1  2  3  Next

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/teen-mother-l ... ache=clear

No, not Texas, Edmonton. Yeehaw.

   

Oh good lord. Seriously?

Pretty much the case, yep. What's the problem? Too truthful.



Also tends to be true. I don't believe it was "bashing" as the mother took it. It's likely statistical fact and more of a warning than a bashing. Kids need to know that single parenting affects the child as much as the single parent. Scare them a bit? Let's hope so!


If the majority of parents actually parented these days, that would be a great idea. Unfortunately, reality is what it is.

   

Video of the interview:

http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/Canada/ID/2472769845/

   

   

Brilliant - bury your heads in the sand and pretend it doesn't happen.

I don't blame them for launching this complaint, this kind of 'education' belongs in the 1950s, not 2014. You don't have to encourage it, but at least tell kids about risks and how to protect themselves instead of just saying, "Don't have sex."

   

Yep. There's those great "parent taught values"!

Hence why this new way of educating is maybe not the answer.

   

What do people expect in today's society?

Seriously?

Schools get shat on if they teach too much, they get shat on if they teach too little...where is the acceptable place for schools to be?

I don't blame the schools for picking the one thing that is confirmed to work 100% of the time, and avoiding everything else like the plague.

If people want better, than society needs to make up their fucking minds...because I can guarantee that as soon as they teach about BC and alternative lifestyles, some fucknut is going to be in the news bitching about how bad that is.

   

Those are excellent values. We are made to reproduce sexually, it's our prime motivation.

For a mother to ensure her daughter gets informed about everything with respect to her sexuality and is then given responsibility and choice in the matter, instead of being told to wear a burqua, is what we have been striving for in Western society since the sexual revolution of the 60's.

And when girls are 'sleeping around', why are they condemned, but not the boys they sleep with?

   

Where is this mythical boys not condemned BS come from.

I have been out of high school for a long time...and we had bad names for man-whores back then.

In grade 10, they thought they were cool cause they got lots of tail.

In grade 11, they started to get pissed because everybody mocked them as sluts.

In grade 12, they weren't man whoring with anybody but their female counter parts because no sane girl would touch them.

Jiggalo
Man-whores
Garbage cocks
Toxic dippers
etc
etc.

   

I'd rep if I could!

   

A complete lack of it in this article, and the comments so far?

And I have been out of high school for some time, and we had no such condemnation of boys. Only the girls. And I still think it was wrong.

Back then, had a girl said "Want to . . . " , I'd have said "Here, or should we wait till after assembly?". I shouldn't condemn women for something I'd do in the blink of an eye.

   

Couldn't tell you. I can only tell you what the experiences were for my wife, my children, and myself.


Again, I couldn't tell you. All I got is what was standard while I was in school.

No boy wanted a cum dumpster, and no girl wanted a garbage cock. Both were seen as equally appalling...and equally risky.


Lol, as much as I want to say I would have taken any opportunity presented, I was from the group that was force fed nothing but fear during sex ed classes.

Sometimes I feel like I lived in a very sexually repressed generation...

   

You tell me. I don't ever remember it being it any different.

Guys are "studs" and get high fives. Women are "sluts" and "whores". That's the way it's always been.

   

Yea, no 'sex ed' classes for me. No mention of sexual reproduction at all, outside of biology class.



Too true. But someone has to start changing things that we see as wrong. I don't see a mother/father letting their children make their own (informed) mistakes as wrong.

   

Because despite all the nonsense about the sexes being 'equal' the fact remains that the ramifications of a girl sleeping around are more serious than are the ramifications of a boy sleeping around.

I know this might shock you, but girls often have babies as a result of sleeping around. Boys don't.

And those babies statistically end up as failures in life because their single-teenage-mother parents who were irresponsible in bed are consistently irresponsible as parents.

Naturally, the liberal and enlightened solution is to make taxpayer-funded abortion available to 'fix' the mistakes these girls make.

The more pragmatic and less expensive (for everyone involved) is to educate the girls on the advantages of not making a mistake in the first place.

If they wait on sex until they're older and mature enough to make informed decisions about their choices then everyone benefits.

There's nothing wrong in telling 12 and 13 year old girls to wait on sex until they're at least out of high school. If they learn from these lessons then great. If they screw up anyway then at least they were warned.

The obverse of this is to tacitly approve of underage girls having sex (usually with older boys or men) and then to be OUTRAGED!!! that some older male 'took advantage' of a young girl when, in fact, she did precisely what she'd been 'educated' to do.

In short, remove the legal consequences to young males for having underage relations with underage females and then feel free to teach whatever you want. But as long as you're going to prosecute boys/men for having relations with these girls then there's a corresponding obligation to ask the girls not to have relations with boys or men.

   

1  2  3  Next