One in four U.S. teenage girls have STD's, study finds
By Lawrence K. Altman
Published: March 12, 2008
The first national study of four common sexually transmitted diseases among girls and young women has found that one in four are infected with at least one of the diseases, U.S. health officials reported Tuesday.
Nearly half the African-Americans in the study of teenagers ages 14 to 19 were infected with at least one of the diseases monitored in the study — human papillomavirus (HPV), chlamydia, genital herpes and trichomoniasis, a common parasite.
The 50 percent figure compared with 20 percent of white teenagers, health officials and researchers said at a news conference at a scientific meeting in Chicago.
The two most common sexually transmitted diseases, or STD's, among all the participants tested were HPV, at 18 percent, and chlamydia, at 4 percent, according to the analysis, part of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.
Each disease can be serious in its own way.......http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/03/12/healthscience/12std.php
Can we do anything about this? How do you teach kids that sex at twelve isn't a great idea?
27 comments:
Hi All,
For starters, if you don't want your children to have sex at 12, don't teach them about sex at 6!
Teaching children about sex is provocative, even if they don't quite understand it, they'll be curious about it, and prone to experimentation.
Of course if that leads them to experiment in the wrong location sexual harassment may be charged against a child who really didn't understand what the heck he was doing in the first place.
And at so young an age, he wouldn't even understand what the word ramifications means.
If you think this is a crazy scenario, I remind you that six year olds have been charged with harassment for kissing a little girl at school on the cheek.
Suspended from school, and at this point must think he's really bad, or something's wrong with him. Now that's real healthy huh?
All because some lamebrain adults think children are just small people and should learn about sex, whether they're ready or not.
In my book this is child abuse. and one wonders about some of the teachers, who fill young minds with grown-up titillations.
One might call it mental molestation. A school is not sacrosanct. The people that work there are not all above reproach.
Parents, since when do you entrust your children to be instructed by a stranger about something so intimate?
Would you appreciate it if a neighbor talked to your child about sex? That neighbor is no less a stranger than a teacher is. In fact you probably know your neighbor better.
Don't make the mistake of thinking because something is done in school and approved by school boards, that it must be right. This isn't teaching arithmetic, or spelling.
This is playing with children's minds, and absolutely irresponsible. To me it's a crime to rob children of their innocence, and steal their childhood from them.
Isn't it about time parents took their chidren back?
Pris
We have oversexed tv
We have 2 parents working
We have single mother families
We have unsupervised teens and children at loose ends for hours
We have thrown G*D out of the public arena
We don't teach our children right from wrong, or else we practice, "Do what I say, not what I do."
We have adults living together unmarried and acting out in front of their children and teens
And we expect different results? I'm just surprised that the percentages aren't higher!
"Leaders" in our society are caught in sexual sin all the time.
WHAT DO WE EXPECT?
Good morning, G*D bless and Maranatha!
tmw
Liberals have been doing everything in their powers to 'counter' the national culture for fifty years now. We can therefore choose to either fight and take back our national popular culture OR do everything in our power to instill a resistance to the popular national culture in our kids. And the best way to do the latter is in the same manner Rousseau was able to innoculate his 'imaginary' ward Emile against the evils of Parisian 'society'...
the sickening part of this - thank you bill clinton - is that girls are performing oral sex on boys because it's no longer considered sex!
this coupled with the stds, causes doctors to misdiagnose many oral diseases - they may treat the girl for strep throat, when in all reality she has a venereal disease IN HER MOUTH!
parents don't have a clue when taking their daughters to the doctor for an...ahem...sore throat...
ABSTINENCE AND EDUCATION IS THE ONLY ANSWER! DON'T LET THE STATE DO THE EDUCATING FOR YOU!
now, on to a nancanalogy - when my eldest attained her d.l., my greatest rule - because i figure most children do it - was that if she EVER had a drink at a party, she would call someone to bring her home and never get into a vehicle with someone who's been drinking.
then i would lay chp magazines open on her pillow with the most horrendous accident scenes and she'd get upset and say, "i'd never drink and drive!"
years later, my youngest sister told me that a couple of times when she was out, she'd call my sister to bring her home because she'd had a couple of wine coolers - IT WORKED!
parents - start laying photos of these diseases on the pillows of your children - see if that won't do the trick.
some of them i've seen are downright ugly - and remind them that herpes is the gift that keeps on giving - no cure.
national abstinence education association
Pris, you need to run for governor.
TMW..."what do we expect?", indeed. WHY can't our society see this? Or do they but they're too busy pursuing their own agenda, so kids be damned?
FJ....which parts of Rousseau do you agree with? or not?
nanc...thanks for the abstinance information; the idea of leaving pictures is a good one; and statistics; some of the STDs do nothing for years but silently rob a girl of the capability to have a child when she's grown up and married.. only discovered when it's too late. Well, come to think of it, marriage isn't a prerequisite anymore, is it.
WHAT has happened to American kids and can this genie be put back into that ugly little bottle and our kids stop this behavior? I don't know.
i'm with pris - children will first ask where babies come from at about the age of six - it's not that difficult to tell them WHERE they come from - they'll usually just say, "oh."
they don't get all that curious about HOW they got there in the first place until about the age of ten or eleven and sometimes later.
wait until they ask in most cases - you don't want them learning these lessons on the school bus, that's for sure!
I agree, nanc....tell a six year old about the stork and tell them about the whole zoo later!
:-)
TMW said everything I was going to. *:]
Our popular culture teaches children that sexualization is cool, that men need not treat women with respect, but rather use them and go.
Girls are taught that abstinence and responsibility are old-fashioned and no one loves a prude.
Is it then any wonder that kids are so willing to give it up?
I also find it quite telling that the higher percentage of infected children are of the 'African-American' community, particularly in inner-city environments, where marriage is scarce and a staggeringly high number of children are born out of wedlock, often to numerous fathers.
Lack of values and personal responsibility is the death of us all.
FJ....which parts of Rousseau do you agree with? or not?
I agree with all of it, provided that the ENTIRE "system" is adhered to. You can't take a Chinese Menu approach to Rousseau... two from Column A and one from Column B (another philosophy). And so it is both eminently impractical and surprisingly useful, depending upon whether one has discovered and agree's with the answer to the question... "What is a good life."
And I happen to agree with Rousseau's answer. Many do not. Especially women and those who desire complete equality between the sexes...
At first reading, the part about women sounds repressive even to me, and I'm not a feminist except in the case of equal job for equal pay. If I say any more on even THAT subject, the women here may never talk to me again...
BUT, the caveat is this, I believe: He says "What they have in common, they are equal...where they differ, they are not comparable" We differ, we two sexes (well, when there WERE only 2 sexes, now we have bi and trans, etc.!) in BODY, obviously...not comparable...in common is mental...we are equal. Still, (don't throw stones, ladies), I'm very big on women staying smart, staying up on things, but SOMEBODY in the household has to make a final decision and that should be the man. (it's a bit like Promise Keepers and they got slammed for what Rousseau got slammed for, exactly that). And I'm enormous on mothers staying home with their kids if they can$$$
Thanks, FJ...I'd rather have folks reading all the books of EMILE than any of Dr.Spock. Much more.
I also very much agree with how everyone should learn a trade, something with their hands.
Do you know he's absolutely right on 'swaddling'? They've found babies don't do well when wrapped tightly as we used to with blankets, etc.... truly!
I appreciate the information; i'd heard of this but never delved into it. z
Our popular culture teaches children that sexualization is cool, that men need not treat women with respect, but rather use them and go.
Girls are taught that abstinence and responsibility are old-fashioned and no one loves a prude.
...and that fathers are nothing more than an ATM machine....
FreeThinker says:
You can thank The Cultural Marxist Movement spearheaded by the Frankfurt School coupled with the popularization of Freudian Psychology for this.
The Frankfurters PLANNED every bit of it, and fully INTENDED to USE the advocacy of Sexual License, Perversion, Degeneracy, Self-Indulgence, and a general preoccupation with Licentiousness and Self-Destructive activities of all kinds as as an all-out attack on Western civilization. These things were MEANT to be used as WEAPONS to DESTROY Christianity, undermine Capitalism, ruin European and American Caucasian Hegemony, weaken our hold on national SOVEREIGNTY and ultimately to destroy FREEDOM, itself.
That all of this was done craftily and insidiously in the names of "Reform" and "Liberation" is the height of irony.
Most of the damage was done through the COURTS, which have long been packed with people BRAINWASHED by the Marxian teachings of the Frankfurters and their most avid disciples–––people like Saul Alinsky, Noam Chomsky, the late Susan Sontag, William Kunstler, Abbey Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, Howard Zinn, Joe Conason, and Katrina Vanden Heuvel.
Never underestimate the power of BAD IDEAS. It only takes ONE rotten apple to destroy a whole barrel full. Very sadly the USA has been contaminated by MANY.
Just as the ISLAMISTS are doing right NOW, the MARXISTS long ago used sophistry, guile, naked aggression and their perverted, demented interpretation of our Constitutionally-guaranteed freedoms against us.
You don't believe any of this happened by ACCIDENT, do you?
Cultural Marxism is a CANCER of the MIND and SPIRIT with which we were very deliberately INFECTED nearly a century ago.
It's a little late now. We cannot put the lid back in Pandora's Box, but at the very least we ought to understand how and why we have the problems we face today.
Here's a decent translation if you ever get the itch. I read it a couple of years back... and then sent away for a copy of Fenlon's "Telemachus", so as to better understand the book Rousseau had recommended that Sophie read to prepare her for meeting Emile (part of a girl's education).
The central problem in educating Emile is for his tutor to find a means to inoculate Emile against corruption by Parisian aristocratic society (& prett, but shallow, women), while at the same time introducing him into the very environment he wants him to reject. The tutor does this by instilling a 'vision' of the ideal woman, "Sophie", in Emile's young mind and makes it Emile's "mission" to find her and make her his own. And of course, none of the Parisian women are able to fulfill the pre-established 'specification'.
In a way, it's a clever application of Plato's Theory of Forms, but in an "intellectual" vice "physical" manner. It's like looking for perfect "justice" and not being satisfied when receiving "anything less".
And ditto in the education of Sophie. "Telemachus" is the "ideal male form" that Sophie has been given to meet and marry, and serves to inoculate her against the clumsy back-seat bumblings of any suitors that might inadvertently approach her...
Oh well. I've currently got a copy of Rousseau's "Julie, or the New Heloise" on my reading table. It was Rousseau's attempt at influencing Parisian Society to reform itself and adopt a more "virtuous" model. I believe he succeeded to a certain extent... for it was quite a best-seller in it's day. ;-)
Unfortunately, there were many powerful forces arrayed against Rousseau's project, and the author spent a great deal of his life trying to avoid persecution by powerful enemies (Voltaire & the French Encyclopedists). Rousseau's was a vision in competition w/that of the subsequent leaders of the French Revolution... probably a bit more "American" than "French".
btw - I guess I should state up front that Fenlon's "Telemachus" was written by Louis XV's tutor as a model for a young king to follow.
But what makes it appropos for Rousseau (and not Fenlon) is that throughout the novel, Telemachus is guided by the goddess Athena in the guise of 'Mentor'. In this manner, I believe that Rousseau was preparing "Sophie" to take "Athena's" place as Telemachus' guide once the "tutor/mentor" departed the scene in a manner that would allow her to become very well versed in the fashions of Parisian society, yet in way that would prevent the pair (and their family) from becoming corrupted by it... as she would not be the active/ decision making partner...
In this way, it's an "unequal" but perhaps more "complementary" pairing of male/female abilities.
...and FT. I know what you're saying about the Frankfurt School. I spent quite a bit of time reading Freud and Herbert Marcuse (Father of the New Left).
And I agree with you that it is based upon a mistake (the idea of Surplus Repression)... but by people with very "good" (not evil) intentions.
And you know what they say about "good intentions". It paves the road to Hell...
The New Leftists have decided to assume the mantle of Dostoyevski's Grand Inquisitor from the "Brothers Karamozov".
And all Jesus (or Socrates) could do was "kiss them" for their "good intentions" (like Judas).
I'd have to hear more about those things Parisian, those "fashions" (not meaning clothing, of course, in this sense) which Sophie would be expected to become 'well versed' in before completely understanding the point about equality, i think?
All I can say is where were all these teenaged girls that wanted to have sex when I was a teen?
;)
Okay, I'll go sit in the corner now.
Mr. B...no reason to sit in the corner. The sentiment of some teenaged good girls today is "Man, that guy I wouldn't do it with when I was seventeen was SOOOO cute, I wonder where he is NOW!"
I have it on very good authority!
Yes you would. Book V deals with the subject of Sophie's education, but it really needs to be considered in the context of the "whole", so I'd ask that you don't prejudge the entirety of Rousseau's work by the contents of Book V alone. After all, as Plato's Diotima informs Socrates in "Symposium"...
'Those who are pregnant in the body only, betake themselves to women and beget children--this is the character of their love; their offspring, as they hope, will preserve their memory and giving them the blessedness and immortality which they desire in the future. But souls which are pregnant --for there certainly are men who are more creative in their souls than in their bodies--conceive that which is proper for the soul to conceive or contain. And what are these conceptions?--wisdom and virtue in general. And such creators are poets and all artists who are deserving of the name inventor. But the greatest and fairest sort of wisdom by far is that which is concerned with the ordering of states and families, and which is called temperance and justice. And he who in youth has the seed of these implanted in him and is himself inspired, when he comes to maturity desires to beget and generate. He wanders about seeking beauty that he may beget offspring--for in deformity he will beget nothing--and naturally embraces the beautiful rather than the deformed body; above all when he finds a fair and noble and well-nurtured soul, he embraces the two in one person, and to such an one he is full of speech about virtue and the nature and pursuits of a good man; and he tries to educate him; and at the touch of the beautiful which is ever present to his memory, even when absent, he brings forth that which he had conceived long before, and in company with him tends that which he brings forth; and they are married by a far nearer tie and have a closer friendship than those who beget mortal children, for the children who are their common offspring are fairer and more immortal.
FJ. I found enough merit in the first four books that I would not write it all off for Book V. you're right.
Do you read or speak French, by the way?
No, I don't speak French. My daughter does though. She plans on spending a semester in Paris on an NYU student-exchange program (next year, I think).
Spanish is my second language. And with that background, I do a little better with Italian and Latin than French.
As it was, when I first read Emile I had a bit of difficulty distinguishing between Rouseau's Amour Propre and his Amour de Soi.
Vitam Impendere Vero -- Rousseau's motto
It's not that Rousseau had something against women. It's that he believed, as many ancients did, in a distinction between the sexes that credited certain virtues that related to courage (or action) to men and other more related to temperance (inaction/ passivity but doing the "right" or "smart" thing) to women. And so the laconic Spartan warriors were thought more courageous than the more temperate talk-everything-through democratic Athenians. And of course, the language, at the times, were full of masculine and feminine forms... dogs (masculine) and cats (feminine).
Much as the following from Plato's "Statesman"...
STRANGER: You fancy that this is all so easy: Well, let us consider these notions with reference to the opposite classes of action under which they fall. When we praise quickness and energy and acuteness, whether of mind or body or sound, we express our praise of the quality which we admire by one word, and that one word is manliness or courage.
YOUNG SOCRATES: How?
STRANGER: We speak of an action as energetic and brave, quick and manly, and vigorous too; and when we apply the name of which I speak as the common attribute of all these natures, we certainly praise them.
YOUNG SOCRATES: True.
STRANGER: And do we not often praise the quiet strain of action also?
YOUNG SOCRATES: To be sure.
STRANGER: And do we not then say the opposite of what we said of the other?
YOUNG SOCRATES: How do you mean?
STRANGER: We exclaim How calm! How temperate! in admiration of the slow and quiet working of the intellect, and of steadiness and gentleness in action, of smoothness and depth of voice, and of all rhythmical movement and of music in general, when these have a proper solemnity. Of all such actions we predicate not courage, but a name indicative of order.
YOUNG SOCRATES: Very true.
STRANGER: But when, on the other hand, either of these is out of place, the names of either are changed into terms of censure.
YOUNG SOCRATES: How so?
STRANGER: Too great sharpness or quickness or hardness is termed violence or madness; too great slowness or gentleness is called cowardice or sluggishness; and we may observe, that for the most part these qualities, and the temperance and manliness of the opposite characters, are arrayed as enemies on opposite sides, and do not mingle with one another in their respective actions; and if we pursue the enquiry, we shall find that men who have these different qualities of mind differ from one another.
YOUNG SOCRATES: In what respect?
STRANGER: In respect of all the qualities which I mentioned, and very likely of many others. According to their respective affinities to either class of actions they distribute praise and blame,--praise to the actions which are akin to their own, blame to those of the opposite party--and out of this many quarrels and occasions of quarrel arise among them.
YOUNG SOCRATES: True.
...and so one also finds a certain part of "pride" the is praiseworthy and another blameworthy in Rousseau's Amour propre/ amour de soi distinction.
Fj...well, I don't consider myself that old, but I'm with Rousseau and the ancients re: women and men, I have to say. Sure, there are both types in both sexes, but generally? Things work better in a society when sorted out as as Rousseau and Socrates do.
Courage, great courage, can be had by man and woman; temperate and warrior-like. I know women who've had to be warriors in their lives.
Still....we could do with more thinking like Rousseau and a return to his thinking. I blame women for the problems we have today....for emasculating men in 100 ways every day. It upsets the kind of society we were meant to have.
Tell me if you like; you have a daughter at NYU. Is she now more politically liberal after the experience there? And tell her, she will LOVE Paris. Every young woman should do a semester in Paris..even if she's not in school. She'll get quite an education. Do you know I lived there for four years? We returned five years ago..it was wrenching to come back. And, you'll find no bigger patriot of America than I. still......every minute was beautiful, every step of a walk, every bite, every sip. Beautiful.
More liberal? If I had to go by the texts she's read, then yes... but I don't think it's impacted her judgement. I'd like to think she's been "inoculated" against the extremes of liberalism. ;-)
And yes, I can tell from your av that you're still a bit of a fancophile. I spent a few of my younger years in Madrid and Caracas... an AF brat. And yes, that's probably where my love of country originated.
FJ, It's funny about having lived abroad as an adult and patriotism for America. Many conservatives, even friends, have been rough on me for saying the slightest good thing about France or Germany. I wonder that we can't love HERE while liking THERE very much...
Living abroad made me realize people are people, whether they're American or European. Good, bad, and indifferent, we've all got them all. My patriotism SURE didn't flag (good one, huh?!!:-)) because I like some Europeans! I think it became more solid and real; I appreciate this country more now, though I adored so much about Europe.
As for your daughter, I'm glad to hear that because we know so many instances where solid conservative parents have raised flaming liberals. One elderly couple we know have 6 children and every single one is an unthinking, knee jerk liberal because of college, though they were taught great values, the evils of socialism, etc. It must be very difficult to fight the constant indoctrination.
On the other hand, a nephew of mine attended Columbia U until 3 years ago, when he graduated, and he said he and his friends sat in class rolling their eyes at the unbelievable indoctrination...it made them see how dishonest profs were who had to get their personal beliefs in above all else and they resented having to form their papers around the prof's beliefs, too.
It was eye-opening for Tom and he's become a more solid conservative because of it.
Post a Comment