Please note that new user registrations disabled at this time.

marriage vs. partnership

Anything goes... just keep it clean.
User avatar
Beldin
Posts: 3939
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2002 3:31 am
Location: Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Contact:

Post by Beldin »

Originally posted by EMINEM

Oh yeah... how long have I been married? I'm not. I'm 22, just recently graduated from university, and more in love with Aerie and Viconia than any real life females I know. :rolleyes: :(

:) No more questions, your honour !
I rest my case.

:cool:

Beldin
Proud driver and SLURRite Linkmaster of the Rolling Thunder ™

Famous Last Words:
"You can't kill me 'cause I've got magic armoraaaaargh !"
"They're only kobolds!"
So he kills kittens? Nothing to fear about that. (CM about Foul on SYM)
"Hey Beldin ! I don't like your face !"
"Nevermore."
User avatar
C Elegans
Posts: 9935
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2001 11:00 pm
Location: The space within
Contact:

Post by C Elegans »

Originally posted by EMINEM

The research findings are clear; question begging will not change the results. First came the sexual promiscuity, then came the depression, anxiety, alcohol abuse, illegal use of drugs...
Excuse me, but this is a misinterpretation of causality and correlation. If two variables are correlated and one happens before the other in time, it still does not necessarily mean than one caused the other - it is still as possible that background factors caused both. A correlations says nothing about causality, this is very important to realize.

Besides, the 1991 study you referred to didn't say anything about order at all. I have full access to all scientific journals, immediate online access to all scientific journals within the field medicine, psychiatry and psychology. Please give at least one reference to support your statement that research findings are clear in regards to causality.

In any case, no research is necessary to recognize the effects sexual activity can wreck on young, immature, and impressionable minds and hearts.
This is equal to saying "no research is necessary to have a personal opinion", and that I agree with. But to find out whether your personal opinion coincides with real events, controlled studies, ie research, is needed. You recognise negative effects of sexual activity in young people because your opinion is that it is wrong. Any observer can look at any events and make a certain interpretation of causes and effects. Such personal observations can be biased, both observer biased and selection biased.
"There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the latter ignorance." - Hippocrates
Moderator of Planescape: Torment, Diablo I & II and Dungeon Siege forums
User avatar
fable
Posts: 30676
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 12:00 pm
Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
Contact:

Post by fable »

4. The research findings are clear; question begging will not change the results. First came the sexual promiscuity, then came the depression, anxiety, alcohol abuse, illegal use of drugs...

This reminds me of DeQuincey's jibe, "If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he next comes to drinking and sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." ;)

In other words, your ordering of the events above might seem a bit arbitrarily dramatic and forced. It stands to reason that promiscuous sex could originate in a lack of self-esteem and as a result of depression and anxiety, but I find it hard to conceive of a person who would be sexually promiscuous first, and *then* depressed, as sex is a known (short-term) palliative for depression.

In the matter of substance abuse, several social workers of my acquaintance would have definitely put drugs far ahead of sex, based upon career experience: the need to support a habit through any means.

Is the ordering of the events that you've listed an observation based upon personal experience? And if so, could you post more details?
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
User avatar
C Elegans
Posts: 9935
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2001 11:00 pm
Location: The space within
Contact:

Post by C Elegans »

Originally posted by EMINEM
As to your second question... do you have a real life example of such a one?
Real life examples in the form of anecdotal evidence don't provide eny evidence, but what it demonstrates is variability - different couples live differently and marriage is not a factor in happiness or life quality. I however have plenty of such anecdotal evidence if you like to hear. Some happy, close and good couple relationships I have personal knowledge of:

- One of the profs at my dept, she's 60+, living with the same man for ages, no kids.

- One of my colleguages and former supervisor, he is 50+, been living with his partner for 22 years, they have two sons in their early 20's.

- My best friend, she's 34, been together with her partner for 8 years and they have a son of 2.

- Another friend, she's also 34, been together with her partner for 10 years, they have a daugther of 1.

- Another friend, he's 36, living with his parther for over 10 years, they have a daughter of 5.

I have plenty of more friends, colleguages and other people I know I could take as examples.

I can have a look in the Swedish statistical yearbook if you wish, but I'm pretty sure that frequency of separation in Sweden is connected to how long the couple have been together, not if they are married or living together as married.
"There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the latter ignorance." - Hippocrates
Moderator of Planescape: Torment, Diablo I & II and Dungeon Siege forums
User avatar
fable
Posts: 30676
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 12:00 pm
Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
Contact:

Post by fable »

8. Even though I'm speaking from the Biblical worldview, I think what I've been trying to express is reasonable, not to mention the traditional view held by most North Americans up until a few decades ago; that waiting for marriage to have sex is better and safer than the alternative.

I would seriously have to question the part about "the traditional view held by most North Americans up until a few decades ago." When liquor stores dissapeared during the Prohibition Era, drinking continued--in fact, it ran riot; and there's no reason to assume that sex before marriage barely existed, simply to become commonplace within the last couple of decades. Society doesn't change its spots so rapidly; some things simply are kept underground until there is a cultural agreement to allow discussion.

On the basis of both fictional and non-fictional materials I'm inclined to think that a lot of modern "issues"--such as racial xenophobia, pre-marital sex, and venereal disease were well known and major problems long before it become acceptable to discuss them in public. And if you require evidence of this, I'll be happy to post some very entertaining instances where the taboos against public acknowledgement were broken. The responses were not "What's this?" but "How dare you say such a thing in public!"
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
User avatar
Maharlika
Posts: 5991
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2001 10:00 pm
Location: Wanderlusting with my lampshade, like any decent k
Contact:

Post by Maharlika »

For me, the bottom line is...

...that in the final analysis, it will always be between the two partners involved. The length of time together will solely depend on the couple's compatibility and commitment to each other --- married or otherwise.

In the Philippines, there is no such thing as divorce (I guess because we are pre-dominantly Catholic). You can file for separation, but you cannot remarry unless your spouse dies.

I do not have access to data about my country pertinent to the discussion, but I think that there is a significant number (perhaps rising) of separation between married couples.

BTW, my parents just celebrated their 32nd anniv this March. My in-laws are going on their 30th.

Hope my 2-cents-worth on the topic helps. :)

"There is no weakness in honest sorrow... only in succumbing to depression over what cannot be changed." --- Alaundo, BG2
Brother Scribe, Keeper of the Holy Scripts of COMM


[url="http://www.gamebanshee.com/forums/speak-your-mind-16/"]Moderator, Speak Your Mind Forum[/url]
[url="http://www.gamebanshee.com/forums/speak-your-mind-16/sym-specific-rules-please-read-before-posting-14427.html"]SYM Specific Forum Rules[/url]
User avatar
frogus
Posts: 2682
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2002 3:54 pm
Location: Rock 'n Roll Highschool
Contact:

Post by frogus »

As to your second question... do you have a real life example of such a one?
Do you want me just to name a couple which is unmarried and have a loving, stable etc relationship? I'm sure you can think of one yourself.
Do you want me to give you the names of the most loving unmarried couple in the world, so we can compare them with the most loving married couple in the world? Of course that's a joke.
Do you want me to set side by side in a graph every single couple in the world and compare their love-o-meter readings? impossible.
The only way we can get anywhere is to imagine (theoretically) the same couple in two alternate universes. In one, they get married, in the other, they don't.
What changes so much in that hour-long service as to make the married couples relationship better.
No more questions, your honour !
I rest my case.
come come Beldin...for reasons above, we cannot just say 'I'm married, you're not so I know more than you.' and then discount one anothers arguments. I seriously doubt wether even you ;) know the answer to this question just because MM doesn't.
Love and Hope and Sex and Dreams are Still Surviving on the Street
User avatar
EMINEM
Posts: 891
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 10:00 pm
Contact:

Post by EMINEM »

Originally posted by C Elegans


This is equal to saying "no research is necessary to have a personal opinion", and that I agree with. But to find out whether your personal opinion coincides with real events, controlled studies, ie research, is needed. You recognise negative effects of sexual activity in young people because your opinion is that it is wrong. Any observer can look at any events and make a certain interpretation of causes and effects. Such personal observations can be biased, both observer biased and selection biased.
'Still waiting for reasons why pre-marital sex is preferable to sex within marriage. In the meantime,

1. You didn't address this point, so I'll assume you concur.

2. You also didn't address this point, so I won't comment further.

3. N/A

4. The article that referred to the 1991 study goes as follows:

"The February 1991 issue of the journal Pediatrics reported that researchers at Indiana University found that sexually active teenagers are more likely to be prone to alcohol abuse and illegal drugs, and are more likely to have trouble in school. They reported that sexually active girls were more likely to be depressed, have low self esteem, feel lonely or attempt suicide."

Now from what I can infer from this text (I have no access to online medical journals, unfortunately), the relationship between sexual promiscuity and alcohol abuse, illegal drugs, depression, low self-esteem, loneliness, and suicidal tendencies IS causal, not correlative. If you don't think so, I'd certainly appreciate it if you could locate the study and post it here on SYM, so we can find out for certain.

I think you completely missed my latter point, however. This isn't a personal opinion; having been through high school and university, I've seen enough real life examples to convince me that abstinance is preferable to pre-marital sex. I don't need research to tell me that, quite apart from substance abuse, young people who are not ready for sex but nevertheless get involved in promiscuous behavior anyway will suffer the consequences of their actions, whether it be emotional, spiritual, or physical scarring that may take years to heal, and affect their future marriage or common-law relationships.

5. You said nothing at all about "safe" sex and the false sense of security of condom use, so I won't bother to respond.

6. Nothing said about this point.

7. The point was that there is greater peace in marriage than common-law relationships. You apparently didn't dispute this.

8. I still think that sex within marriage was the dominant view held by most North Americans until the advent of the sexual revolution. And since you didn't dispute that sex within marriage is safer than sex outside of marriage, I'll end here.


@Beldin... no so fast! :) I don't think that just cuz I'm single I'm unqualified to make these judgments. To use an ancient Indian proverb, "If you want to know how water feels like, don't ask the fish!" :)
User avatar
frogus
Posts: 2682
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2002 3:54 pm
Location: Rock 'n Roll Highschool
Contact:

Post by frogus »

'Still waiting for reasons why pre-marital sex is preferable to sex within marriage.
IT'S NOT!!!!!!Come on man, read my posts...neither one is preferable which is why it is bad that people are pressured into marriage by society and the Church.
Love and Hope and Sex and Dreams are Still Surviving on the Street
User avatar
C Elegans
Posts: 9935
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2001 11:00 pm
Location: The space within
Contact:

Post by C Elegans »

Originally posted by EMINEM

1. You didn't address this point, so I'll assume you concur.

2. You also didn't address this point, so I won't comment further.

3. N/A
Who is this directed to? To Astafas, Beldin, me or us all? I hope you don't expect me to comment on points that were your replies to Astafas, Beldin or Frogus. Or is this a reply to my previous post where I addressed some questions to you that you haven't replied? :confused:

4. The article that referred to the 1991 study goes as follows:

"The February 1991 issue of the journal Pediatrics reported that researchers at Indiana University found that sexually active teenagers are more likely to be prone to alcohol abuse and illegal drugs, and are more likely to have trouble in school. They reported that sexually active girls were more likely to be depressed, have low self esteem, feel lonely or attempt suicide."

Now from what I can infer from this text (I have no access to online medical journals, unfortunately), the relationship between sexual promiscuity and alcohol abuse, illegal drugs, depression, low self-esteem, loneliness, and suicidal tendencies IS causal, not correlative. If you don't think so, I'd certainly appreciate it if you could locate the study and post it here on SYM, so we can find out for certain.
But I already commented on this 2 posts back. Did you miss that? I even quoted from the study, and pointed out the age dependency.

Unfortunately I can't post the whole article here for copyright reasons, I can only post the abstract, ie the summary.

However, you should also note that it is a misunderstanding to interpret the statement you quoted above as indicating causality - please explain to me where in the statement you see that A leads to B.
"There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the latter ignorance." - Hippocrates
Moderator of Planescape: Torment, Diablo I & II and Dungeon Siege forums
User avatar
C Elegans
Posts: 9935
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2001 11:00 pm
Location: The space within
Contact:

Post by C Elegans »

Here is the abstract. You clearly see they say nothing at all about causality, the study design is an association study, ie a correlation study, where they have used odds ratio to describe increased risk for something. This means that if they examine 1000 nonvirginal girls and 20 of them have smoked pot, and 1000 virginal girls and 2 of them have smoked pot, the nonvirgins are said to have 10 times higher risk of having smoked pot. It does not say which caused the other.

From Medline:

Pediatrics 1991 Feb;87(2):141-7 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut
Premature sexual activity as an indicator of psychosocial risk.

Orr DP, Beiter M, Ingersoll G.

Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis.

Although unprotected premature sexual activity is associated with well-defined biologic risks of sexually transmitted disease and pregnancy, the concomitant psychosocial risks are less well documented. The strength of association (odds ratio) of coital status with other risk behaviors and feelings was examined in 1504 junior high school students. Among the 12 through 16-year-old students, 63% of the boys and 36% of the girls were nonvirginal (had had intercourse at least once). The proportion of sexually experienced boys and girls increased with age. Nonvirginal boys and girls were significantly (P less than .001) more likely than their virginal cohorts to engage in other activities considered risky. The odds ratios for nonvirginal youth ranged from 3.5 for girls having used drugs other than alcohol or marijuana, to 10.4 for girls having used marijuana. Nonvirginal boys and girls were also at significantly greater risk for engaging in minor delinquent acts and having school problems. Nonvirginal girls (but not boys) were 6.3 times more likely to report having attempted suicide. The strength of associations with feelings was weaker. Nonvirginal girls were at slightly greater risk for reporting feeling lonely, feeling upset, and having difficulty sleeping. A significant proportion of the students reported sexual experience and ever use of alcohol or marijuana (45% of boys, 27% of girls). There were strong age effects so that by age 15 years, 63% of the boys and 50% of the girls reported experience with both activities. The data suggest that early sexual experience among adolescents is associated with other potentially health-endangering behaviors and that the syndrome of problem behaviors is important in this age group.
"There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the latter ignorance." - Hippocrates
Moderator of Planescape: Torment, Diablo I & II and Dungeon Siege forums
User avatar
frogus
Posts: 2682
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2002 3:54 pm
Location: Rock 'n Roll Highschool
Contact:

Post by frogus »

you didn't dispute that sex within marriage is safer than sex outside of marriage
Think about what you are saying carfully MM. I maintain that there are only three factors which affect the safety of sex: How frequently one 'has it', how many different people one has it with, and what contraception one uses. As far as I can see, saying marriage has anything to do with the safety of sex is completely ridiclulous.
The point was that there is greater peace in marriage than common-law relationships.
What is a common-law relationship?
I've seen enough real life examples to convince me that abstinance is preferable to pre-marital sex.
I refuse to believe that this is your opinion. Do you really think the world would be a better place if noone had sex? What about in a hundred years? Do you mean instaed that abstainance is better for Christians? Abstainance is better as long as only a few people do it?
They reported that sexually active girls were more likely to be depressed, have low self esteem, feel lonely or attempt suicide
I (and noone else of course) can tell which is cause and which is effect, but it seems to me (through very close experience) that depression and suicidality (real word?) are effects of conditions of the brain (deficiency in certain hormones etc) and that sexual activity is a second order effect. In my experience of depressed and suicidal people, they are willing to try anything to relieve themselves, even if a rational normal person would not think that it would do any good. Even if you and I can't see how sexual activity would relieve depression, a depressed person is willing to try it on the off chance, hoping irrationally. I however have never noticed that sexually active peole are driven to depression. I have never once heard of this happening in real life or in stats and surveys.
Love and Hope and Sex and Dreams are Still Surviving on the Street
User avatar
EMINEM
Posts: 891
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 10:00 pm
Contact:

Post by EMINEM »

Originally posted by frogus
IT'S NOT!!!!!!Come on man, read my posts...neither one is preferable which is why it is bad that people are pressured into marriage by society and the Church.
IT IS! You're entitled to your opinion, but I will be forever in complete disagreement with you on this one. On the basis of STD risks alone, terminal or otherwise, it makes sense to have sex only within the bonds of matrimony.
User avatar
C Elegans
Posts: 9935
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2001 11:00 pm
Location: The space within
Contact:

Post by C Elegans »

Here is another study by the same group who did the 1991 Pediatrics study.

Am J Dis Child 1989 Jan;143(1):86-90
Reported sexual behaviors and self-esteem among young adolescents.
Orr DP, Wilbrandt ML, Brack CJ, Rauch SP, Ingersoll GM.
Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis.

Six hundred seventy-seven adolescents in grades 7 through 9 of a blue-collar, midwestern junior high school responded to a survey of sexual behavior and self-esteem. The focus of this study was on the relationship between sexual experience and self-esteem. Fifty-five percent of the students reported having had at least one coital experience; 7% reported having intercourse about once a week. The proportion of sexually experienced adolescents increased with age; 28% of 12-year-olds, 52.7% of 13-year-olds, 60.1% of 14-year-olds, 73.6% of 15-year-olds, and 90% of 16-year-olds reported having intercourse on at least one occasion. More boys of all ages were sexually active than girls. Six percent of students had had, or were suspicious of having had, a sexually transmitted disease; 7.8% were involved in a pregnancy. The average of the self-esteem scores for girls was significantly lower than the average for boys. There was an interaction effect between gender and coital history for self-esteem. Girls who reported having had intercourse had lower self-esteem scores than those who did not. On the other hand, self-esteem of sexually experienced and inexperienced boys did not differ, nor did self-esteem of virginal boys and girls. Boys and girls with a history of sexually transmitted diseases had lower self-esteem than all others. Pregnancy, on the other hand, did not seem to affect self-esteem of the sexually experienced adolescents. This cross-sectional study does not permit determination of whether the lower average self-esteem among certain girls was antecedent to or a consequence of sexual experience.

As you can see, it can't be decided what effects came first. It's also interesting to note that apart from the kids who had a history of STD:s, only the nonvirginal girls have lower self esteem, not the boys. So either girls with low self esteem have earlier sex, or girls get lower self esteem by having sex, whereas boys do not.

An interesting note: According to the same kind of study (Youth Risk Behaviour Study), in a sample of over 4000 9-12 grade girls, 1 of 5 had experienced date violence, and controlling for other factors, there was a correlation to substance abuse and other risk behaviour. In this context, it should also be noted that in a poll (I have the ref at work, I can post it later if you wish), 50% of US boys report that they would rape a girl if they were sure no legal consequences would follow. This factor should also be taken into account when we ask ourselves why there is a correlation between certain behaviours.


JAMA 2001 Aug 1;286(5):572-9
Dating violence against adolescent girls and associated substance use, unhealthy weight control, sexual risk behavior, pregnancy, and suicidality.
Silverman JG, Raj A, Mucci LA, Hathaway JE.
Division of Public Health Practice, Harvard School of Public Health, 1552 Tremont St, Boston, MA 02120, USA.

CONTEXT: Intimate partner violence against women is a major public health concern. Research among adults has shown that younger age is a consistent risk factor for experiencing and perpetrating intimate partner violence. However, no representative epidemiologic studies of lifetime prevalence of dating violence among adolescents have been conducted. OBJECTIVE: To assess lifetime prevalence of physical and sexual violence from dating partners among adolescent girls and associations of these forms of violence with specific health risks. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Female 9th through 12th-grade students who participated in the 1997 and 1999 Massachusetts Youth Risk Behavior Surveys (n = 1977 and 2186, respectively). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Lifetime prevalence rates of physical and sexual dating violence and whether such violence is independently associated with substance use, unhealthy weight control, sexual risk behavior, pregnancy, and suicidality. RESULTS: Approximately 1 in 5 female students (20.2% in 1997 and 18.0% in 1999) reported being physically and/or sexually abused by a dating partner. After controlling for the effects of potentially confounding demographics and risk behaviors, data from both surveys indicate that physical and sexual dating violence against adolescent girls is associated with increased risk of substance use (eg, cocaine use for 1997, odds ratio [OR], 4.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.3-9.6; for 1999, OR, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.7-6.7), unhealthy weight control behaviors (eg, use of laxatives and/or vomiting [for 1997, OR, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.8-5.5; for 1999, OR, 3.7; 95% CI, 2.2-6.5]), sexual risk behaviors (eg, first intercourse before age 15 years [for 1997, OR, 8.2; 95% CI, 5.1-13.4; for 1999, OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.4-4.2]), pregnancy (for 1997, OR, 6.3; 95% CI, 3.4-11.7; for 1999, OR, 3.9; 95% CI, 1.9-7.8), and suicidality (eg, attempted suicide [for 1997, OR, 7.6; 95% CI, 4.7-12.3; for 1999, OR, 8.6; 95% CI, 5.2-14.4]). CONCLUSION: Dating violence is extremely prevalent among this population, and adolescent girls who report a history of experiencing dating violence are more likely to exhibit other serious health risk behaviors.

And another study from Pediatrics:
Pediatrics 1993 Jul;92(1):13-9
Early initiation of sex and its lack of association with risk behaviors among adolescent African-Americans.
Stanton B, Romer D, Ricardo I, Black M, Feigelman S, Galbraith J.
Department of Pediatrics, University of Maryland Medical School, Baltimore 21201.

OBJECTIVE. High rates of adolescent homicide, pregnancy, substance abuse, and sexually transmitted diseases underscore the importance of interventions designed to reduce problem behaviors. However, the definition of "problem" behavior and the association with other activities may change between youth cultures. Therefore, greater attention to defining the "problem" behaviors to be targeted will permit more effective utilization of primary vs secondary intervention strategies and identification of high-risk individuals. DESIGN. Two studies of African-American adolescents regarding sexual intercourse, school truancy, substance abuse, and drug trafficking are presented. The first study involved 57 youths (10 to 14 years of age) from a pediatric primary health center and gathered data through pile-sorting. The second study of 300 youths (9 to 15 years of age) from six public housing sites used a questionnaire administered by a "talking" computer. Both studies assessed different self-reported behaviors, feelings about engaging in specific behaviors, and perceptions of friends' behaviors. RESULTS. While 40% of subjects reported having had sex, substantially smaller proportions reported school truancy (14%), illicit drug use (2% to 6%), or drug trafficking (6%). Analyses of reported behaviors, feelings, and perceived peer norms revealed that sex was consistently depicted as forming a different domain from other problem behaviors. CONCLUSIONS. Interventions that rely on primary prevention strategies for sexual intercourse and that identify sexually active youths as at risk for problem behaviors may not be appropriate for African-American adolescents growing up in resource-depleted urban areas.

So the correlation doesn't hold for this Afro-American sample. Why is that? Black Americans are the most christian people in the world according to polls. Still, this youth sample from a black community does not show a correlation between early sex and problem behaviours.
Since Orr et al's results were not replicable in the Afro-American population, what about other populations? Other countries and cultures? Unfortunately I haven't time to go deeper in to this right now, but with a quick search I could not find any studies from other countries that demostrated the same correlations as Ingersoll's. A South Korean study reported a correlation between drug use, not having two parents, living away from parents and living in Seoul (biggest city). So far, we don't know whether the correlations Orr reports only are representative for the white US population, or if it can be generalised further.


This was actually an interesting area, if anyone wants to use the free Medline (Pubmed) to look for studies, the address is:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed

If you find something interesting, you can always click "related article" in the right corner and you'll get back abstracts of articles concerning the same area. You only get abstracs, for access to full articles one must pay.
"There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the latter ignorance." - Hippocrates
Moderator of Planescape: Torment, Diablo I & II and Dungeon Siege forums
User avatar
Nippy
Posts: 5085
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: Reading, England
Contact:

Post by Nippy »

@ Frogus, I agree with everything you are saying. The only part I have trouble with is:
Think about what you are saying carfully MM. I maintain that there are only three factors which affect the safety of sex: How frequently one 'has it', how many different people one has it with, and what contraception one uses. As far as I can see, saying marriage has anything to do with the safety of sex is completely ridiclulous.


Marriage is generally a way to keep sexual relationships to one person stopping the dangers, thats the point MM is trying to make I think. Otherwise, I back everything you say. :)
IT IS! You're entitled to your opinion, but I will be forever in complete disagreement with you on this one. On the basis of STD risks alone, terminal or otherwise, it makes sense to have sex only within the bonds of matrimony.


Eminem, I disagree with you on this. The majority of teenagers now adays are so aware of STI's that they do use contraception which stops the spreading of diease. I've been taught about them for around five years, I know what they are and how to stop them. To suggest that I lose my freedom to choose whatever sexual partner I like for you to say that I cause and spread STI's is a bit ludicrous.

If you go upto a 16 year old child in England and ask him about STI's the majority are more educated than 30 year olds because of government initiatives. Infact, there were more shared STI's and a greater risk of infection for the 30 year olds in the 1970's. Children have to be educated these days because they see news about HIV and Aids, see the stories of Syphillus, Gonnoherea, Clamedia and all other diseases that are caused and they don't want to get them.

If we talk about STI's lets talk about the different way governments are dealing with it. Our government (and the one thing I do like about this government) is adopting a good stance on this. No longer are people in trouble for underage sex, they are warned about the dangers of it. If they do have sex, then they are given free contraception in family planning clinics.

We live in a modern world Eminem. We don't have to get married to have sex and to say that matrimony will stop STI's from being spread is judgemental and ridiculous on the people who don't want to get married but have long term partners.
Perverteer Paladin
User avatar
Mr Sleep
Posts: 11273
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2000 10:00 pm
Location: Dead End Street
Contact:

Post by Mr Sleep »

*Dons Moderator Cap*

Suicide is not relevant to this discussion, could you leave it out so it does not dilute this conversation too far from it's original topic.

Also if everyone could keep calm that would be much appreciated.

*Takes off moderator cap*

@Nippy, as i stated earlier, just because one is aware and educated to the causes and effects of STD's does not mean that they avoid un-protected sex, there are figures to back up the fact that there is a large amount of unprotected sex regardless of education level.
I'd have to get drunk every night and talk about virility...And those Pink elephants I'd see.
User avatar
EMINEM
Posts: 891
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 10:00 pm
Contact:

Post by EMINEM »

Originally posted by C Elegans
Here is another study by the same group who did the 1991 Pediatrics study.
.
.
.
.
.

If you find something interesting, you can always click "related article" in the right corner and you'll get back abstracts of articles concerning the same area. You only get abstracs, for access to full articles one must pay.
Wow! This is good stuff! Thanks very much, CE. I really appreciate you taking some time off your busy schedule to put this up. Talk about food for thought. I'll let you know what I think of these abstacts as soon as find my dictionary! :)
User avatar
Nippy
Posts: 5085
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: Reading, England
Contact:

Post by Nippy »

Originally posted by Mr Sleep


@Nippy, as i stated earlier, just because one is aware and educated to the causes and effects of STD's does not mean that they avoid un-protected sex, there are figures to back up the fact that there is a large amount of unprotected sex.
Sleepy, I couldn't agree more, but these are the dangers of modern society. It's the same as living in the 'Wild West', people die of different causes, because if we didn't we would be overpopulated, we have to die somehow and some people are unlucky enough to contract STI's, others die of a bulletwound.

My point was that being more aware can generally stop the contraction of diseases. I know for a fact that everyone at my school for example, is extremely careful because we know the dangers.

We have to remember the localiastion as well, different areas have different rates of contraction due to stereotypes and a programmed nature that it doesn't matter if you use a condomn or not. Infact, some people can't even afford them at young ages and that makes a big difference.

Sleepy can I ask if these figures are from the UK and where the research was done? (I don't mean to sound like I disbelieve them, I am interested in the dispersion of the data.)
Perverteer Paladin
User avatar
C Elegans
Posts: 9935
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2001 11:00 pm
Location: The space within
Contact:

Post by C Elegans »

A little comparison between US and Sweden :D

- US: 76% say they are christian, 6% of Swedes
- Cohabitation and other forms of non-marriage relationships are much more common in Sweden
- Premarital sex in accepted in Sweden among about 95% of the population, only by 60% in the US.
- Swedish teens use contraceptions more than US teens
- Both countries have teenage populations that have similar amounts of sex at the same age, still STD:s and unwanted teenage pregnancy is much more common in the US.

MM, how do you explain this?
"There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the latter ignorance." - Hippocrates
Moderator of Planescape: Torment, Diablo I & II and Dungeon Siege forums
User avatar
Mr Sleep
Posts: 11273
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2000 10:00 pm
Location: Dead End Street
Contact:

Post by Mr Sleep »

Originally posted by Nippy
Sleepy, I couldn't agree more, but these are the dangers of modern society. It's the same as living in the 'Wild West', people die of different causes, because if we didn't we would be overpopulated, we have to die somehow and some people are unlucky enough to contract STI's, others die of a bulletwound.
That is a little cynical isn't it :) ;) However much i agree :o
We have to remember the localiastion as well, different areas have different rates of contraction due to stereotypes and a programmed nature that it doesn't matter if you use a condomn or not. Infact, some people can't even afford them at young ages and that makes a big difference.
Wasn't there a scheme to give young children Condoms that was turned down due to it seeming to endorse underage sex?
Sleepy can I ask if these figures are from the UK and where the research was done? (I don't mean to sound like I disbelieve them, I am interested in the dispersion of the data.)
The figures were from the UK and were done on the 18-30 year old "Club Culture" It is relevant to the Balerics and the holiday resorts. I can't actually remember the figures and i don't have them to hand, but i could probably find them if needs be :)
I'd have to get drunk every night and talk about virility...And those Pink elephants I'd see.
Post Reply