowl, a "record" 500,00 complaints came in. Whic his roughly, 1/6 of a percent of Americans. Which means 99.84% of Americans didn't see it or care enough to complain.

Of the 50 - 100 million people who watch the Super Bowl, that's less than a percent. Please do not blame the other 99% for the retardedness of that 1%.

And Americans love Sex. Girls Gone Wild? The multi billion dollar a year porn business? Please. We love sex. You people have to stop paying attention to the Vocal Fundies. They do not represent all of us.
Amen! Uh ... I mean ... yeah! :D

I don't know--have you ever had sex with an Anglican? :D
Not when I could help it, no! :D

the trend really scares me as a parent. Someone bought my 4 year old a pair of pants with the word "hottie" on the rearend. Why in the heck would a 4 year old need something to draw attention to thier rearend?! I don't let her wear them. Of course it wasn't much of a fight, her grandma tried to buy her a bikini this summer and my daughter said "that's just trashy grandma, you aren't supposed to show your belly to everyone!!"
LOL! Sounds like Granny might have been in the "free love" movement! :D

I have had to have several talks with my older grand daughter about some of the clothes she was wearing, not because there was anything basically wrong with the clothes, but because she was about 14 and wearing things you would normally see on college girls. All things in good time, sez me. :)

I think the explination from eurotrip best explains that...


"You do know America was founded by prudes who were tired of all the steamy,kinky sex going on in Europe."

here in the uk we find your attitude to sex in the us a bit odd

especially the fact you lot don't seem to count oral sex as sex

very odd

I think the explination from eurotrip best explains that...

"You do know America was founded by prudes who were tired of all the steamy,kinky sex going on in Europe."

Are you saying that I, an American, am not having steamy, kinky sex?

My wife and I have a weblog of our sexual adventures, and my wife is into hotwifing. You'll have to google the term yourself, because the NS terms and conditions forbid me from posting a link to our site or to any direct example on the web.

We've met lots of similar people. There's a site called Adult Friend Finder, which is the largest web resource for swingers on the Net. It has 11 million active American members.

.

We still have a long way to go--teen pregnancy and STD rates are pandemic compared to Europe, and our abortion rate is high compared to them as well, and we've got a group of people who preach abstinence only that has far too much power in this country. But those are recent setbacks in a movement that's been going consistently forward for nearly half a century now.

If you study 20 century american history, you will see this topic like a pengelum. In the 1920's we had a open sexual society. I mean basically one big party. Then after the depression and war we had the 50's which was sexually repressed. Then swing back to openness occured in the 60's. Then in the 80's it swung back again. In the 90's it swung once more. Right now we are in the sexually repressed(?) side. Just give it time and it will swing the other way. I wouldnt be bugged too much by it, just hope that it swings back before we loose any freedoms.

Are you saying that I, an American, am not having steamy, kinky sex?

My wife and I have a weblog of our sexual adventures, and my wife is into hotwifing. You'll have to google the term yourself, because the NS terms and conditions forbid me from posting a link to our site or to any direct example on the web.

We've met lots of similar people. There's a site called Adult Friend Finder, which is the largest web resource for swingers on the Net. It has 11 million active American members.

Kinky and steamy.... I approve.

I just qouted Eurotrip because that just made me laugh, anyone who knows American history knows that would be inaccurate.

If you study 20 century american history, you will see this topic like a pengelum. In the 1920's we had a open sexual society. I mean basically one big party. Then after the depression and war we had the 50's which was sexually repressed. Then swing back to openness occured in the 60's. Then in the 80's it swung back again. In the 90's it swung once more. Right now we are in the sexually repressed(?) side. Just give it time and it will swing the other way. I wouldnt be bugged too much by it, just hope that it swings back before we loose any freedoms.

Wow. 11 million swingers online in the US. Swing clubs easy to find. And I'm a gun-toting born again Christian Republican and my wife and I are swingers.

What USA are you living in?

If you study 20 century american history, you will see this topic like a pengelum. In the 1920's we had a open sexual society. I mean basically one big party. Then after the depression and war we had the 50's which was sexually repressed. Then swing back to openness occured in the 60's. Then in the 80's it swung back again. In the 90's it swung once more. Right now we are in the sexually repressed(?) side. Just give it time and it will swing the other way. I wouldnt be bugged too much by it, just hope that it swings back before we loose any freedoms.
You're right about the pendulum swinging, although right now I'd say we're in the middle of a battle, thanks to technology. In the past, before the days of VCRs and camcorders, if you wanted to access porn, especially in video form, you had to go to a nasty theater in a seedy part of town and in disguise so no one would recognize you--big social stigma if you got caught, career-ending in some cases. VCRs made it easier to watch porn in your own home, camcorders made it easier and cheaper to either make your own or for amateurs to get into the business, and the internet made it easier to market it and hook up with like-minded people.

So now there are two sides in open battle--those who want it and access it and live the lifestyle, and those who are screeching to stop it and trying to play on traditional values and mores in order to shame others from taking part in it. There's a lot of room for hypocrisy here, however, because the ability to access it in your home means you can be on the street corner decrying it and then go home and beat off to bukkake if you want and no one knows the difference unless you get outed.

Honestly, though, I think this time the pendulum has been moved by technology--it'll still swing back and forth, but we won't have a return to the puritanism of the 50s, because people have gotten too used to being able to access what they want, whether it be porn or birth control/contraception or "marital aids" or the company of like-minded people who share their sexual proclivities. They're not going to give that up easily.

No, because you'd never have come to America 'cos your ancestors would have frozen to death in Europe.

Far too literal Lisk...but funny...

And how do you know my ancestors were from Europe?

was being the operative word here. I am still in a band (of sorts) with my two year old and my four year old. We got a gig at Thanksgiving this year. :D

As a drummer, I can only hope that it is the 2 year old smashing the pots...

I have a real band, but a similar side project. I play guitar, while my 3 year old daughter plays piano and sings and my son plays a little drum kit. We're nominated for a grammy as "Best Living Room Rock Group Without a Prevalent Single"

;)

Xenophobia denotes a phobic attitude toward strangers or of the unknown (SRC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenophobia) ):gundge:
:: cough cough ::

I wasnt around then, but I'd bet your right, youth today seems to be leaning away from it though.. i mean, go to a junior highschool/high school and look at what the chicks.. and even the dudes wear! at the school i went to for 2 years till i moved/ you didnt even look twice if you saw half a boob or someones pants at mid-thigh its common... ( :rolleyes: )

Thoughts?

Right. But in a recent study done for the Federal Child Protection Agency, these same kids that don't bat an eye lash are having sex in the school.

75% of males of age 13-15 admitted having sexual relations with girls AT SCHOOL during school hours.

85% of females ages 13-15 admitted to having performed oral sex on males at school.

When the girls were asked what they did to attract the boys, the general reply was that they "flash them" to get their attention.

The boys responded that this form of arousal is what lead to the acts.

So much for the theory that suggestive clothing doesn't lead to anything amongst teens.

Now, I am not a prudish parent by any means. But dressing like a hooker at school gets you treated like a hooker at school.

I think the more upsetting fact is that IT IS HAPPENING AT SCHOOL! What do the teachers do all day? Where are the principals (and where are the principles)?

What's more disturbing is you really can't get away from it. Apparently it is more likely to happen at a co-ed private school than at a public school.

I'm not sure where you're from. I'm an American, and my wife and I regularly have sex together outside of marriage - and we've met MANY people who do the same.

Sierra, I'm sure you know that you and your wife are somewhat of an exception to the rule. I'm not saying everyone in the US is a sex nazi. However, that said, how many people do you know of that, if they knew of your lifestyle, would think you some sort of freak (I know you wouldn't care, and I don't label you as such, but you know there are people that would)?

And for the record...WNY = Western New York...I live in Buffalo...GO SABRES!!

Sierra, I'm sure you know that you and your wife are somewhat of an exception to the rule. I'm not saying everyone in the US is a sex nazi. However, that said, how many people do you know of that, if they knew of your lifestyle, would think you some sort of freak (I know you wouldn't care, and I don't label you as such, but you know there are people that would)?

And for the record...WNY = Western New York...I live in Buffalo...GO SABRES!!

There are 11 million active members of Adult Friend Finder. Most wouldn't care about my lifestyle - I'm sure there are some who would.

But I feel that the US has been getting progressively better as far as sex is concerned.

here in the uk we find your attitude to sex in the us a bit odd

especially the fact you lot don't seem to count oral sex as sex

very odd

I count it as sex...and I'd like to count it even more.

But I understand what you are saying, although I know that "not counting oral as sex" is fairly common outside the US as well. Apparently, teens across the world feel it's a way to save their virginity.

There are 11 million active members of Adult Friend Finder. Most wouldn't care about my lifestyle - I'm sure there are some who would.

But I feel that the US has been getting progressively better as far as sex is concerned.

To a degree I agree. But it seems more like a weird rift between The Fundamentalists that want to cotrol everything and keep everyone practically Menonite, and the Voyeuristic "I want to see it even if it isn't something I want to do" faction.

In some ways, I fall into the latter. I love to see people doing strange things and living different lifestyles (more involving drugs and crime than sex, but it's the same idea).

To a degree I agree. But it seems more like a weird rift between The Fundamentalists that want to cotrol everything and keep everyone practically Menonite, and the Voyeuristic "I want to see it even if it isn't something I want to do" faction.

In some ways, I fall into the latter. I love to see people doing strange things and living different lifestyles (more involving drugs and crime than sex, but it's the same idea).

Don't take your perception of the world from what you see on TV. The supposed outrage over the clothing malfunction on TV is "supposed" as far as I'm concerned. Most people today are growing up with a less restrictive view of sex. If it weren't for the fear of AIDS that is trumpeted every day, people would be screwing in public today.

If someone wants to be a Puritan, they can stay indoors.

And for the record...WNY = Western New York...I live in Buffalo...GO SABRES!!

I like Buffalo. I take my students out there about every 2 months to go eat at Anchor Bar.

Don't take your perception of the world from what you see on TV. The supposed outrage over the clothing malfunction on TV is "supposed" as far as I'm concerned. Most people today are growing up with a less restrictive view of sex. If it weren't for the fear of AIDS that is trumpeted every day, people would be screwing in public today.

If someone wants to be a Puritan, they can stay indoors.

I don't really watch TV (I watch FUSE and the Iron Chef...maybe a few movies on IFC, or something on Discovery. But 9 days out of 10, my TV isn't even on (except for when I play XBOX)).

I think the outrage about the whole Super Bowl thing is retarded...it was planned people! Let it go.

Now...I don't think people should be screwing in public, not because I'm a prude but because fat people gross me out and I know it would be them screwing in public.

And I think you are missing the point. I'm not talking about media, I'm talking about that fact that they talk about condoms in health class, but don't show kids how to use one. The fact that in some school districts (usually the one's with the highest teen pregnancy rate) you can have your kids opt-out of Sex Ed.

I think sex should be taught and seen in school (I know the video I watched in Sex ed was about as helpful as asking a tree how he reproduced).

But why are people trying to put a stop to proper Sex Education?

Why isn't Robert Maplethorpe's work considered art in the US? This is my point.

I like Buffalo. I take my students out there about every 2 months to go eat at Anchor Bar.

Where are you that you can take field trips to Anchor Bar? Hell, I grew up here and we never went on Field Trips to Anchor Bar.

I dont think our sexual attitude has anything to do with our past, but has much more to do with our geography and general outlook. In Europe you have distinctly seperate cultures living right next to each other. Due to sheer lack of space, if one culture develops a more sexual attitude, then thier horny neibhor countries will eventually want more sex. Its the "I want what the Jonse's have" attitude. If a neibhoring country passes a law that legalizes prostitution, then it becomes profitable for the neibhoring countries to do the same. In america, we also have culturally diverse regions, but we are spaced far enough away from each other that it take a long time for the "Jonses" to show thier views to the "Smiths". You can definately go to different regions of the US and find EXTREMELY liberal views on sex, and within an hours drive find a completely prudish society. Given the size of the country, the government has to take into account the views of the country as a whole, which makes any major change a VERY slow process, and by the time the votes are in the trends are swinging the other way.
The other social aspect of our nation is our level of acceptable deniability. It is much easier for us to do our deeds without having to explain them to our children or our neibhors. You'd be foolish to think that American individuals like sex any less than anywhere else in the world, but most Americans would also rather not have to explain thier personal bedroom preferences. We simply feel it is respectful not to flaunt our sexuality for the world to see. Were not uptight, were just "over it".

I dont think our sexual attitude has anything to do with our past, but has much more to do with our geography and general outlook. In Europe you have distinctly seperate cultures living right next to each other. Due to sheer lack of space, if one culture develops a more sexual attitude, then thier horny neibhor countries will eventually want more sex. Its the "I want what the Jonse's have" attitude. If a neibhoring country passes a law that legalizes prostitution, then it becomes profitable for the neibhoring countries to do the same. In america, we also have culturally diverse regions, but we are spaced far enough away from each other that it take a long time for the "Jonses" to show thier views to the "Smiths". You can definately go to different regions of the US and find EXTREMELY liberal views on sex, and within an hours drive find a completely prudish society. Given the size of the country, the government has to take into account the views of the country as a whole, which makes any major change a VERY slow process, and by the time the votes are in the trends are swinging the other way.
The other social aspect of our nation is our level of acceptable deniability. It is much easier for us to do our deeds without having to explain them to our children or our neibhors. You'd be foolish to think that American individuals like sex any less than anywhere else in the world, but most Americans would also rather not have to explain thier personal bedroom preferences. We simply feel it is respectful not to flaunt our sexuality for the world to see. Were not uptight, were just "over it".


I don't think I can agree with your logic on this for a couple of reasons.

1) I live in Buffalo, NY which directly borders Canada, a country with more liberal views of sex, freedom of speech, art vs. pornography, etc. Yet, the attitude where I live is not as liberal as Canada and pretty much equates to the average american view of "sex is for married people and that's it".

2) Sexual attitudes are not a matter of votes swaying the government. They have to do with the society we live in and the attitudes purveyed. Voting won't generally change that, people do.

Change is a slow process. One would think that we would try to be more progressive than regressive, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Where are you that you can take field trips to Anchor Bar? Hell, I grew up here and we never went on Field Trips to Anchor Bar.

I come from Dayton. The FAA says I need to take my students on a cross country of atleast 250 miles for a insterment rating. Buffalo is around 300 miles, so we fly out to eat at Anchor Bar and fly over the falls.

Balipo:

1. You are obsessed with sex!!! (Are you a virgin?)

2. Don't you think AIDS changed everything? Before the early 80's free love was everywhere. Look at all the teen sex romp movies from the 70's and early 80's. They practically disappeared after 1984.

The USA is not the only sexually repressive society in the world: the Indian film industry (Bollywood) will not include even a kiss in any film; Islamic societies are among the most repressive. I think Europeans look at the USA and see people like themselves whose culture is so very different.

Perhaps the reason for the USA repression of nudity and overt public sexuality is arrested development. Victorianism is alive and well in the USA. Owing to a overly strong fundamentalist background, Americans must continue the charade of being human and sexual but pretending to be 'saintly' and 'offended' by nudity.

I come from Dayton. The FAA says I need to take my students on a cross country of atleast 250 miles for a insterment rating. Buffalo is around 300 miles, so we fly out to eat at Anchor Bar and fly over the falls.

That's funny. One of the wonders of the world not far away...and you get wings? Actually, living here for so long, I'd rather take people to get wings at Anchor than go see the falls (it really is just a bunch of water falling over a cliff).

The USA is not the only sexually repressive society in the world: the Indian film industry (Bollywood) will not include even a kiss in any film; Islamic societies are among the most repressive. I think Europeans look at the USA and see people like themselves whose culture is so very different.

Perhaps the reason for the USA repression of nudity and overt public sexuality is arrested development. Victorianism is alive and well in the USA. Owing to a overly strong fundamentalist background, Americans must continue the charade of being human and sexual but pretending to be 'saintly' and 'offended' by nudity.

You've obviously never been to my house, and partied with my wife and I. Or our friends.

The USA is not the only sexually repressive society in the world: the Indian film industry (Bollywood) will not include even a kiss in any film; Islamic societies are among the most repressive. I think Europeans look at the USA and see people like themselves whose culture is so very different.

Perhaps the reason for the USA repression of nudity and overt public sexuality is arrested development. Victorianism is alive and well in the USA. Owing to a overly strong fundamentalist background, Americans must continue the charade of being human and sexual but pretending to be 'saintly' and 'offended' by nudity.

Then there are those like me who throw off the shackles that mindset and go enjoy themselves. It is the best thing I have ever done. :p

Balipo:

1. You are obsessed with sex!!! (Are you a virgin?)

2. Don't you think AIDS changed everything? Before the early 80's free love was everywhere. Look at all the teen sex romp movies from the 70's and early 80's. They practically disappeared after 1984.

1. Nope...definitely not. And if you don't believe me, ask my kids!

2. AIDS did have a curbing effect on sex (read Allan Gurganus' Plays Well With Others for a good perspective) in general. But it made us safer, not less lusty.

As far as the movies of the late 70's and 80's...you have seen the movies like Van Wilder, American Pie, and the like? Same thing. I think those movies died out because they were the same thing again and again.

As a drummer, I can only hope that it is the 2 year old smashing the pots...

I have a real band, but a similar side project. I play guitar, while my 3 year old daughter plays piano and sings and my son plays a little drum kit. We're nominated for a grammy as "Best Living Room Rock Group Without a Prevalent Single"

;)

nope. The 4 year old plays drums (she has been working on it since about 2) I got her a little trap set from Toys R Us when she turned 3, she is getting pretty good at doing 4 beats on her bass drum and then hitting on the 2 and 4 on her snare. We can't add anything else now though because she is a perfectionist and wants to be perfect on this rhythm first.

My two year old plays the guitar, she is pretty good at the fingering for G but is still working on strumming in time. (it's okay she is only 2)

right now I am playing bass but it has been made very clear by the 4 year old that she is searching for a replacement because I am "too old"
she did actually find a 6 year old who plays bass but he doesn't want to be in a "chick band" so the search continues :D

That's funny. One of the wonders of the world not far away...and you get wings? Actually, living here for so long, I'd rather take people to get wings at Anchor than go see the falls (it really is just a bunch of water falling over a cliff).

Hey, you guys have damned good wings!!!

We do go fly over the falls on each flight. I have pics if anyone want to see 'em.

You've obviously never been to my house, and partied with my wife and I. Or our friends.

Sierra...again you are a small microcasm (sic?) of US society. And about the 11 million American users on AFF:

1) How many of them actually follow through their registration?

2) How many are actually teenage boys lying about their age to see nude women?

3) How many are cheating wives/husbands who are not as proud as you of their activity and are actually hiding it?

11 million yes...but not 11 million proud and honest.

You've obviously never been to my house, and partied with my wife and I. Or our friends.

You do realize you are in a minority. A good majority of the people I know are real prudes when it comes to that. I never could understand why people would lock themselves in as they have.

nope. The 4 year old plays drums (she has been working on it since about 2) I got her a little trap set from Toys R Us when she turned 3, she is getting pretty good at doing 4 beats on her bass drum and then hitting on the 2 and 4 on her snare. We can't add anything else now though because she is a perfectionist and wants to be perfect on this rhythm first.

My two year old plays the guitar, she is pretty good at the fingering for G but is still working on strumming in time. (it's okay she is only 2)

right now I am playing bass but it has been made very clear by the 4 year old that she is searching for a replacement because I am "too old"
she did actually find a 6 year old who plays bass but he doesn't want to be in a "chick band" so the search continues :D

It's always a good idea to "learn 'em early". That way the know dissappointment and things like the band breaking up are easier.

Of course, firing your mom from bass is a bit rough. ;)

Sierra...again you are a small microcasm (sic?) of US society. And about the 11 million American users on AFF:

1) How many of them actually follow through their registration?

2) How many are actually teenage boys lying about their age to see nude women?

3) How many are cheating wives/husbands who are not as proud as you of their activity and are actually hiding it?

11 million yes...but not 11 million proud and honest.

1. Good question - but apparently a lot of them. Enough to make swing clubs popular and available.
2. Unless they have a credit card...
3. Most of them - but they aren't ashamed - they're just afraid that the divorce court will take half their stuff.

I've met many proud and honest people though.

I blame the porn industry.

The porn industry? Exactly the ones who make MONEY with sex? Why should THEY be responsible for keeping the US under the moral thumb?

Because then it sells.

Look at Europe. Look at our porn. It's waaaaaaaaaay out. It deals with stuff I wouldn't even ponder mentioning here, for the simple reason that I fear I might have to pay for your keyboard when you throw up on it.

Why?

Because we have all the normal stuff at home. Wanna have a blow job? Go to your wife (or husband, depending on your preferences). You don't have to buy a porn video to see that kinda thing. You don't have to go to a whore to get it.

Hell, you don't have to PAY to get this!

And since the amount of people who enjoy the really ... erh ... "way out" things in sex is rather small, the market is rather small too.

Sex doesn't really sell here. Baywatch bombed in ways you can't even begin to imagine, mostly it was seen by 12-year olds who can't simply go out and buy a porn magazine. Anyone older would've done this instead.

So that's the reason for sexual repression in the US. It increases the market.

You do realize you are in a minority. A good majority of the people I know are real prudes when it comes to that. I never could understand why people would lock themselves in as they have.

That's my whole point and why I started this thread!

Why do people, especially in the US, lock themselves in and deny sexual pleasures?

Or deny the pleasure of a piece of art that contains nudity or even a vaguely sexual act (I say vaguely because it is static, and an act is dynamic)?

Where I live, an artist created a huge mural to be seen downtown. It isn't there because too many people felt it was pornographic because apparently the picture of a girl skipping rope had a bit of her underpants showing.

Umm...she was skipping rope...these things happen. I don't think there would be 50 pervs standing in front of it whacking off because of that. But either way, it was removed from city property and everyone sued (the artist sued the city, the city the artist, the city council sued the land owner...etc.)

That whole scenario is a picture of America in my opinion.

*snip*

Sex doesn't really sell here. Baywatch bombed in ways you can't even begin to imagine, mostly it was seen by 12-year olds who can't simply go out and buy a porn magazine. Anyone older would've done this instead.

So that's the reason for sexual repression in the US. It increases the market.

A possible good point...but Baywatch did fairly well in Europe for one reason.

That Reason is that for some some unknown reason, you people LOVE David Hasselhoff. You think he is sexy and talented...and that he can sing!?!?

That's more insane than our sexual aspects.

I've travelled extensively in my day. I've been around a time or two. I;ve noticed that in many countries sexual mores and what is or is not pornography is a lot more relaxed than here in the US.

I've also noticed that attitudes towards sex differ outside the US. Here, however, sex is seen as naughty, or bad and any deviation from the act (i.e. doing anything but attempting to procreate) is horrifying and shocking. Add to this that the populace of the US has a teen pregnancy problem, more than likely due to our reluctance to discuss sex with our children.

Art is easily slandered and said to be "pornographic" in the US as well, especially modern art and performance art.

My point is this, why is the US such a prude when it comes to sex and all that goes along with it?

Is religious fundamnetalism? A feeling that we are better than others if we make sex a bad thing?

I notice that in countries with relaxed laws regarding sex and nudity that they don't have the "sex-based" problems we have here.

Why is that? Could it be that if we had a more open discussion about sex that we would be liberated? Or perhaps if we allowed public nudity and had more exposure to a more relaxed attitude toward "naughty" stuff would things get better or worse?


Dude, you really have to separate the pundits, the preachers, the politicians, and the media from the people. You really need to. Yes our media does perpetuate a pro-violence/anti-sex image, yes the people on TV bitch and moan about Sex Ed in schools; yes politicians try to score brownie points by claiming "family values" and yes it is all bullshit. However, I have met too many horny old men, too many middle aged men and women with a fond and cheery disposition towards sex, too many young adults with a *ahem* excited outlook on sex, too many teenagers with a "lets fuck like weasels" outlook on sex, and too many kids "lets bang" outlook to take the whole “OMG Amer1ka is the prudez00rz” thing seriously. By the large when it comes to day to day life very, very, very few people, not even Christians, are anti-sex. Hell even Priests understand that people have sex and those that take the Bible seriously know that people are supposed to have sex. By the large everyone likes sex; people just view other people having sex differently. For instance, homosexuality DOES creep a lot of people out, young people generally think older people having sex is gross, and parents don't like to think about their kids having sex (although many simply assume that they are and mind their own business, yes even Christians.)

It really is something that almost everyone can agree on even though our media is up too it's neck in hypocrisy.

http://www.libchrist.com/

Yes, even Christians.

My wife and I are fundamentalist Christians who belong to the Assembly of God (we're Pentacostals).

But we're swingers, too.

I'll say that I'm certainly no prude, and open enough about myself.
Heterosexual and loving it!
I think that people should enjoy the gift that is their body a lot more.
If you're Christian, remember: God gave it to you, so why is it this way?

Now, to the first topic:
I think you're missing the biggest point of Americans being hysterical about just everything.

It's quite stupid, really. Whenever breasts are shown, Americans instantly go like "OMG IT'S NUDITY, BAD FOR OUR CHILDREN, EXECUTE THE GUILTY!" However, when violence featuring splashing brains to the walls is shown, nobody says a word against.
[quote]

That's right. It's a blatant hypocrisy. They'll crack down on what they call one "sin", but not another.
Look at the 10 commandments. There's nothing there saying "thou shalt not have fun when having sex". But killing? Thou Shalt Not Kill's right in there.
But, I think that one's been ignored since time immemorial.
It should really be called "Thou Shalt Not Kill...", with "..." meaning "unless it's who we order you to".
Then again, most of the commandments are either bullshit or put in a bullshit way. Designed to control people. A lot are arbitrary/stupid/otherwise irrelevant.
Comedian George Carlin has his own take:
http://www.georgecarlin.com/home/home.html
(play the MP3)

And as for modern-day (1800s onwards) focus on "War's OK but sex isn't",
look at wars in general. This "War of Stupidit- um...War on TERROR" that's happening right now.
Put it this way, Bush has a war to fight...he's not going to want to encourage his citizens to stay home and enter the SEX TRADE...
http://slate.msn.com/id/2124786/?nav=navoa

[quote=Dreamwhere]
I'm currently having human biology course in school. We are shown many pictures of naked human beings. Soon I'll have 'deeper' sex education, with even more naked human beings shown. It would be ridiculous to try to hide these kinds of things. Humans are sexual beings and naturally lust for sex to preserve their own race. What's so bad about it?

Good for you. Nice to see that they're educating people for a change.
I see it as a step in the right direction. Don't be surprised though, if, during your class, some fundamentalist organization kicks the door in and demands that you cease.

Oh, and by the way, humans don't only lust for sex to preserve their own race (although that's certainly part of it) - it's quite enjoyable, too! (^_-)


And goddamnit, come on, breasts are just milk storages. Yes, of course, they have an use for sexual pleasure (at least for men), but I don't see why that would be a reason to hysterically try erase them from all media.

Not only for men. I've heard that breasts are sensitive to women in the same way as testicles are to guys.
So women "have a use for breasts for sexual pleasure", too. (^-^)


Now, round 2:


I'm not in the US, but I think sex is bad.

In that case, you're DOING IT WRONG! (^0^)
Seriously though, why do you think it's bad?
It's enjoyable (if done properly and, by properly, I mean in ways that are enjoyable to all parties) and it's how we're created. It's how you were MADE!

Are you an American? If not, please do not pretend you know anythign about us. When the boob was shown on TV duing the Super Bowl, a "record" 500,00 complaints came in. Whic his roughly, 1/6 of a percent of Americans. Which means 99.84% of Americans didn't see it or care enough to complain.

Of the 50 - 100 million people who watch the Super Bowl, that's less than a percent. Please do not blame the other 99% for the retardedness of that 1%.

And Americans love Sex. Girls Gone Wild? The multi billion dollar a year porn business? Please. We love sex. You people have to stop paying attention to the Vocal Fundies. They do not represent all of us.
Sorry to be so late on responding -- off thinking about things other than sex for a while.

Yes, I am an American. And I do consider American attitudes towards sex to be very unhealthy. I'm talking about the general cultural and pop culture portrayals of sex and my general experience of private American citizens expressing either a lack of sex in their lives or a lack of happiness associated with a lot of sex. Combine this with rising rates of STDs and statistics about young Americans starting their sex lives with high risk activities that they do not actually enjoy. Many people seem to be having a hard time finding a middle ground that makes them happy and keeps them healthy. Finally, tho the prudes who blew a gasket over Janet Jackson's breast are only a small number, the impact of their hysteria has been widespread and damaging to the culture. I see the core problem as being in the reaction to their complaints.

Not to put too fine a point on this, but ... bullshit! You know nothing about America or Americans, this much is obvious. :p
You're right, that's not too fine a point. If you hadn't been so rude, I might have posted some links to sources. As it is, I don't waste time talking to people who can't even be civil, let alone explain why they think I'm so wrong.

Too bad. I guess we can't be friends after all.

In that case, you're DOING IT WRONG! (^0^)
Seriously though, why do you think it's bad?
It's enjoyable (if done properly and, by properly, I mean in ways that are enjoyable to all parties) and it's how we're created. It's how you were MADE! There could be several reasons.
1] I'm a fuck up. Quite probable.
2] Religious reasons. Certainly a part of it.

I don't think sex is bad per se, but I think that life is better off without it. I'm not an anti-nudity prude, and I disassociate myself from the strange schizos that Western culture seems to have about sex.

I don't think sex is bad per se, but I think that life is better off without it. I'm not an anti-nudity prude, and I disassociate myself from the strange schizos that Western culture seems to have about sex.

You've obviously never had great sex.

I don't think sex is bad per se, but I think that life is better off without it.

how so? I know my kids lives would really suck without sex (because they would have never been born)







*no my kids don't have sex.... their parents do.....

how so? I know my kids lives would really suck without sex (because they would have never been born) Other ways of producing offspring.

Other ways of producing offspring.
yeah but they are both expensive and not very fun.

and some of them I find morally wrong.

Dude, you really have to separate the pundits, the preachers, the politicians, and the media from the people. You really need to. Yes our media does perpetuate a pro-violence/anti-sex image, yes the people on TV bitch and moan about Sex Ed in schools; yes politicians try to score brownie points by claiming "family values" and yes it is all bullshit. However, I have met too many horny old men, too many middle aged men and women with a fond and cheery disposition towards sex, too many young adults with a *ahem* excited outlook on sex, too many teenagers with a "lets fuck like weasels" outlook on sex, and too many kids "lets bang" outlook to take the whole “OMG Amer1ka is the prudez00rz” thing seriously. By the large when it comes to day to day life very, very, very few people, not even Christians, are anti-sex. Hell even Priests understand that people have sex and those that take the Bible seriously know that people are supposed to have sex. By the large everyone likes sex; people just view other people having sex differently. For instance, homosexuality DOES creep a lot of people out, young people generally think older people having sex is gross, and parents don't like to think about their kids having sex (although many simply assume that they are and mind their own business, yes even Christians.)

It really is something that almost everyone can agree on even though our media is up too it's neck in hypocrisy.


Hypocrisy is a main part, I acknowledge that. However who is representing us in America, if it isn't either the pundits, the preachers, the politicians, or the media. The intelligentsia of America are practically silent.

As far as "supposed" to have sex...I don't think humans are "supposed" to do anything. But that is a whole other issue.

And while people talk about being open about sex, very few are in the US. Ask the same people how they feel about public nudity and they will be appalled.

I lived in FL for 3 years and many days went by where I wouldn't have minded going in the buff...but alas, the law says no.

The # of people relatively open to sex in the US is low. And we perpetuate this dogma of "Sex = Bad" not just through the media, or through the politicians and churches (one in the same in my opinion), but through how sex is treated.

That's my point. So stop with this "you're bewildered by the media" crap...I rarely pay attention to the media (save as a form of morbid entertainment).

Yeah, but you fail to see my point. Christians don't say "OMG WTF SEXX00RS IS BAD, DONT HAVES IT", most view it as a completely natural and beautiful thing.

Being too sexual, however, is bad. Like sexual/pornographic scenes on TV, waaay too many sexual partners, etc.
Uh-huh....so basically, sex is good, as long as it is in the missionary position, between a man and a woman bound together for life in matrimony? Too sexual? What the heck is that? We are sexual beings...and there is an enormous stigma attached to people who are perceived as 'promiscuous' for very little reason. Even TALKING about sex in North America (because we Canuks are pretty uptight too) is blush-worthy. That's a cultural thing, not a natural 'modesty'.

Other ways of producing offspring.

Lisk...you've officially gone over board...

Even Jesus' parents had sex (he had a brother you know)...there is nothing wrong with sex...

Does it fuck up relationships for people your age? absolutely...but you'll learn to love it...

and some of them I find morally wrong.

Adopting kids is morally wrong? Now I've heard it all.

The reason sex is considered bad in the US is because of the tendency to keep making an issue out of it. It's like racism. The reason racism is such a problem is because everyone keeps pointing out how bad it is. If people stopped pointing out racism, it would cease to be an issue.

The same thing with sexuality. If people stopped making such an issue out of it, it would cease to be a problem.
That's the single most ridiculous thing I've read in weeks.

Racism is caused by people talking about how bad racism is? Like stick your fingers in your ears, and everything is better? Read my signature. It suits this argument.

It (racism, issues with sexuality) will stop being an issue not when people stop talking about it...but when people GROW UP and stop holding onto narrow minded prejudice for the sake of splitting people into groups that are more easily stereotyped. And that is going to take a hell of a lot more effort than pretending everything is rosy...with the hope that action will follow thought all on its own.

Adopting kids is morally wrong? Now I've heard it all.
I didn't say anything at all about adoption being morally wrong.
I said that I believe some of the 'other' ways of having offspring are morally wrong, not all of them, some.

you misread.

yeah but they are both expensive and not very fun.

and some of them I find morally wrong. There are ways to do it without killing embryos - they just involve needles in important places. :eek:
Lisk...you've officially gone over board...

Even Jesus' parents had sex (he had a brother you know)...there is nothing wrong with sex...

Does it fuck up relationships for people your age? absolutely...but you'll learn to love it... Yeah, he might well have had a brother. But he was produced by immaculate conception… well, that is what I believe. As I've said to you before, there does seem to be a certain pattern.

I'm not sure where you're from. I'm an American, and my wife and I regularly have sex together outside of marriage - and we've met MANY people who do the same.
Yes, but you are hardly the mainstream, and you know that. You might be open about it, but your practices are generally frowned upon...even perhaps by the people who visit you and your lovely wife. Frowned upon in public, enjoyed in private? In any case...you know what I mean. You're the 'fringe' baby...

There are ways to do it without killing embryos - they just involve needles in important places. :eek:
Yeah, he might well have had a brother. But he was produced by immaculate conception… well, that is what I believe. As I've said to you before, there does seem to be a certain pattern.
true. and I have to point out again that I said some

some is not the same as all

true. and I have to point out again that I said some

some is not the same as all Yes, I assumed you were talking about IVF. I'm unaware of any other ways to produce your own genetic offspring apart from sex.

Don't take your perception of the world from what you see on TV. The supposed outrage over the clothing malfunction on TV is "supposed" as far as I'm concerned. Most people today are growing up with a less restrictive view of sex. If it weren't for the fear of AIDS that is trumpeted every day, people would be screwing in public today.

If someone wants to be a Puritan, they can stay indoors.
You've hit on something important though...it's not just us outsiders that see US society through the lens of your media. It's your own people too. Cripes...if I were you guys, I'd turn the damn tv off, stop reading the paper, and relax a bit...the world is not as scary as you think (and as the rest of us are becoming convinced of) and more people should do as you do...see you next weekend? :D

Yes, I assumed you were talking about IVF. I'm unaware of any other ways to produce your own genetic offspring apart from sex.
yeah. I know. I was still frustrated with someone else. sorry.

*snip*
Yeah, he might well have had a brother. But he was produced by immaculate conception… well, that is what I believe. As I've said to you before, there does seem to be a certain pattern.

That may be what you believe...however, I won't until I see proof. I go for the teen pregnancy theory.

Anyway...the point, sex isn't bad. You just perceive it as such. And if you think about it, anything can be put into a light that makes it seem bad. Be it sex, or religion.

I don't think they had surrogate moms, adoption, or in vitro fertilization in mind when the bible was written.

That may be what you believe...however, I won't until I see proof. I go for the teen pregnancy theory.

Anyway...the point, sex isn't bad. You just perceive it as such. I don't think they had surrogate moms, adoption, or in vitro fertilization in mind when the bible was written. Yes, she was pregnant when she was probably a teenager - 14 at the youngest.

Sex was necessary when the Bible was written to produce children. That doesn't make it good… ach, am very confused. Head explode. :( I didn't mean it was BAD, just that it's better without it.

Once again, iEdit. What I find bad about sex is the fact that you are giving your body to someone and holding nothing back (although obviously self-sacrifice using the description loosely can be a very noble thing), but more that you are USING someone else.
Also, I acknowledge that my position might be a subconscious reaction against the oversexualisation of Western culture.

I didn't mean it was BAD, just that it's better without it.

I can agree that many of the problems in the world can be traced back to sex and that since many exhibit a complete lack of self control that things maybe would be better without it. I don't think it is at all practical though (not that you claimed it was) but apparently (I have learned lately) it is also impractical to expect people to realize the consequences of thier actions and choose to have self control to avoid unwanted circumstances.

so I really don't know what to do about it on that end, other than to try to raise my children better than I was raised.

I have a theory that a lot of the marital strife in our societies (North America) is due to this problem with sex. Honesty is essential in a successful relationship...but how can you be honest if you hide your own sexual desires from your spouse, and even from yourself? Women are socialised to be passive sexually...to be too aggressive is considered slutty, and desirable in the short term, but not really in the long term. Men are taught to pursue, as though women don't actually enjoy sex. And the truth is, many women DON'T enjoy sex. Why? Because the sex is bad. They don't know how to tell their man how to please them. And eventually, the guy gives up trying, figures his wife is frigid, and goes off to fulfill his desires elsewhere. Or visa versa. If people could just admit, yeah, sex is good, we enjoy it, and THIS would make it better...I think there would be less cheating, and less stress. How can you be mad at someone who gives you the most earth-shattering orgasms imaginable? And how can you be honest...but hide that part of yourself? You can't. So open up, don't judge, and start enjoying sex as something normal, natural, and good, instead of making it into a dirty, private little secret. Unless that's your thing:).

Yes, she was pregnant when she was probably a teenager - 14 at the youngest.

Sex was necessary when the Bible was written to produce children. That doesn't make it good… ach, am very confused. Head explode. :( I didn't mean it was BAD, just that it's better without it.

Once again, iEdit. What I find bad about sex is the fact that you are giving your body to someone and holding nothing back (although obviously self-sacrifice using the description loosely can be a very noble thing), but more that you are USING someone else.
Also, I acknowledge that my position might be a subconscious reaction against the oversexualisation of Western culture.

You are both (or all of you depending on how many) using sex for some gain. It is a mutual gain, and therefore mutual sacrifice. I don't think your reaction is subconcious as it is an attitude, not really an action or reaction. You choose this. Why you choose to view sex in such away is more than likely due to either upbringing or culture. Either way...it's learned behavior.

I have a theory that a lot of the marital strife in our societies (North America) is due to this problem with sex. Honesty is essential in a successful relationship...but how can you be honest if you hide your own sexual desires from your spouse, and even from yourself? Women are socialised to be passive sexually...to be too aggressive is considered slutty, and desirable in the short term, but not really in the long term. Men are taught to pursue, as though women don't actually enjoy sex. And the truth is, many women DON'T enjoy sex. Why? Because the sex is bad. They don't know how to tell their man how to please them. And eventually, the guy gives up trying, figures his wife is frigid, and goes off to fulfill his desires elsewhere. Or visa versa. If people could just admit, yeah, sex is good, we enjoy it, and THIS would make it better...I think there would be less cheating, and less stress. How can you be mad at someone who gives you the most earth-shattering orgasms imaginable? And how can you be honest...but hide that part of yourself? You can't. So open up, don't judge, and start enjoying sex as something normal, natural, and good, instead of making it into a dirty, private little secret. Unless that's your thing:).


Excellent points. Sinuhue...you are dead on as usual...

I have a theory that a lot of the marital strife in our societies (North America) is due to this problem with sex. Honesty is essential in a successful relationship...but how can you be honest if you hide your own sexual desires from your spouse, and even from yourself? Women are socialised to be passive sexually...to be too aggressive is considered slutty, and desirable in the short term, but not really in the long term. Men are taught to pursue, as though women don't actually enjoy sex. And the truth is, many women DON'T enjoy sex. Why? Because the sex is bad. They don't know how to tell their man how to please them. And eventually, the guy gives up trying, figures his wife is frigid, and goes off to fulfill his desires elsewhere. Or visa versa. If people could just admit, yeah, sex is good, we enjoy it, and THIS would make it better...I think there would be less cheating, and less stress. How can you be mad at someone who gives you the most earth-shattering orgasms imaginable? And how can you be honest...but hide that part of yourself? You can't. So open up, don't judge, and start enjoying sex as something normal, natural, and good, instead of making it into a dirty, private little secret. Unless that's your thing:).

I also agree. :)

I had a friend who is married and wanted something different in bed and was worried about telling her hubby. I had to say to her "if you aren't comfortable enough to talk to him about that, first you shouldn't be having sex with him, much less married him." she got so mad, I have no clue why.

You are both (or all of you depending on how many) using sex for some gain. It is a mutual gain, and therefore mutual sacrifice. I don't think your reaction is subconcious as it is an attitude, not really an action or reaction. You choose this. Why you choose to view sex in such away is more than likely due to either upbringing or culture. Either way...it's learned behavior. No, definitely not upbringing nor culture. I've never been surrounded by people in any way who are erotophobes.

I also agree. :)

I had a friend who is married and wanted something different in bed and was worried about telling her hubby. I had to say to her "if you aren't comfortable enough to talk to him about that, first you shouldn't be having sex with him, much less married him." she got so mad, I have no clue why. Okay, that's odd. She should imo trust him enough to talk about it. You really have to be honest about it… not advisable to keep quiet.

Okay, that's odd. She should imo trust him enough to talk about it. You really have to be honest about it… not advisable to keep quiet.
I know. If you are unhappy in your relationship and you don't tell your SO then it is kinda like lying, at the very least if you don't let them know what is going on you kinda don't have a right to be perpetually unhappy about it. I mean if your SO doesn't even know what is going on why do you get to be mad at them about it without giving them a chance.

I know. If you are unhappy in your relationship and you don't tell your SO then it is kinda like lying, at the very least if you don't let them know what is going on you kinda don't have a right to be perpetually unhappy about it. I mean if your SO doesn't even know what is going on why do you get to be mad at them about it without giving them a chance.Well I've been on both sides of the thing...my husband and I spent our first few years never discussing sex, just having it, and not particularly enjoying it. I was too embarrassed to talk about it, and he didn't want to pressure me into talking about something that made me uncomfortable. What a pair of idiots!

It IS like lying. And it's damaging.

Well I've been on both sides of the thing...my husband and I spent our first few years never discussing sex, just having it, and not particularly enjoying it. I was too embarrassed to talk about it, and he didn't want to pressure me into talking about something that made me uncomfortable. What a pair of idiots!

It IS like lying. And it's damaging. See, Balipo, this is why I should never get into sex at all. :)

I also agree. :)

I had a friend who is married and wanted something different in bed and was worried about telling her hubby. I had to say to her "if you aren't comfortable enough to talk to him about that, first you shouldn't be having sex with him, much less married him." she got so mad, I have no clue why.
People don't like it when you move the wool away from their eyes to show them they arn't moving because they are standing in front of a wall.

People don't like it when you move the wool away from their eyes to show them they arn't moving because they are standing in front of a wall.
never thought of it that way.

i think that some regins have to learn that if it is your body and you want to sell it then i guess thats your buisness. Do i support it? No. Do i think that pervs shouldn't be allowed to have sex with a woman/man for money? Yes! Ever one of these regins should consider these questions. :fluffle:

See, Balipo, this is why I should never get into sex at all. :)

Lisk, you missed the point. The DENYING of sexual urges that are natural and need to be discussed and tried are what the problem was. Not the sex itself...silly little man.

People don't like it when you move the wool away from their eyes to show them they arn't moving because they are standing in front of a wall.

That is like a Buddhist poem of truth...it's beautiful and holds knowledge. Nice one. :)

Lisk, you missed the point. The DENYING of sexual urges that are natural and need to be discussed and tried are what the problem was. Not the sex itself...silly little man. Yes, I am totally aware what was being discussed and that was what I replied to. :) Not so silly.

My point is this, why is the US such a prude when it comes to sex and all that goes along with it?


I don't think the U.S. is particularly prudish. Seems to me that we're surrounded by sexual images all the time, to the point where we've become rather indifferent to them. Pornography is easily available to those who want it, only child pornography is frowned upon.

I don't think the U.S. is particularly prudish. Seems to me that we're surrounded by sexual images all the time, to the point where we've become rather indifferent to them. Pornography is easily available to those who want it, only child pornography is frowned upon.

I think that sexual imagery and actual sex are two different things (in light of this discussion). Maybe the "white bread" sexual imagery is there, like J-Lo at the grammy's or even the aribrushed hottied in FHM and the like. But when someone does something like paint a picture of a woman in rapture from self-induced orgasm, this is called "smut".

Also, we can make sexual images of woman, and rarely men (except in that weird commercial i once saw that had the gayest looking man wiping counter and holding a puppy in an advert for paper towels...but I think he was only sexy to men...I digress).

Add to that the lack of frank discussion about sex in our education system (all they teach is Sex is bad, sex makes you sick or pregnant, don't do it), and this is where my concept of it being prudish comes from.

Add to that the lack of frank discussion about sex in our education system (all they teach is Sex is bad, sex makes you sick or pregnant, don't do it), and this is where my concept of it being prudish comes from.
their goal is to keep teens from having sex though
what kind of discussion would you like?


I mean I told my 4 year old when she was younger that if you stick anything in an electrical outlet that you will die. (now I know there is a good probability she wouldn't actually die but I was trying to keep her from doing it at all)

their goal is to keep teens from having sex though
what kind of discussion would you like?
Well, personally, I'd like all of these prude, unrealistic fools to finally face reality and say, "Hey, we know you're teenagers and have raging hormones, and we know that, whatever we do or say, you're going to have sex no matter what. So we might as well teach you how to do it safely and how to prevent pregnancy."

Or maybe you'd rather have a society full of completely sexually-ignorant teenagers, having sex without condoms and other prophylactics, just because people can't face the fact that teenagers are going to be teenagers and let their hormones take advantage of their emotions?

And I know someone's going to say, "but wut do u meen by sex ed, u meen liek sex posishuns lol!!!1" No...I mean telling them that:

1. Not "pulling out" in time creates problems.
B. Not wearing a condom or using other prophylactics creates problems.
iii. STDs = teh_bad, so if you're going to do it, be safe about it.

You can't stop nature's ways.

Well, personally, I'd like all of these prude, unrealistic fools to finally face reality and say, "Hey, we know you're teenagers and have raging hormones, and we know that, whatever we do or say, you're going to have sex no matter what. So we might as well teach you how to do it safely and how to prevent pregnancy."

Or maybe you'd rather have a society full of completely sexually-ignorant teenagers, having sex without condoms and other prophylactics, just because people can't face the fact that teenagers are going to be teenagers and let their hormones take advantage of their emotions?

And I know someone's going to say, "but wut do u meen by sex ed, u meen liek sex posishuns lol!!!1" No...I mean telling them that:

1. Not "pulling out" in time creates problems.
B. Not wearing a condom or using other prophylactics creates problems.
iii. STDs = teh_bad, so if you're going to do it, be safe about it.

You can't stop nature's ways.

I could agree with that type of sex ed.
I don't agree with the attitude that I hear from some
"sex is something that can't be helped, self control doesn't exist, go out and hump like bunnies because you aren't responsible for the consequences anyway you got those ragin hormones after all and sex is a need and if you don't have sex before you are married you are going to die."
not that you said any of that but I have heard similar....

I could agree with that type of sex ed.
I don't agree with the attitude that I hear from some
"sex is something that can't be helped, self control doesn't exist, go out and hump like bunnies because you aren't responsible for the consequences anyway you got those ragin hormones after all and sex is a need and if you don't have sex before you are married you are going to die."
not that you said any of that but I have heard similar....

I would think that some sort of instruction on relationships would be more helpful than the technical talk they get nowadays.

I would think that some sort of instruction on relationships would be more helpful than the technical talk they get nowadays.
I'm just curious, and I'm not even trying to be belligerent:

How would that help the incidence of teen pregnancy and disease?

their goal is to keep teens from having sex though
what kind of discussion would you like?


I mean I told my 4 year old when she was younger that if you stick anything in an electrical outlet that you will die. (now I know there is a good probability she wouldn't actually die but I was trying to keep her from doing it at all)
Yeah, but, your kid is not going to naturally develop an instinct to stick her finger into light sockets (we hope ;) ), so you're never going to have to teach her how to balance her light socket urges in order to have good relationships and maintain her health throughout her life.

The just-say-no approach to sex education is counter-productive because the sex drive exists for a reason and can't be denied. It can only be sublimated (and not very successfully, if we judge by some catholic priests). Kids who aren't given full information and a sense of control over their urges will be less able to avoid bad relationships and unsafe conditions. They will also not make good role models for their own children.

EDIT: It just occurred to me -- is telling a 4-year-old she'll die if she sticks anything into an electrical socket the best way to go? You may be creating an anxiety that will have you doing her ironing for the rest of your life. :D

I would think that some sort of instruction on relationships would be more helpful than the technical talk they get nowadays.
i would support adding that too.
I think a lot of people have sex for the wrong reasons. If they understood the ramifications maybe they would be better equiped to handle those situations.

I have run into many people on NS who think that using a condom basically deals with all the possible consequences of sex.

and I know that you and I both know that isn't true, even though we have entirely different veiws on sex in general. ;)

Yeah, but, your kid is not going to naturally develop an instinct to stick her finger into light sockets (we hope ;) ), so you're never going to have to teach her how to balance her light socket urges in order to have good relationships and maintain her health throughout her life.

The just-say-no approach to sex education is counter-productive because the sex drive exists for a reason and can't be denied. It can only be sublimated (and not very successfully, if we judge by some catholic priests). Kids who aren't given full information and a sense of control over their urges will be less able to avoid bad relationships and unsafe conditions. They will also not make good role models for their own children.
I was just pointing out that it depends on what your goals are what kind of discussion you have. I was asking Balipo because I was curious what his goals would be and how he would handle the subject.

I'm just curious, and I'm not even trying to be belligerent:

How would that help the incidence of teen pregnancy and disease?

It would go a long way to stem domestic abuse and violence. Teaching women to stay away from men who display the warning signs of abuse would help.

It would also stem teen pregnancy - because it goes beyond the condom. The girl will now think - "well, if I get pregnant as a result of this, what will happen next - especially with this guy". She may cross her legs and tell him that he's not worth the risk.

EDIT: It just occurred to me -- is telling a 4-year-old she'll die if she sticks anything into an electrical socket the best way to go? You may be creating an anxiety that will have you doing her ironing for the rest of your life. :D

yeah, my kid is a little more intelligent now though then she was when she was 1 year old and I told her that. and I am a little more intelligent too, now that I realize that anything I tell her she takes as the Gospel Truth I have been a lot more careful about how I word things.

It would go a long way to stem domestic abuse and violence. Teaching women to stay away from men who display the warning signs of abuse would help.

It would also stem teen pregnancy - because it goes beyond the condom. The girl will now think - "well, if I get pregnant as a result of this, what will happen next - especially with this guy". She may cross her legs and tell him that he's not worth the risk.
I concur. Whatever the case may be, I just feel that this country should undertake more pro-active approaches on tackling these problems.

i would support adding that too.
I think a lot of people have sex for the wrong reasons. If they understood the ramifications maybe they would be better equiped to handle those situations.

I have run into many people on NS who think that using a condom basically deals with all the possible consequences of sex.

and I know that you and I both know that isn't true, even though we have entirely different veiws on sex in general. ;)

I agree partially as well. Perhaps if there was a discussion in the sex ed classroom about relationships and the feelings that lead to sex and the serious commitment that need be involved, you get fewer HJ's in the hallways.

Just telling kids, "Inserting your penis into the vagina causes ejaculation which leads to the risk of pregnancy and Sexually Transmitted Diseases, like AIDS", isn't sufficient.

First off, you want kids to not have sex. Take a field trip to an AIDS home where people are in the last stages (kind of a scared straight). That will help them understand STD's. Before going back to school, bring them to the welfare office and the home of a 17 year old mom of two struggling on her own. Then take them to the local prison to meet dead beat dads. When we get back to school we show examples of and how to use condoms, dental dams, foam, the pill, and other contraceptives and STD prevention devices.

That will curb things a little bit. Then discuss relationships. But don't have the health teacher do it. Bring in a Sociologist or Psychologist that understands these things.

That's how I'd do sex education. Ditch the jargon and start presenting facts. Talk to kids like they are respected and already know a little. Don't "dumb things down" or over jargonize them to make them feel stupid.

Oh, and provide condoms and dental dams in both the men's room and the ladie's room. Because they will still have sex. But provide them with the safety devices.

(Not to mention that if all this was done, we'd have reason to say "You had your chance to avoid all this, now you cannot depend on the state to provide for your mistake.")

I guess all of you are from the USA, so here comes my story about sex in Europe - Denmark.

Here, we have sex education in school, in 6. grade and up to 9. grade i think. We dont have much problems with disieses and pregnency, because we are beging told about sex, how to do it, how to use protection, and about the danger. We can also buy condoms everywhere in every store - and we do it. And its fine. Here in Denmark, we all think you americans are crazy, its like if you see your son wachting porn you go "OMFG STOP IT§§" and die. I dont know if this is true or not, but most danish thinks so.

The gererally age when teens have sex fírst time is 16. I think its a fine age. And i think its becouse we are told that sex is not forbidden. When something is forbidden, its becoes exiting to do it. I think thats your problem, you tell your kids that its bad to have sex, and they think "wow it gotta be something cool when we are not allowed to do it", and there ya go.

So my advise is to be a lot more open. We got danish forums for teens where you can discuss sex, and as told, we are having sexual education on school. So we get a lot more relaxed on sex..

Xeeber (yeah a lot of misspelling - but im only 14..)

I agree partially as well. Perhaps if there was a discussion in the sex ed classroom about relationships and the feelings that lead to sex and the serious commitment that need be involved, you get fewer HJ's in the hallways.

Just telling kids, "Inserting your penis into the vagina causes ejaculation which leads to the risk of pregnancy and Sexually Transmitted Diseases, like AIDS", isn't sufficient.

First off, you want kids to not have sex. Take a field trip to an AIDS home where people are in the last stages (kind of a scared straight). That will help them understand STD's. Before going back to school, bring them to the welfare office and the home of a 17 year old mom of two struggling on her own. Then take them to the local prison to meet dead beat dads. When we get back to school we show examples of and how to use condoms, dental dams, foam, the pill, and other contraceptives and STD prevention devices.

That will curb things a little bit. Then discuss relationships. But don't have the health teacher do it. Bring in a Sociologist or Psychologist that understands these things.

That's how I'd do sex education. Ditch the jargon and start presenting facts. Talk to kids like they are respected and already know a little. Don't "dumb things down" or over jargonize them to make them feel stupid.

Oh, and provide condoms and dental dams in both the men's room and the ladie's room. Because they will still have sex. But provide them with the safety devices.

(Not to mention that if all this was done, we'd have reason to say "You had your chance to avoid all this, now you cannot depend on the state to provide for your mistake.")

I can agree with all of that.
shocking isn't it. :eek:

I guess all of you are from the USA, so here comes my story about sex in Europe - Denmark.

Here, we have sex education in school, in 6. grade and up to 9. grade i think. We dont have much problems with disieses and pregnency, because we are beging told about sex, how to do it, how to use protection, and about the danger. We can also buy condoms everywhere in every store - and we do it. And its fine. Here in Denmark, we all think you americans are crazy, its like if you see your son wachting porn you go "OMFG STOP IT§§" and die. I dont know if this is true or not, but most danish thinks so.

The gererally age when teens have sex fírst time is 16. I think its a fine age. And i think its becouse we are told that sex is not forbidden. When something is forbidden, its becoes exiting to do it. I think thats your problem, you tell your kids that its bad to have sex, and they think "wow it gotta be something cool when we are not allowed to do it", and there ya go.

So my advise is to be a lot more open. We got danish forums for teens where you can discuss sex, and as told, we are having sexual education on school. So we get a lot more relaxed on sex..

Xeeber (yeah a lot of misspelling - but im only 14..) In Britain, our "education" is the opposite of the USA's. It's patronising and condescending, assuming that we ALL are going to be screwing off like rabbits. They don't even MENTION any kind of other choices people might make. That's right, they don't even mention that there are other options.

Not that it really matters, 'cos no one takes it seriously.

In Britain, our "education" is the opposite of the USA's. It's patronising and condescending, assuming that we ALL are going to be screwing off like rabbits. They don't even MENTION any kind of other choices people might make. That's right, they don't even mention that there are other options.

Not that it really matters, 'cos no one takes it seriously.

Ummm...that's sounds about the same as the US more or less.

Ummm...that's sounds about the same as the US more or less. I thought that the majority of the USA's education was the polarised opposite.

I think that perhaps the attitude that sex is bad comes from the fact that for many, sex is bad. If you figure that most men don't last long enough for the woman to achieve orgasm (and probably lacks the attentiveness, etc), then I would bet that most women (especially those who never or rarely achieve orgasm during sex) would think that sex is bad. Just because it's bad - not because it's forbidden.

And after a while, with such lackluster performance, men would be thinking, "gee, it's got to be better than this, I mean, she just lays there". So after a while, most men would think that sex is bad.

There you have it!

I thought that the majority of the USA's education was the polarised opposite.
depends on the region you are in.
around here is abstinence only

which believe me I am all for abstinence until marriage, but I don't think it has anything to do with sex ed.....

and I don't think that anyone is really going to practice abstinence without a better reason than the health teacher said so.

I think that perhaps the attitude that sex is bad comes from the fact that for many, sex is bad. If you figure that most men don't last long enough for the woman to achieve orgasm (and probably lacks the attentiveness, etc), then I would bet that most women (especially those who never or rarely achieve orgasm during sex) would think that sex is bad. Just because it's bad - not because it's forbidden.

And after a while, with such lackluster performance, men would be thinking, "gee, it's got to be better than this, I mean, she just lays there". So after a while, most men would think that sex is bad.

There you have it!

Interesting concept. That's why I strive for giving 2 to 3 orgasms prior to my one per event. You're saying sex=bad as a performance issue versus a social issue. I could see it becoming social as woman (who have the opportunity to be more vocal in society now mare than ever) start proclaiming sex is bad because there partners suck. Good point.

I thought that the majority of the USA's education was the polarised opposite.

Not really. It's taught in health class in 5th and 10th or 11th grade by a teacher that is lowest on the totem pole. It is only a brief unit of the health class and focuses more on "don't do it, it's bad" than any practical reasoning behind the why? or how? or what?, if you catch my drift.

And similarly, US kids don't take it seriously.

depends on the region you are in.
around here is abstinence only

which believe me I am all for abstinence until marriage, but I don't think it has anything to do with sex ed.....

and I don't think that anyone is really going to practice abstinence without a better reason than the health teacher said so.

Actually...I think they'll probably go off and attempt to find any sex they can have...because the Health Teacher said not to.

I was just pointing out that it depends on what your goals are what kind of discussion you have. I was asking Balipo because I was curious what his goals would be and how he would handle the subject.
I think my elementary school had a good approach (ah, good old PS 90, NYC <sigh, sniff>).

The biology of sex -- organs, babies, hormones, STDs, etc -- was taught as part of the biology and health/hygiene programs. Related to this were weekly sex ed classes with a specialist teacher -- these classes focused on emotions, psychology, social attitudes towards sex, and especially on an open forum for students to ask questions, air fears, etc. I remember, to get us over our initial shyness about looking ignorant, the teacher had us submit written questions anonymously, which then the whole group would discuss. When kids soon realized that many of their schoolmates had similar questions, we soon got over shyness and could ask and discuss issues openly. Sometimes, we had a guest speaker in the class who would be either a psychologist or a doctor (probably a volunteer acquaintance of our teacher's).

I was lucky in that I could talk about anything with my mom, but a lot of my friends didn't feel they could talk to their parents, and they said that having this moderated peer group situation helped them a lot. I think it also helped to get perspective from people other than one's own family. I mean, you're family are not the one's you're going to have sex with (we hope!! :eek: ;) ).

Interesting concept. That's why I strive for giving 2 to 3 orgasms prior to my one per event.

Stop right there.

It's not about the orgasm. It's all about enjoying yourself and taking your time and making her happy.

If she comes once, or 20 times, it's still all about making her happy. Not about how many times she has an orgasm compared to you. Not all orgasms are the same, either. And more does not always mean better.

Ask her what she wants. And talk to her all through the time you're with her.
And listen - don't do it your way - do what she wants when she wants it.

Stop right there.

It's not about the orgasm. It's all about enjoying yourself and taking your time and making her happy.

If she comes once, or 20 times, it's still all about making her happy. Not about how many times she has an orgasm compared to you. Not all orgasms are the same, either. And more does not always mean better.

Ask her what she wants. And talk to her all through the time you're with her.
And listen - don't do it your way - do what she wants when she wants it. But then she might be worried that it's not all about you! You see?

Then we're all unhappy.

Stop right there.

It's not about the orgasm. It's all about enjoying yourself and taking your time and making her happy.

If she comes once, or 20 times, it's still all about making her happy. Not about how many times she has an orgasm compared to you. Not all orgasms are the same, either. And more does not always mean better.

Ask her what she wants. And talk to her all through the time you're with her.
And listen - don't do it your way - do what she wants when she wants it.

I guess that what I was saying was more "my relationship" specific. This is what she likes, and by performing in ways she likes, she orgasms and hence is happy. We've discussed this thoroughly. And the 2 to 3 doesn't happen everytime...it depends on mood, situation, how long it's been, whether the dog starts making weird noises (my dog will sometimes wander into the room jealous because she's been fixed), and various other factors.

In 7th grade science, my teacher got us to overcome our shyness by having us repeat the word "penis" over and over. Not a big deal now, but a pretty serious matter when you're 12. What makes the story worth telling is that while we're sitting there (all 30 or so of us) chanting "penis" repeatedly, the assistant principal/dean of discipline walks in the room. We all say "penis," he looks at us, looks at our teacher, turns around, and leaves. Needless to say, that put an end to the anatomy chants for the rest of the year.

Stop right there.

It's not about the orgasm. It's all about enjoying yourself and taking your time and making her happy.

If she comes once, or 20 times, it's still all about making her happy. Not about how many times she has an orgasm compared to you. Not all orgasms are the same, either. And more does not always mean better.

Ask her what she wants. And talk to her all through the time you're with her.
And listen - don't do it your way - do what she wants when she wants it.
I agree, with a caveat: if she enjoys having an orgasm, and it also turns you on, teaching her how to have multiple orgams and "spontaneous" orgasm ( in case you aren't familiar with the term, it means having orgasms without touching or being touched ), then that's something well worth seeking! :D

That was what I was trying to say. It was a me-specific thing and it doesn't make everyone happy.

Olara']In 7th grade science, my teacher got us to overcome our shyness by having us repeat the word "penis" over and over. Not a big deal now, but a pretty serious matter when you're 12. What makes the story worth telling is that while we're sitting there (all 30 or so of us) chanting "penis" repeatedly, the assistant principal/dean of discipline walks in the room. We all say "penis," he looks at us, looks at our teacher, turns around, and leaves. Needless to say, that put an end to the anatomy chants for the rest of the year.
LOL! Kewl. One year when one of my grandchildren was in about third or fourth grade, her classmates became fascinated ( as children often become fascinated with particular words ) with the word "weiner." It apparently got so bad, with the children constantly making halarious references to the word "weiner," that the teacher finally told them, "Let's get this straight ... there are no weiners anywhere on anyone's body!" When my grand daugher told me, I totally lost it! :D

LOL! Kewl. One year when one of my grandchildren was in about third or fourth grade, her classmates became fascinated ( as children often do ) with the word "weiner." It apparently got so bad, with the children constantly making halarious references to the word "weiner," that the teacher finally told them, "Let's get this straight ... there are no weiners anywhere on anyone's body!" When my grand daugher told me, I totally lost it! :D
I would be mad too.

My kids know the proper names for all their body parts, it isn't something bad so they tend to not make any jokes about it.

I got really mad at a babysitter once though who tried to teach my daughter to call it a 'wee wee' because calling it her vulva embarassed her. That is the dumbest thing I ever heard, I mean my kids say abdomen I am not going to make them say tummy because I am embarassed by the real name for it.

I think a lot of the sex 'taboo' is because people are uncomfortable with their own bodies.

I would be mad too.

My kids know the proper names for all their body parts, it isn't something bad so they tend to not make any jokes about it.

I got really mad at a babysitter once though who tried to teach my daughter to call it a 'wee wee' because calling it her vulva embarassed her. That is the dumbest thing I ever heard, I mean my kids say abdomen I am not going to make them say tummy because I am embarassed by the real name for it.

I think a lot of the sex 'taboo' is because people are uncomfortable with their own bodies.

True enough. I still say tummy though...because when you are little you don't seem to have a discernible abdomen...and tickling an abdomen (I have the most ticklish kids in the world) isn't as fun as tickling a tummy.

We do discuss real names though. Although, they are in the groove of referring to their armpits as tickle spots (you cannot touch or come close to their armpits...ever). But I'm sure that will pass.

True enough. I still say tummy though...because when you are little you don't seem to have a discernible abdomen...and tickling an abdomen (I have the most ticklish kids in the world) isn't as fun as tickling a tummy.

We do discuss real names though. Although, they are in the groove of referring to their armpits as tickle spots (you cannot touch or come close to their armpits...ever). But I'm sure that will pass.
oh we still say tummy too, but I was using it as an example

my kids say almost every night "yummy in my tummy" about my dinner.

Interesting concept. That's why I strive for giving 2 to 3 orgasms prior to my one per event.
Are you single? ;)

easiest way to prevent teen pregnancy & ETC
(THIS IS A JOKE DO NOT TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY)


Castrate all the males at birth, harvest their sperm once a year or so and artificialy insemenate women which they then will have to marry.


:)


(THIS IS A JOKE, CALM DOWN IF YOU ARE UNCALM)

easiest way to prevent teen pregnancy & ETC
(THIS IS A JOKE DO NOT TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY)


Castrate all the males at birth, harvest their sperm once a year or so and artificialy insemenate women which they then will have to marry.


:)


(THIS IS A JOKE, CALM DOWN IF YOU ARE UNCALM) THIS IS NOT A JOKE… WELL IT PROBABLY IS BUT ANYWAY:
How about we sterilise all males? No teenage pregnancy. Of course, you have unsterilise them at some point, which is necessary to prevent the population from decreasing.

How about we get all the 4th graders together, have them strip down, and the teacher shows them how to properly have sex in all the different ways, including condom usage?

That way, when they start screwing like rabbits, they won't have any problems, because it is all about the mechanics.

Feelings don't matter, right?

Well, that is why the attitudes are the way they are in the US. We are afraid that the more "open" society is about sex, our kids will start doing it earlier and earlier. And the next thing you know, NAMBLA will have won. And the 49 year old guy down the street will be able to marry your 8 year old son, without parental consent.

We try to keep our kids "innocent", which is not a bad thing.

And yes, we also try to keep them from seeing brains splattered all over the place as well.

Are you single? ;)

Hmmm...how to respond....

Why, are you naked? ;)

THIS IS NOT A JOKE… WELL IT PROBABLY IS BUT ANYWAY:
How about we sterilise all males? No teenage pregnancy. Of course, you have unsterilise them at some point, which is necessary to prevent the population from decreasing.

Lisk...if we do that they will be humping like bunnies because they need not worry about making babies!!! They'd be having sex on desktops in the middle of the Intelligent Design speech in biology class....the horror...

And for the record...a vasectomy is a reversible procedure.

They'd be having sex on desktops in the middle of the Intelligent Design speech in biology class....the horror...


LMAO!!!!

And for the record...a vasectomy is a reversible procedure.

If paying nearly ten thousand dollars for what took only 800 dollars to cut is "reversible".

Speaking as someone who tried to have his reversed, the odds really drop after the three year mark. It's microsurgery, and not many doctors know how to do it well enough to make vasectomy a reversible procedure for mass sterlizations.

Hmmm...how to respond....

Why, are you naked? ;)
Well, no, because I'm at work (and it's not that kind of a job ;) ). Besides, the light of the computer screen just ain't romantic enough, so you'd have to work awful hard for those 3 or 4. Under better conditions, well, let's just say, I try to give as good as I get. :D

(If you're married, btw, I'd love a tape of you explaining this exchange. heh, heh.)

sex is a powerful control device. the church has been using sex to control people for centuries.(this is partly why most of the western world is so confused and fearful about sex)coaches use sex to boost players aggression. military uses sex to make soldiers more violent. basically those in control restrict sex and make it a "negative compulsion behavior" to serve their own agendas. guilt causes people to return to church to confess their "sins." lack of sex during training followed by being teased by sexy cheerleaders causes jocks to be more aggressive during a game. the same applies to the military,which is why the supposedly equal male and female troops are kept apart. yes,it cuts down on disease and untimely pregnancies,but sex is really a relaxing distraction and stress reliever that doesnt serve those who need to be aggressive.

the reason why american society is so violent and unhappy is because of all the restrictions on sex. if people were better educated on sex(starting in K1) and most of the taboos removed(except violent rapes)then sex crime would EVENTUALLY go down(even though there might be a TEMPORARY surge in crime,disease,and pregnancy as people go nuts for awhile thanks to the long,long repression of normal behaviors)and our society would be more loving and less violent.

of course this goes against social engineering,which is why those in power wont allow us to get too liberal. sexual freedom must be sternly demanded or people will remain screwed in the head about their natural desires. those in power encourage violence and scorn affection because it serves their political purposes.

there are many good books that have been written on sexual behaviors and its impact on societies. google for it...

How about we get all the 4th graders together, have them strip down, and the teacher shows them how to properly have sex in all the different ways, including condom usage?

That way, when they start screwing like rabbits, they won't have any problems, because it is all about the mechanics.

Feelings don't matter, right?

Well, that is why the attitudes are the way they are in the US. We are afraid that the more "open" society is about sex, our kids will start doing it earlier and earlier. And the next thing you know, NAMBLA will have won. And the 49 year old guy down the street will be able to marry your 8 year old son, without parental consent.

We try to keep our kids "innocent", which is not a bad thing.

And yes, we also try to keep them from seeing brains splattered all over the place as well.

Reminds me of Bowling for Columbine. The first 2/3rds of the movie was genius, then MM just went the crazy conspriacy theory angle. This is the exact arguement for increased gun control. The reason its so bad here because we view guns as so bad. Its our own self-reinforcing of how bad guns are that createst he gun problems. If we educated our kids about guns and how they work, I'm sure they won't go out and blast each other's brains out. Because now we taught them to be responsible. I have friends who can take apart their pistol's blindfolded and put them back together. They haven't murdered me, nor are they fanatics. Guns are just another part of their lives.
Same arguement about video games. Now, people say that if people do it, we'll try it in real life. Think about it, I've played Medal of Honor, I've had no urge to join the Army. And if video games really trained people to be murders, then we should have at least 30 million murderers in ths country based merely on Halo 2 sales. Do we see an epidemic of murder? No, in my home city of New York City our murder rates have been declining for years. Its not guns, its law enforcement. We'd have much less accidental gun deaths if owners were more responsible and more education was given about guns.
Now, lets talk about the 1940's. During that period, Disney manufactured some softcore pornographic comics, showing favorite characters in a variety of sexual positions and how to do it. The problem is that our "Free Love" movements scared too many people. They went to the 1950's trying to seek a more innocent time that didnt' exist. Its all reactionary.

Well, no, because I'm at work (and it's not that kind of a job ;) ). Besides, the light of the computer screen just ain't romantic enough, so you'd have to work awful hard for those 3 or 4. Under better conditions, well, let's just say, I try to give as good as I get. :D

(If you're married, btw, I'd love a tape of you explaining this exchange. heh, heh.)

If you give as good as you get that would be an interesting exchange... ;)

And why not be naked at work? I'm sure your co-workers would appreciate it.

Add to this that the populace of the US has a teen pregnancy problem, more than likely due to our reluctance to discuss sex with our children.


The funny thing about Americans and teen pregnancy is this, Its mostly in Republican areas. I have no proof or links so feel free not to believe me, I just wanted to point out some of what I picked up. In my high school I have never seen one pregnant teen and my area is almost completely Democrat. I've seen schools in Florida, Georgia and Tennessee and I have always seen some pregnant teens. So much for those "moral values".

As to the main point of this thread I couldnt agree with you more.

The funny thing about Americans and teen pregnancy is this, Its mostly in Republican areas. I have no proof or links so feel free not to believe me, I just wanted to point out some of what I picked up. In my high school I have never seen one pregnant teen and my area is almost completely Democrat. I've seen schools in Florida, Georgia and Tennessee and I have always seen some pregnant teens. So much for those "moral values".

As to the main point of this thread I couldnt agree with you more.

It has been noted that the problem of teen pregnancy is growing in suburban population and declining in city centers. And since most suburban populations are conservative, if not republican, you are probably right.

Don't really want to make this a political argument, but as I live in a mostly republican town and region, I can answer that there are a LOT of teenage pregnancies. When I was in high school, there might have been two in the four years I was there. I have talked to friends that graduated years behind me and they could list off two dozen names of girls that got pregnant and either had an abortion or dropped out of school to have the child.

On a different note, and the true thread, I just want to add that when I was in college, I dated a girl from Spain (I am American). That woman knew what sex was about. Before really getting down and dirty, I found out that she had been in sexual relationships with both boys and girls and had learned a ton about how to please someone and how to please herself. She taught me an incredible amount of knowledge I had beforehand no idea even existed, even after reading Kama Sutra and watching Debbie Does Dallas and all that.

After we broke up, I came back to my home town and I had a few sexual relationships here, and (in all modesty) I have been told that I am now incredible in bed by those that I hadn't slept with before, and the ones I had been with wondered where in the hell I got so good.

So I'd like to thank that woman from Spain, who now lives in Germany. You've made me one very confident person, both in the sack and out of it. :fluffle:

It has been noted that the problem of teen pregnancy is growing in suburban population and declining in city centers. And since most suburban populations are conservative, if not republican, you are probably right.
sure. I used to spend my summers on my uncle's farm (which was about 30 miles from anything) or my dad's ranch (which was outstide a town that had a popualtion of 600)

there were only 3 things to do when school wasn't in session

1 go to Sonic
2 get high
3 have sex

and since I was the only one with a job and therefore the only one with money (which I wasn't going to share) everyone else picked option 3
I think it is a suburban/city issue more than a republican/democrat issue

I remember that one of these small towns around here put in a skate park and a $1.00 movie theater and the teen pregnancy rate went down. (don't have a link)

If you give as good as you get that would be an interesting exchange... ;)

And why not be naked at work? I'm sure your co-workers would appreciate it.
I said I give as good as I get. My co-workers are too annoying to get treats.

It has been noted that the problem of teen pregnancy is growing in suburban population and declining in city centers. And since most suburban populations are conservative, if not republican, you are probably right.

Here's the data. Read through it and then make your conclusions.
http://www.agi-usa.org/pubs/state_pregnancy_trends.pdf

Here's the data. Read through it and then make your conclusions.
http://www.agi-usa.org/pubs/state_pregnancy_trends.pdf

Just on the surface, it looks like Hispanics and Blacks have almost twice the teen pregnancy rate and twice the abortion rate (or more).

Are you saying that those people are mostly Republicans?

sure. I used to spend my summers on my uncle's farm (which was about 30 miles from anything) or my dad's ranch (which was outstide a town that had a popualtion of 600)

there were only 3 things to do when school wasn't in session

1 go to Sonic
2 get high
3 have sex

and since I was the only one with a job and therefore the only one with money (which I wasn't going to share) everyone else picked option 3
I think it is a suburban/city issue more than a republican/democrat issue

I remember that one of these small towns around here put in a skate park and a $1.00 movie theater and the teen pregnancy rate went down. (don't have a link)


I miss living near a Sonic. They gave good burgers...not argument about that.

But you bring up a good point. If the kids have things to occupy their time other than sex, they likely won't have it, or at least not as much. I admit that when I first became active at 17 (almost 18) we did a lot of other things other than have sex. But we did have a lot of sex. Like a lot.

But being a musician there were always shows to go to and movies to see, and yes I skated and rode Freestyle street bikes. And she was an artist so any new exhibit was a must see. So our relationship wasn't just sex. about 50/50.

I miss living near a Sonic. They gave good burgers...not argument about that.

But you bring up a good point. If the kids have things to occupy their time other than sex, they likely won't have it, or at least not as much. I admit that when I first became active at 17 (almost 18) we did a lot of other things other than have sex. But we did have a lot of sex. Like a lot.

But being a musician there were always shows to go to and movies to see, and yes I skated and rode Freestyle street bikes. And she was an artist so any new exhibit was a must see. So our relationship wasn't just sex. about 50/50.
yeah. and I am not saying that putting in a mall will stop all teen pregnancy either, but a lot of kids I knew growing up were just doing it because they were bored, maybe if they weren't so bored it wouldn't be such an issue.

Just on the surface, it looks like Hispanics and Blacks have almost twice the teen pregnancy rate and twice the abortion rate (or more).

Are you saying that those people are mostly Republicans?

I can't say whether they are or aren't. That was an interesting report. Maybe it appears the way it is because if you have 116 out of 1000 girls pregnant in NY (a democratic state) that seems less than 116 out 1000 girls in North Dakota (which is republican, and 116 is a large portion of some of the small towns there).

I guess we need to look at other factors than political affiliation.

yeah. and I am not saying that putting in a mall will stop all teen pregnancy either, but a lot of kids I knew growing up were just doing it because they were bored, maybe if they weren't so bored it wouldn't be such an issue.

I think malls are the solution to free thinking, not teen pregnancy. If it weren't for malls I could argue that kids would have less sex because they would start thinking for themselves. Not about what abercloning and filth shirt they needed to impress the opposite sex by showing how alike they are.

I think that sexual imagery and actual sex are two different things (in light of this discussion). Maybe the "white bread" sexual imagery is there, like J-Lo at the grammy's or even the aribrushed hottied in FHM and the like. But when someone does something like paint a picture of a woman in rapture from self-induced orgasm, this is called "smut".

Also, we can make sexual images of woman, and rarely men (except in that weird commercial i once saw that had the gayest looking man wiping counter and holding a puppy in an advert for paper towels...but I think he was only sexy to men...I digress).

Add to that the lack of frank discussion about sex in our education system (all they teach is Sex is bad, sex makes you sick or pregnant, don't do it), and this is where my concept of it being prudish comes from.

Are you sure we're both talking about the same country? :confused:

I think malls are the solution to free thinking, not teen pregnancy. If it weren't for malls I could argue that kids would have less sex because they would start thinking for themselves. Not about what abercloning and filth shirt they needed to impress the opposite sex by showing how alike they are.
interesting point, maybe a mall was a bad example.....

Are you sure we're both talking about the same country? :confused:

Maybe he didn't watch Sex in the City, or Desperate Housewives, or MTV, or go to school - even back in the 1970s, I had sex ed that went into detail without telling us it was dirty or bad.

The admonishment we got was "don't get pregnant" and "don't catch a disease".

Which we took to mean, "don't get caught".

Maybe he didn't watch Sex in the City, or Desperate Housewives, or MTV, or go to school - even back in the 1970s, I had sex ed that went into detail without telling us it was dirty or bad.

The admonishment we got was "don't get pregnant" and "don't catch a disease".

Which we took to mean, "don't get caught".

Same country, went to HS in the 90's after the "revised" sex ed came about. The focus was more on "don't do it, you'll get pregnant or aids" without any discussion of avoidance or prevention of disease. With the high school classes I've seen lately, it's strictly "don't do it...now let's have D.A.R.E. presentation."

Same country, went to HS in the 90's after the "revised" sex ed came about. The focus was more on "don't do it, you'll get pregnant or aids" without any discussion of avoidance or prevention of disease. With the high school classes I've seen lately, it's strictly "don't do it...now let's have D.A.R.E. presentation."

Around here, everyone gets to learn how to put a condom on a banana. Once with their hands, and once with their mouth. Explicit enough?

Lisk...if we do that they will be humping like bunnies because they need not worry about making babies!!! They'd be having sex on desktops in the middle of the Intelligent Design speech in biology class....the horror...

And for the record...a vasectomy is a reversible procedure. It's not like anybody worries anyway, is it? I mean, given that people seem quite happy to catch the lovely chlamydia…

It's not like anybody worries anyway, is it? I mean, given that people seem quite happy to catch the lovely chlamydia…

Probably because men carry it without ever knowing.

Around here, everyone gets to learn how to put a condom on a banana. Once with their hands, and once with their mouth. Explicit enough?

Why didn't we get that? That would be an excellent lesson...except for the idiots that would put a condom on the banana and move on to unprotected sex (I guarantee it would happen). :)

Probably because men carry it without ever knowing. Exactly. Many people don't worry about the diseases now, and that's not going to change soon. I would love to care less about it, but unfortunately it's a slight drain on the NHS. Something will have to be done to get around that.

Liskeinland, would you consider this soup to be bad?
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b283/jtkwon/cflavor.jpg

Liskeinland, would you consider this soup to be bad?
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b283/jtkwon/cflavor.jpg No… :confused: why would I?

I think we've veered seriously off topic.

But in general, I still think the US is prudish about sex in art and education.

Imagine if the No Child Left Behind Act builds in an ID philosophy...if we take out evolution, why not nix sex ed too?

As a high school teacher of sex education, I think it's fair to say I hear more than my share of the sexual "happenings" of youth of today. Then I go into the teacher's lounge and hear the middle-aged version. Frankly, I don't care for the religious establishments' "rules" and on-going condemnations or the hedonists' personal indulgences. My personal view, as an orthodox Christian, is that sexual behavior is a outward expression of who you see yourself to be in terms of your own relationship to whoever/whatever is your God. For me, God gave me a body as a holy vessel used for His purposes. It's reserved for the only (w)holy devoted sexual passion in my life, my husband, who shares the same walk/journey in God with me. I've been blessed having previously lived for the "gods of the world"! You can't beat it!!! Consider it...... :fluffle:

As a high school teacher of sex education, I think it's fair to say I hear more than my share of the sexual "happenings" of youth of today. Then I go into the teacher's lounge and hear the middle-aged version. Frankly, I don't care for the religious establishments' "rules" and on-going condemnations or the hedonists' personal indulgences. My personal view, as an orthodox Christian, is that sexual behavior is a outward expression of who you see yourself to be in terms of your own relationship to whoever/whatever is your God. For me, God gave me a body as a holy vessel used for His purposes. It's reserved for the only (w)holy devoted sexual passion in my life, my husband, who shares the same walk/journey in God with me. I've been blessed having previously lived for the "gods of the world"! You can't beat it!!! Consider it...... :fluffle:

Well...you made sense until that last line. You've previously lived for "the gods of the worlds"?

Well...you made sense until that last line. You've previously lived for "the gods of the worlds"?
it's kinda Christian terminology in some denominations.

there aren't any real 'gods of the worlds' it is more refering to how some let other things besides God control thier lives

ie drugs, lust, greed, ect.

it's kinda Christian terminology in some denominations.

there aren't any real 'gods of the worlds' it is more refering to how some let other things besides God control thier lives

ie drugs, lust, greed, ect.

Oh...all the fun stuff you mean?

(just kidding ;) )

Oh...all the fun stuff you mean?

(just kidding ;) )
fun in the moment sure, but not the best actions in the long run.

it's kinda Christian terminology in some denominations.

there aren't any real 'gods of the worlds' it is more refering to how some let other things besides God control thier lives

ie drugs, lust, greed, ect.
Okay, yeah, but can't we have sex ed for non-Christians, too? Some people (not you :) ) want everything to be set to their own standards without making any provision for the wider world. Is it because they want to leave the wider world with no choice but to conform to their standards?

I think this is why we have abstinence-only programs that not only promote a Christian attitude to students who may not be Christians but also fail to give accurate health information on the idea that this will encourage promiscuity. In fact, you don't have to be promiscuous to get a disease -- just careless or unlucky -- but you do need information to avoid getting or spreading diseases.

Since Christians know as well as other people that sex is a proper, natural activity that adds to a full experience of life, and that it has certain inherent risks even within marraige, would you agree that sex ed should be more about information and less about ideology?

Okay, yeah, but can't we have sex ed for non-Christians, too? Some people (not you :) ) want everything to be set to their own standards without making any provision for the wider world. Is it because they want to leave the wider world with no choice but to conform to their standards?

I think this is why we have abstinence-only programs that not only promote a Christian attitude to students who may not be Christians but also fail to give accurate health information on the idea that this will encourage promiscuity. In fact, you don't have to be promiscuous to get a disease -- just careless or unlucky -- but you do need information to avoid getting or spreading diseases.

Since Christians know as well as other people that sex is a proper, natural activity that adds to a full experience of life, and that it has certain inherent risks even within marraige, would you agree that sex ed should have be more about information and less about ideology?


To a certain extent, I believe that parents should have a larger hand in teaching their children than the government.

If you do everything through the government, you get a "one size fits all" or "winner take all" style of education.

So, if the Republicans are in charge, you get abstinence only education, and if you get Democrats in charge, you get your daughter learning how to put a condom on a banana using only her mouth (that's what they taught my daughter).

So, in order to make allowances for everyone, perhaps parents should be brought in, and given a wide variety of materials to show their children. They should be encouraged to talk about it with their children.

Since Christians know as well as other people that sex is a proper, natural activity that adds to a full experience of life, and that it has certain inherent risks even within marraige, would you agree that sex ed should be more about information and less about ideology?

you should reference my previous posts in this thred

I don't think absitnence only is sex education. Believe me there has to be some really great reasons to be abstinent or it ain't gonna work, parents should talk to kids about those reasons, teachers should teach facts.

My poor fellows, how sad it must be living in a country where sex is dirty, naughty and bad.

Sex is GOOD. Sex is about loving someone. It's a way to show your love physically. At least for me it is.

Also: Am I the only one who notes that, even though americans are allegedly more prudish/uptight about sexuality than their neighbours(I'm canadian), it's the US medias and culture who makes the best job of flaunting sexuality and transforming it into "a mass market consuption" thing rather than putting emphasis on the emotionnal ties and/or romantic dimension of sex?

So, in order to make allowances for everyone, perhaps parents should be brought in, and given a wide variety of materials to show their children. They should be encouraged to talk about it with their children.

Unfortunately, it's a sad fact that parents are less present now in their children's live than they used to be. What with both parents having a career, lots of work hours, stress and pressure and worries. Nowadays, most children are brought up more by school and TV than their own parents.

fun in the moment sure, but not the best actions in the long run.

Okay...we can go into this...

Define the negative impact of protected, safe sex in the long run? Granted, I will give that there are hurt feelings when a relationship ends and what have you, but in general you get over it. There are few long term effects that are negative.

Drugs, sure there can be negative effects for long term use. But in the short term they can be fun, as long as you know your limits.

Greed can be construed as good or bad dependent upon perspective. Greed can bring financial stability and success, something we all strive for. Within limits, it is very positive.

To a certain extent, I believe that parents should have a larger hand in teaching their children than the government.

If you do everything through the government, you get a "one size fits all" or "winner take all" style of education.

So, if the Republicans are in charge, you get abstinence only education, and if you get Democrats in charge, you get your daughter learning how to put a condom on a banana using only her mouth (that's what they taught my daughter).

So, in order to make allowances for everyone, perhaps parents should be brought in, and given a wide variety of materials to show their children. They should be encouraged to talk about it with their children.

I think educating adults is an excellent idea. But then, I also think educating teens that are already pregnant is an excellent idea.

Of course, if you had the former, there would be less requirement for the latter.

My poor fellows, how sad it must be living in a country where sex is dirty, naughty and bad.

Sex is GOOD. Sex is about loving someone. It's a way to show your love physically. At least for me it is.

Also: Am I the only one who notes that, even though americans are allegedly more prudish/uptight about sexuality than their neighbours(I'm canadian), it's the US medias and culture who makes the best job of flaunting sexuality and transforming it into "a mass market consuption" thing rather than putting emphasis on the emotionnal ties and/or romantic dimension of sex?

Interestingly enough, this made me think of something.

First, while we flirt with sexuality in the media, really it's just a tease. Unlike Canada (I live 15 mins from the Rainbow bridge into Fort Erie, CA) where sex is for sale in all but the activity. I can go up there and in 20 minutes be pleasured by a completely naked woman (or two) in a dry hump sort of way for about $20US, for $30US a real HJ, for $50US a bj, and if you're willing to spend enough, she'll ride you like a donkey. You don't get that action in the states.

Secondly, I think the reason we flaunt sex is because we want the people to think anything outside the heterosexual 1 to 1 relationship is uncommon and wrong. So we show every straight couple in america on TV and obsess when they break up. But rarely do the non-traditionals get airplay, and when they do it is either as a comedy or so obscure few are aware of it.

I've travelled extensively in my day. I've been around a time or two. I;ve noticed that in many countries sexual mores and what is or is not pornography is a lot more relaxed than here in the US.

I've also noticed that attitudes towards sex differ outside the US. Here, however, sex is seen as naughty, or bad and any deviation from the act (i.e. doing anything but attempting to procreate) is horrifying and shocking. Add to this that the populace of the US has a teen pregnancy problem, more than likely due to our reluctance to discuss sex with our children.

Art is easily slandered and said to be "pornographic" in the US as well, especially modern art and performance art.

My point is this, why is the US such a prude when it comes to sex and all that goes along with it?

Is religious fundamnetalism? A feeling that we are better than others if we make sex a bad thing?

I notice that in countries with relaxed laws regarding sex and nudity that they don't have the "sex-based" problems we have here.

Why is that? Could it be that if we had a more open discussion about sex that we would be liberated? Or perhaps if we allowed public nudity and had more exposure to a more relaxed attitude toward "naughty" stuff would things get better or worse?


We are severely repressed in the United States. I mean, even the Victorian era couldn't have been THIS repressed. I believe it is fear, coupled with our natural tendency to knee-jerk reactions in this country.

We never deal with a problem until it explodes, then we have a knee-jerk reaction and pick up the pieces.

Another problem in this country is the attitude of "out of sight, out of mind...if we don't see it, it doesn't happen" that causes us to treat only the visible symptoms of problems, and never actually address the CAUSE of problems - partly, because, addressing the CAUSE would cause us to have to change our ways and our thinking, and take us up from out of the comfortable ignorance into which we have settled, and, collectively, America does not want to do that.

It is why the War on Drugs is a monumental failure, and so will the War on Terrorism be.

Until we learn to make ourselves uncomfortable...and face certain uncomfortable truths...we will never even consider, let alone treat, the actual CAUSES of the ills we see, we will simply continue to treat the symptoms, trying to stamp out the symptoms of the problem. And that isn't gonna work.

The sex thing is just a small aspect of our entire repressed, smug, comfortable society where we refuse to believe that we bear any responsibility for the ills of society...because if we believed that we did, it would force us to change, and we're far too comfortable to want to do that.

Define the negative impact of protected, safe sex in the long run? Granted, I will give that there are hurt feelings when a relationship ends and what have you, but in general you get over it. There are few long term effects that are negative.
Drugs, sure there can be negative effects for long term use. But in the short term they can be fun, as long as you know your limits.
Greed can be construed as good or bad dependent upon perspective. Greed can bring financial stability and success, something we all strive for. Within limits, it is very positive.


there is a difference in taking things in moderation and letting them rule your life.
If everything you did was dictated by greed, your life would be pretty screwed up, same thing for drugs, or lust.

First, while we flirt with sexuality in the media, really it's just a tease. Unlike Canada (I live 15 mins from the Rainbow bridge into Fort Erie, CA) where sex is for sale in all but the activity. I can go up there and in 20 minutes be pleasured by a completely naked woman (or two) in a dry hump sort of way for about $20US, for $30US a real HJ, for $50US a bj, and if you're willing to spend enough, she'll ride you like a donkey. You don't get that action in the states.


If you're saying Canada's the only place where there is still prostitution going on, I think you're closing your eyes on what goes around in your country. It's not the world's oldest profession for nothing.

Can you tell me where exactly that sort of thing is going on in Canada?

All for the sake of accurate information, of course! :p

But seriously, what we get from Hollywood and US TV channels is more than just "flirting with sex" and "showing a married couple". Watch a Pop Star's videoclip, for gawd's sake. Some of them actually manage to scandalize me, and I tell you, I'm NOT easily scandalized.

My poor fellows, how sad it must be living in a country where sex is dirty, naughty and bad.

Sex is GOOD. Sex is about loving someone. It's a way to show your love physically. At least for me it is.

Also: Am I the only one who notes that, even though americans are allegedly more prudish/uptight about sexuality than their neighbours(I'm canadian), it's the US medias and culture who makes the best job of flaunting sexuality and transforming it into "a mass market consuption" thing rather than putting emphasis on the emotionnal ties and/or romantic dimension of sex?

that is because sex SELLS. And everything here in the States is valued only on how much money it can make someone. Nothing else matters in this society. Only money. It's a sick society that I hope collapses...and it couldn't happen soon enough to suit this pissed-off American.

there is a difference in taking things in moderation and letting them rule your life.
If everything you did was dictated by greed, your life would be pretty screwed up, same thing for drugs, or lust.

And that is why America is screwed up. Most everyone in America IS greedy, and is ruled by, and dictated by greed and selfishness. Even to the expense of their fellow human beings. The motto of America should be "I Got Mine...Fuck You!" :upyours:

that is because sex SELLS. And everything here in the States is valued only on how much money it can make someone. Nothing else matters in this society. Only money. It's a sick society that I hope collapses...and it couldn't happen soon enough to suit this pissed-off American. Woah. Careful with the blood pressure.

Is it really that consumerist in the USA? I've only been to New York for four days…

Woah. Careful with the blood pressure.

Is it really that consumerist in the USA? I've only been to New York for four days…

Yes, it is that consumerist. and those like me, who've been discriminated against, and taken advantage of, and generally left out of society for mean motives...well, we see what everyone else has and we don't, and we get pissed off. I hate this fucking country.

Yes, it is that consumerist. and those like me, who've been discriminated against, and taken advantage of, and generally left out of society for mean motives...well, we see what everyone else has and we don't, and we get pissed off. I hate this fucking country. What can I say, move to your ancestral homeland.

that is because sex SELLS. And everything here in the States is valued only on how much money it can make someone. Nothing else matters in this society. Only money. It's a sick society that I hope collapses...and it couldn't happen soon enough to suit this pissed-off American.

Why don't you move over to Canada then?

It's just like the USA, only safer, quieter, and more comfortable! Plus, we get free healthcare :D

Oh, and we can hump each other like rabbits without feeling guilty. As long as we wear condoms.

Yes, it is that consumerist. and those like me, who've been discriminated against, and taken advantage of, and generally left out of society for mean motives...well, we see what everyone else has and we don't, and we get pissed off. I hate this fucking country.
well then you got 2 options
1 leave.
2 band together with the others like you who feel that it sucks here and do something about it, besides whining on the internet all day.

btw are you in some minority I don't know about? I don't think I have been on any threds with you. I don't want to accidentally offend you or anything.

I think the Usa is such a prude place, becuse your damn free liberal "grown-up" society consider showing mass-killing and blood and everything related to pain good, and showing even a tiny little nipple is forbidden...the american society is so retarded in this way. I think.

I think the Usa is such a prude place, becuse your damn free liberal "grown-up" society consider showing mass-killing and blood and everything related to pain good, and showing even a tiny little nipple is forbidden...the american society is so retarded in this way. I think.

Even though I think this is worded poorly and pretty inflammatory, I believe there's a good point to be made.

Why is it that the american media can broadcast images of extreme violence without a second thought, yet things as innocuous as Janet Jackson's nipple or two men kissing at the Oscars stir up such a reaction?

Personnally, I don't get it. I'd rather have children see a nipple or a kiss than poeple settling their arguments with guns and baseball bats. But then again, that's just me.

you should reference my previous posts in this thred

I don't think absitnence only is sex education. Believe me there has to be some really great reasons to be abstinent or it ain't gonna work, parents should talk to kids about those reasons, teachers should teach facts.
I knew you agreed with me on that point all along :) . I was just using you to bring up the point in general.

Anyway, I wish we could talk a little more about the culture in general. Sex ed in schools is just one part/symptom (depending on your point of view). My opinion is that, in general, the extremes -- total prudes vs. anything goes libertines -- are going after each other in the arts, education, even law and politics, and essentially making everyone uncomfortable.

I knew you agreed with me on that point all along :) . I was just using you to bring up the point in general.

Anyway, I wish we could talk a little more about the culture in general. Sex ed in schools is just one part/symptom (depending on your point of view). My opinion is that, in general, the extremes -- total prudes vs. anything goes libertines -- are going after each other in the arts, education, even law and politics, and essentially making everyone uncomfortable.
me too. maybe we should start a new thred.

Even though I think this is worded poorly and pretty inflammatory, I believe there's a good point to be made.

Why is it that the american media can broadcast images of extreme violence without a second thought, yet things as innocuous as Janet Jackson's nipple or two men kissing at the Oscars stir up such a reaction?

Personnally, I don't get it. I'd rather have children see a nipple or a kiss than poeple settling their arguments with guns and baseball bats. But then again, that's just me. How about we show war Celtic-style? Bare naked people with spiked hair riding in chariots armed with spears!

Why don't you move over to Canada then?

It's just like the USA, only safer, quieter, and more comfortable! Plus, we get free healthcare :D

Oh, and we can hump each other like rabbits without feeling guilty. As long as we wear condoms.

Love to. But I hate cold weather! Besides, as long as my mom is alive, I can't do that. After she's dead, I very well might.

someone needs to start teaching me the words to "O, Cnada!" Fuck the United States.

well then you got 2 options
1 leave.
2 band together with the others like you who feel that it sucks here and do something about it, besides whining on the internet all day.

btw are you in some minority I don't know about? I don't think I have been on any threds with you. I don't want to accidentally offend you or anything.

Well, I'm part of what might be the smallest minority group in America. I don't actually expect any sympathy from you, though, not with the way your answer has been worded...so you can just go digging for yourself, and figure it out, if you are that interested...I don't plan on giving you a stick with which to beat me.

Even though I think this is worded poorly and pretty inflammatory, I believe there's a good point to be made.

Why is it that the american media can broadcast images of extreme violence without a second thought, yet things as innocuous as Janet Jackson's nipple or two men kissing at the Oscars stir up such a reaction?

Personnally, I don't get it. I'd rather have children see a nipple or a kiss than poeple settling their arguments with guns and baseball bats. But then again, that's just me.

You know...George Carlin once said something similar: "I'd rather my children watch a movie with two people making love to one another...than two people trying to KILL one another. but I'd like to take it a step further. I'd like to change the word KILL to the word FUCK...in all those old movie cliches we grew up with!"

Can you imagine..."Ok, sheriff, we're gonna fuck ya now...but we're gonna fuck ya slow!" Or "Fuck the ump, Fuck the ump, Fuck the ump!" Or..."Hey, better ease up on the clutch, Bill, you'll fuck the engine!"

:D

Well, I'm part of what might be the smallest minority group in America. I don't actually expect any sympathy from you, though, not with the way your answer has been worded...so you can just go digging for yourself, and figure it out, if you are that interested...I don't plan on giving you a stick with which to beat me.
sorry if you found my wording too harsh. I found your post kinda harsh myself though. I doubt that whatever you told me would cause me to "beat you" but if you don't feel comfortable telling me that is fine.

sorry if you found my wording too harsh. I found your post kinda harsh myself though. I doubt that whatever you told me would cause me to "beat you" but if you don't feel comfortable telling me that is fine.

I just suspect a certain lacking of sympathy or empathy or compassion in you, due to your choice of words in your original response. So I doubt you would have anything other than the insensitive reaction to what I could tell you.

But I'll give you a hint.

Look at my signature line. REALLY LOOK at it...and REALLY THINK about it, and you may discover the answer is right there.

I just suspect a certain lacking of sympathy or empathy or compassion in you, due to your choice of words in your original response. So I doubt you would have anything other than the insensitive reaction to what I could tell you.

But I'll give you a hint.

Look at my signature line. REALLY LOOK at it...and REALLY THINK about it, and you may discover the answer is right there.
I am really sorry if I gave you that impression, I tend to be a very empathetic person.

for some reason I don't see signatures on my computer, not sure how to fix it though.

edit- okay I fixed it, and I think I sorta figured it out. I am sorry if people say hateful things to you, and I am sorry if you are being discriminated against. Neither of those actions are right, whether they claim to be Chrisian or not. I am not going to say that I know how you feel because there is no way for me to truthfully say that, but I would imagine that it hurts a lot and I can be empathetic to pain, and I am sorry if people have hurt you.

If you're saying Canada's the only place where there is still prostitution going on, I think you're closing your eyes on what goes around in your country. It's not the world's oldest profession for nothing.

Can you tell me where exactly that sort of thing is going on in Canada?

All for the sake of accurate information, of course! :p

But seriously, what we get from Hollywood and US TV channels is more than just "flirting with sex" and "showing a married couple". Watch a Pop Star's videoclip, for gawd's sake. Some of them actually manage to scandalize me, and I tell you, I'm NOT easily scandalized.

Oh no, no, you missed my point. I was more saying that I'm aware Canada is less repressed than the US even though I live in a town that in mere minutes away (and will win the STANLEY CUP THIS YEAR!! GO SABRES!!...ok, I feel better now).

This sort of thing goes on nightly at the "Canadian Ballet" locations in Fort Erie, Clifton Hill, Toronto and all points between.

A pop star's video generally is meant to scandalize, and that's cable, which isn't like a primetime network showing things. Even in a pop stars video there is little more than skin and mock masturbation for the pleasure of teenage boys. No real sex.

I think the Usa is such a prude place, becuse your damn free liberal "grown-up" society consider showing mass-killing and blood and everything related to pain good, and showing even a tiny little nipple is forbidden...the american society is so retarded in this way. I think.

Right on! Of course, we could just have a laissez-faire type European state that gives out free health care as long as it complicated, like cancer or something.

All society is retarded, not just America. Here I have the freedom to call my doctor and get a check up without waiting 6 months. In Europe, for the most part, this is impossible. That's retarded.

me too. maybe we should start a new thred.

Start a new THREAD!! I'm drowning in repeated sentiments and ideas here...

All society is retarded, not just America. Here I have the freedom to call my doctor and get a check up without waiting 6 months. In Europe, for the most part, this is impossible. That's retarded. I have to point out that this is not true. I assume that you're talking about private healthcare - as far as I know, the USA doesn't have free full healthcare. Well, private healthcare is also very quick in the UK and Europe - just the national services that aren't. They still work though.

How about we show war Celtic-style? Bare naked people with spiked hair riding in chariots armed with spears!

Hmmm, bare-naked Celts with spikey hair...

*drool* :p

Hmmm, bare-naked Celts with spikey hair...

*drool* :p Cold and floppy.

Someone needs to start teaching me the words to "O, Canada!" Fuck the United States.

You know, that's the fun part: you don't have to be able to sing the national anthem to be Canadian. I personnally couldn't sing it for the life of me... Patriotism isn't so important here. Being Canadian is about being able to live in harmony with your neighbours, not waving a flag or singing an anthem.

Being Canadian is about being able to live in harmony with your neighbours, not waving a flag or singing an anthem.

Which is why I liked my stay there so much.

Start a new THREAD!! I'm drowning in repeated sentiments and ideas here...
here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=9751290&posted=1#post9751290)
it is utterly boring without you. please help.

I have to point out that this is not true. I assume that you're talking about private healthcare - as far as I know, the USA doesn't have free full healthcare. Well, private healthcare is also very quick in the UK and Europe - just the national services that aren't. They still work though.

I still say the motto of the United States should be changed to "I Got Mine, Fuck You!! :upyours:"

You know, that's the fun part: you don't have to be able to sing the national anthem to be Canadian. I personnally couldn't sing it for the life of me... Patriotism isn't so important here. Being Canadian is about being able to live in harmony with your neighbours, not waving a flag or singing an anthem.

Sounds good to me. But you'll have to teach me the lyrics to some Stompin' Tom connors songs. The only one I know is "Sudbury Saturday Night."

I have to point out that this is not true. I assume that you're talking about private healthcare - as far as I know, the USA doesn't have free full healthcare. Well, private healthcare is also very quick in the UK and Europe - just the national services that aren't. They still work though.

However, I know people in Sweden (a medically progressive nation to say the least) that report that many of the elderly die because the public health care they get doesn't care to do much for them. As most are retired and on fixed income, that is their only choice.

I have heard similar stories from the UK, France, Germany, and Denmark.

You know, that's the fun part: you don't have to be able to sing the national anthem to be Canadian. I personnally couldn't sing it for the life of me... Patriotism isn't so important here. Being Canadian is about being able to live in harmony with your neighbours, not waving a flag or singing an anthem.

I could probably sing it...but I'm a hockey fan... ;)

here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=9751290&posted=1#post9751290)
it is utterly boring without you. please help.

I've tried my best...only time will tell if the thread can survive...

(That was my best TV drama line ever!)

I've tried my best...only time will tell if the thread can survive...

(That was my best TV drama line ever!)

So I help out your thread and mine dies. Of course it could be that I started another more "enticing" thread.

So I help out your thread and mine dies. Of course it could be that I started another more "enticing" thread.
you did? where? I suck at starting threds. nobody likes them. I am going to quit :(

you did? where? I suck at starting threds. nobody likes them. I am going to quit :(

Don't quit, sweet boobs...all will be well. You do great at responding to threads. I'll help you via telegrams. :)

me too. maybe we should start a new thred.
You'll have to do it for us, because I'm either too lazy or too insanely busy to be a good thread hostess. (I can't tell whether it's because I'm busy or lazy because I know I'm too lazy, but right now I'm also insanely busy. Ack! :eek: ;) )