Would you view it as a success if less teenagers started having sex?

And by teenagers, I mean people younger than 18, still in high school. People who grow up in less than ideal situations tend to have sex earlier, so maybe holding off on sex is a sign of good things in other areas of life. What do you all feel?





(i know you all hate me and think i'm an irrational prude)Would you view it as a success if less teenagers started having sex?
I think that teenagers should most absolutely hold off on sex. They're too young, in my opinion, to make the proper choices on both partners or even protection. Sometimes parents wait to talk to their children about safe sex because ';oh, they're too young'; but come to find out the teen has been having sex for a while. I encouraged both my younger cousins to at LEAST wait for sex until 18. I personally didn't start having sex until 20. But I was also raised in an oppressive religious situation. Is that more healthy or the ideal situation? No, forced religion became problems for me later on. I also agree with some of the other posters that there is no ';ideal'; situation. Both my younger cousins come from a rather well-off loving family. One waited until she was 18, the other---- well, she didn't wait.





As I always say, sex should be between consenting ADULTS, not teens.Would you view it as a success if less teenagers started having sex?
Until we can remove the urge from them, that will not happen.


Protected sex is all we can hope for. That would be an improvement.


Honey, you aren't hated. I admire your standards. Don't call yourself names.


C. :)
I don't hate you at all! I think teenagers of 14 and under defnintely should not be having sex. But...15 and up, most teenagers are full of hormones and some do mature more than others. As long as they are having protected sex, it doesn't bother me. I lost my virginity at 15 and don't regret it at all, I married my first love and lead a happy and successful life.





So although in a lot of cases it isn't a good thing, it's not always the case.
Yes. Well if they're married I wouldn't, but it's very rare for teenagers to get married these days so I'd generally say yes. I'm one of those rare people who actually believes in waiting until marriage though. What good does teenage sex really bring though? A few minutes of pleasure. What bad? Rape, attempted rape, false rape accusations, STD's, unplanned pregnancies, abortions...
yes it would be a success for the whole country...the 16 year olds ok it's a little early but who am I to talk.





I had a conversation with my little sis, she is 14. The majority of the girls she knows are already sexually active...I doubt they all are but they are all talking as such. That age keeps dropping for girls, but not so much for the guys. Do all males have ideal situations?


I don't think the situation a child growns up in makes that big of deal, unless your talking extreme cases.





A rebellious curious teen is just that nothing more....and arnt they all just that?
I would definately view it as a success. Nowdays, people treat sex like nothing. You are right, people growing up in rough families tend to have sex earlier, which may further lead them to more problems, thus continueing the circle. Holding on to sex is a sign of will power, control and responsibility, and these values are often reflected in the person's character in other areas of life as well.





Why it would be a success if teenagers started having less sex:


1)When you have sex and you are into a healthy relationship, and you are mature enough to make wise decisions, you will encounter less problems.


2)Early sex usually results in that teenager going on and having more partners later on. This increases chances of STDs.


3)If teenagers started having less sex, they would focus more of their attention in other important areas of life: eg. education, physical exercise, spirituality etc etc. This would be beneficial for the teenager, as well as the society.


4)Having sex earlier leads to a mentality that promotes the notion of sex having less value. Sex simply becomes a means to get quick pleasure. This causes problems later on in life, when love means less to you because of your demoted view of sex. This in turn results into higher divorce rates (~60%!!).





Student Doctor, D.O. - just my 2 cents
I do think it would be better if more teenagers waited but I seriously doubt that's going to happen. We can only attempt to educate them as much as possible so that when they do decide to have sex, it's safe and responsible.





I don't think you're a prude, nor do I hate you.
I only thought you were an irrational prude when you ranted against public hand holding. This is a bit more reasonable. sure. I'd rather efforts be directed towards educating kids on safe sex though, rather than just trying to tell them not to.
And those growing up in ideal situations don't have sex? Does an ';ideal'; situation even exist? I think holding off having sex is a sign of someone making a wise decision and not giving into peer pressure.
Huh?





That ';Huh?'; refers to your paragraph. If having a crappy life leads teens to have sex more early and more often, somehow preventing their having sex would NOT improve their lives. That's like saying rain gets people wet; therefore, if you keep dry it prevents the rain from falling.





I don't think it's about having or not having sex, per se.





There are a lot of girls having sex they really don't want to have, and aren't really ready to have. Less of that is all to the good.





And there are a lot of STDs due to careless sex, and sex engaged in by the ignorant; less of that would also be splendid.





And, of course, there are way too many teen pregnancies. Fewer: better on that one, too.





But I don't think there's something inherently bad about sex.





Sex itself isn't the problem. It's mistaking sex for love, sex leading to being emotionally crushed, getting diseases, getting pregnant when one isn't ready to parent. THOSE things are the problems.





Oh, are you saying that, if we saw a decrease in sexual activity among the young, would we consider that to be evidence that their lives were better?





Dunno. Maybe.





I'd think more direct evidence would be a better indication.





If you'd said fewer suicide attempts, then yes, that WOULD be a good sign.
Yeah i guess it would be a sign of more positive family life.


But then again the kids still having sex could still be using no protection. Being dumbasses.





so whether we're having sex or not:


the only thing that matters is if we're doing it on our own time and safely.





Stupidity is unchangeable no matter what life is like..


der der derrr.








hahaha sorry your not prude :]


but things like this just can't be analysed and decided upon.
In my opinion it would be a success. It will be less babies and less teenagers spreading diseases.
It seems people forget back in their own school days. Sorry but I went to a very good school and there was always talk about sex. There are reasons why movies like American Pie, Porky's etc. are popular in their times is because people relate to similar feelings at that age.





My bigger concern is why the kids are having sex and the context they have it in. Most of my friends lost their virginity to boyfriend/girlfriend, nowadays kids treat sex like playing a game of Monopoly. Do it whenever just because they are bored.





Teens will always have sex, it will never change. Heck read the papers, if the adults can't set the standard do not criticize the kids.
Thats the best time to have sex. As long as its protected.
I would but im not sure teenagers, reguardless of how much education, can be 100% aware of the implications of sex, im not sure most people realy understand its social impact until it screws them over in some way (no pun intended)
I don't think of you as a prude just because you have made your choices. Between getting them to not have sex, and getting them to be more precautious, I choose the latter. The mindset shift required for that is easier/less time consuming than what would be required to accomplish the former. Getting them to not have sex at all when they are ready to do it, may not be possible.





Edit - I don't hate anything or any person.
Uh . . . no, we don't.





I wouldn't view it as a success or a failure, but just a shift in attitudes.
The only alternative I can see in preventing teens from having sex entirely is to encourage early marriage as was commonly done in the past. Teenagers are interested in sex due to their raging hormones and telling them they should wait for another decade until marriage to have sex isn't a realistic alternative. Some teenagers will have sex anyway. What we can hope for are better contraceptives and sex education so that the teens themselves can learn to make informed decisions and not rush into something they aren't necessarily ready for.
You are right that kids raised in difficult family situations tend to have sex earlier than other kids in their group but don't get cause and effect confused. Some people are in bad situations and do wait to have sex.





Holding off on sex is an indicator of having good things in other areas in life.





Honestly, I would view it as a success if there were fewer teen pregnancies and STI cases.





I would view it as a success if there were less social pressure and if it was more a personal thing to decide whether to have sex. People feel they are ready and feel they are with the right person at different ages so I don't think there is much good putting a number down.








And why go there with ';i know you all hate me and think i'm an irrational prude'; ?? That is a lame childish whine! If someone disagrees with you, that's all it is.
No - you aren't an irrational prude. You just have questions about this stuff and that's ok.





The thing is to not pass harsh judgment on those who don't agree with you.





That being said, I think even people in the most seemingly ideal situations can be led to having sex before they are ready - and I would assume it's due to peer pressure or trying to act like an adult.


What I think is that children are having sex at way too young of an age - there are kids is middle school that have had sex, even gotten pregnant!


Usually those who start early are looking for love and for lack of a better term... in all the wrong places.
A resounding success in terms of population reduction. Preferably worldwide.