Nudity, americans and teen pregnancy

Recommended Videos

Irony's Acolyte

Back from the Depths
Mar 9, 2010
3,636
0
0
Well I think that the teenage pregnancy comes from the rather prudish culture that's put upon teenagers by adults. The adults make out sex and nudity to be sort of tabooish or at least something that teenagers aren't mature enough to handle (in a similar vein to alcohol). Being teenagers this just makes it a "forbidden fruit" sort of thing so they go after sex with even more vigor. The thing is since they aren't really "supposed" to be having sex (at least according to mainstream social rules), they are doing it without real interference from adults, so the teens probably aren't using protection properly or at all. Its sort of like alcohol; because its illegal for anyone under the age of 21 to drink alcohol here in the States, they due it without proper supervision and so its a lot more dangerous.

So its a combination of the "Forbidden Fruit" aspect of sex that's taught here in the US and the fact that teens aren't being properly taught how to have safe sex because they "aren't supposed to be having it". I can loosely compare it to the age of Prohibition that we had here for a while. Since people were still looking for a drink and alcohol was prohibited (in some way, I think it was illegal to sell or produce it), drinkers had to turn to illegal and more dangerous venues to get their alcohol.
 

GeorgW

ALL GLORY TO ME!
Aug 27, 2010
4,806
0
0
Lord Monocle Von Banworthy said:
GeorgW said:
Lord Monocle Von Banworthy said:
GeorgW said:
....so why does only America have this teen pregnancy problem? (It doesn't btw, UK for example is a lot worse.
The second sentence removes the need for the first. If America doesn't HAVE a severe problem (stacked against other nations) there's no reason to ask the question.

But you know what? At least the US has a birthrate of over 2.0 however it got there, so in a few hundred years IT might still exist. What do all the free-living, latex-wrapped Europeans have to say about that?
Context is required for the first part. As I continued saying, this thread is about America, so I was trying not to get off topic. I still felt like pointing out that America is not alone.

As for the birthrate, the world is overpopulated as it is. And most European countries have over 2.0 as far as I know. The countries in Scandinavia do at least, and that's where I'm from. We have the perfect population for our size according to me.
I hate that "the world is overpopulated" crap. "Overpopulated" means about as much as "overweight." It implies that somebody somewhere has the authority to declare what a proper population is. It sounds all clever to be so misanthropic until you're the one living through a population crash. Ever been in one of those Japanese villages where nobody's under 60? I have. I don't want to live in a nation or a world like that.

And you're quite wrong about the numbers. Scandinavian countries are all ranked in the 150s out of 195. VERY marginally above the EU as a whole, which would be ranked 158th if it were a country. Your population is graying and crashing, I'm sorry to say. Not as badly as Hong Kong maybe, but you're not reproducing enough to maintain your numbers.
Well, I stand corrected. But our population is increasing since we take in immigrants from overpopulated contries. So it balances out quite nicely.
Overweight is when you weigh too much to be healthy. Overpopulation is when you have too big of a population to sustain it. And I'm not just talking about basic living needs. Living space, resource import, energy consumption and environmental damage all have to be considered.
And you have to agree that a lot of areas in China, Japan and India, to name a few, are ridiculously overpopulated.
I'd simply rather have a small, but happy population than a huge and miserable one. Maybe that's just me...
This is starting to get really off topic, if you want to keep talking we can take it to PMs.
 

Mr.Mattress

Level 2 Lumberjack
Jul 17, 2009
3,645
0
0
Archangel357 said:
It's because we kicked those retarded puritans out of Europe for a reason.
Which is funny, because an entire nation in Europe was founded on what was basically Puritanical Ideals way before Puritanism started.

*looks at Switzerland*

OT: What everyone else has said: Our Puritanical Roots coupled with our Rebellious Attitude and lack of Safe Sex Ed in Sex Ed.
 

Wintermoot

New member
Aug 20, 2009
6,563
0
0
the teen pregnancy part has mainly to do with the "no boobs policy" basicly keeping kids stupid on things like sex the policy probaly has to do with the huge christian influences
 

BRex21

New member
Sep 24, 2010
582
0
0
Again, this is very far off topic but i felt compelled to respond, its a sickness

Therumancer said:
Well, see the point that I'm making is that again, you apparently aren't reading what I wrote because I addressed some of these topics in my response. One of the reasons my posts are so long is because I tend to head off what I already know are going to be common responses/disagreements. I've debated some of these subjects for years.

For example, you talk about the right to bear arms and "well, what are you going to do against a tank or supersonic jet?". You apparently missed several key points being made about both a military of non-exclusionary volunteers as another part of the checks and balances (making it difficult for the entire army to be mobilized against it's own people), and of course the simple point that by using that level of force... which is what it would require, the goverment would wind up leveling the country itself and wound up ruling nothing.

There is a massive armed revolt, to deal with the insurgents in New York the military bombards it with artillery, flies some supersonic jets over and carpet bombs, and drives tanks through the wreckage, given that going in with infantry gun to gun wouldn't liable accomplish anything.... well congrats, the goverment has stopped the insurgency in that region. Unfortunatly in doing so it has leveled one of the greatest cities and marketplaces in the world to an extent from which it's unlikely to ever recover. That incredible natural harbour that has been one of The USA's greatest assets? It's now offline and pretty much full of toxins and munitions. Your workforce? You just killed them all.

When the population is unarmed they can be kept in line with armed force fairly easily, but if the population is armed, in the case of a large scale rebellion it takes the kind of force your talking about to "win" and if you do that by the time it's over your not going to wind up with anything.


As far as riots go, again I mentioned "small groups of people". Riots are not a general rebellion, but a comparitively small portion of the population. Sure it's a lot of people in a given area, but something that can be dealt with. It's not a matter of a substantial portion of the population deciding that the goverment needs to go and deciding to bring it down, etc...
I did read it, i disagreed with it and provided alternate veiws

There is no way an armed revolt would be able to take and hold an American city. mechanized infantry and teargas could handle almost anything your standard gun owner could throw at with minimal collateral damage, no matter what a second amendment gun nut is carrying, if its legal the military will one up them, that was my point. Even gun to gun i would bet on the military being able to out snipe civilians with almost no friendly casualties.

Even with an army of "volunteers" as you put it, they can't desert, they would be thrown in jail. Not to long ago, they would have been shot, and if they did refuse they probably just wouldn't go, there are other soldiers who would probably be in favor of the conflict. If any political group put legislation in place that actually cause cities to take up arms and the ENTIRE MILITARY to desert (either the entire hierarchy or even strictly the enlisted)there would probably be grounds for, and easily the will to, impeach the president entirely without the use of guns, most likely the use of guns would only incur the wrath of the military BECAUSE its illegal. besides the difference between most countries and the US right now in terms of recruitment is that the US has lower psychological and physical requirements, although they wont take anyone who is gay... not something to really brag about.



Therumancer said:
Other points you raise were also answered within my initial post if I recall, and this is getting long enough as it is. I will say that you should do a web search for the "oil for food scandal". The program isn't what is being talked about, but the direct violation of policies that were in force hidden behind the legitimate operation of that program.
You should try doing a search in french to see if you can find it in the french media, as the point you were arguing was that the french couldn't print it. Most countries, even with strict censorship issues cant control the press in the digital age, its simply not possible without global effort and therefore the people, legal or not, have virtually the same freedom simply with the click of a mouse.
 

vento 231

New member
Dec 31, 2009
796
0
0
Teen pregnancies make teenagers fail at life, making the competition less in the working world, so I'm good with it.
 

Blemontea

New member
May 25, 2010
1,321
0
0
I love the Escapist. If i ever am having self esteem issues i can just come here to a group of people who know more about the world than a majority of the people that surround me.
OT: The only problem ive had with teen pregnancy is when people have used it to try and reel back in an old boyfriend through responsibility, or just for attention. Or sometimes its just someone spreading rumors to call the other girl a whore. IN other words im surrounded by bullshit and the only serious problem we have in Wyoming is drugs.
I agree fully with what a lot of people hear are saying "The forbidden Fruit taste the sweetest." If America taught better sex ed. and didn't make the act of sex and nudity a big deal the teen pregnancy rate would most likely go down.
 

zarsu

New member
Sep 21, 2010
32
0
0
Per
shadyh8er said:
Jumping_Over_Fences said:
If a child is surrounded by toys and you take one that they have been ignoring they start crying because that toy has now become the one they need to play with.

It is the same with sex. If it is just lying around people will ignore it, because it is not that big of a deal. You take it away and people become obsessed with it.

People always seek out what they are told is taboo. Making something out to be horrible has the opposite effect on the masses.
I was going to say something like this, but I didn't know how to word it. This is perfect.
Same here.
 

Astoria

New member
Oct 25, 2010
1,887
0
0
I'm not sure what makes France any different but there might be a scientific reason for why younger generations are interest in sex at a younger age than older. It's got something to do with people having healthier diets now or something like that. Because their bodies are getting more nutrients they grow quicker meaning they hit puberty quicker and of course puberty is when you start getting interested in all of that. I could be completly wrong but it's a theory I heard from one of my teachers.