| This work is available here free, so that those who cannot afford it can still have access to it, and so that no one has to pay before they read something that might not be what they really are seeking. But if you find it meaningful and helpful and would like to contribute whatever easily affordable amount you feel it is worth, please do do. I will appreciate it. The button to the right will take you to PayPal where you can make any size donation (of 25 cents or more) you wish, using either your PayPal account or a credit card without a PayPal account. |
|
Realistic, Effective Sex Education Sex education programs (including those that extol the
virtues of abstinence) given in schools and churches seem not to make much of a
dent in the teen pregnancy or sexual participation rates. They are usually too unrealistic, plus they
fight a losing battle against the combined forces of Hollywood, Madison Avenue,
and the natural effects of teenage hormones, inexperience, ignorance, idiocy,
irresponsibility, insecurity seeking intimacy and love, and peer pressure. So in order to remedy this situation and
counter these forces, at the risk of reducing the pregnancy rate to zero (not
only among teens, but among everyone) and ending heterosexual marriage along
with the human race, I recommend the following sex education program. It will cost almost nothing to implement and
should prove nearly 100% effective. It
will foster abstinence from at least sober intercourse without preaching it. The program is in three parts: (1a) all teenage boys must
spend at least two weekend afternoons a month (for at least five hours each)
accompanying their girlfriend if they have one (or any girl, if they do not)
while she shops at a mall. On one of every
two of those weekends, they must take at least one child under the age of 4
that they have to keep with them at all times and that they are not allowed to
abandon or abuse, and whom they must take home alive and in pretty much the
condition in which they borrowed them. (1b)
All teenage girls must take their boyfriends if they have one (or any other boy
if they do not) with them while shopping at the mall. Half those trips must include children under
the age of 4 as described above. This
should represent the ghost of relationships/marriage-future. (2) The second part of the program is for girls only. They are to be truthfully taught by peers who
have had intercourse, particularly intercourse with teenage boys, just how
satisfying that is, which from reports I hear is basically “not at all”. The idea is to show girls, who are the ones normally
in charge of consensual sex (since guys are almost always willing – unless
fully discouraged by the mall requirement above), that by having intercourse
they will incur virtually all the burdens with none of the benefits while the
guys incur all the benefits with almost none of the burdens. This should encourage a bit more reluctance
on the part of the girls to submit to the 25 second inept and disappointing
experience that bestows a lifetime of responsibility on them. (3) Finally, even though this includes rudimentary math, it
should be explained to both boys and girls that the reliability rate of 99%
effectiveness that the best birth control methods (other than permanent
sterilization) claim means that potentially having sex twice a week could
result in one pregnancy a year since that would be 1 out of 104 times and thus
close to the 1% failure rate of their birth control method. This, of course will not eliminate all sexuality, but it
should drastically reduce or totally eliminate all sober consensual intercourse
involving fertile women or women who are seeking emotional intimacy more than
sex, particularly more than dissatisfying sex.
And insofar as alcohol is a known cause of consenting sex, this program
may prevent drinking in mixed company, since it would not help just to take
along a sober “designated” sexual surrogate. As to abortion as a backup form of birth control, the
following question should be asked: if every 100 times you had purely
recreational sex (i.e., sex for pleasure rather than for procreation) someone
somewhere in the world would die; and if
for every 100 recreational sex acts by other fertile people, your own life was
put at risk, would it be right for you or others to have intercourse for only
recreational purposes, particularly if there were other, far less risky ways to
have sex which would achieve physical pleasure and/or emotional intimacy?
|