<p>lol. Amen. Since I went solo in my law practice after my son was born and the divorce, I also know that men can bond with the pediatrician (and nurses), lunchroom staff (I volunteered and worked one day 3 weeks a month on the cafeteria line in HS), the volunteer SAH moms, the play-date kids and the after football games chaperones and the folks at the emergency room. Add in the TKD instructor and the hair cut stylist.</p>
<p>You can take a shift of carpool, drive your kids to events(I confess this gets OLD after a while) and explain to your son about a corsage for the dance. </p>
<p>And, you never realize how fast a kid grows until you are personally responsible for buying their clothes (and the SHOES!). </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I remember seeing “families” at things like the circus where the mom and kids all were walking in a close group bubbling with excitement and behind them trailed dad looking bored. If you are not plugged into the group you may not actually be much of a part of a family.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, why are more sanitation workers men? Perhaps because there is a lot of heavy lifting and men are physically stronger than women? You don’t seem to want to ackowledge that there are differences between men and women.</p>
<p>What biological differences are there between men and women that mean women should be “naturally better” or “naturally want to do” (which are two different things, btw) cooking, cleaning and laundry? Or is that just the convenient dodge for the guy who doesn’t want to do cooking, cleaning, laundry – or child care?</p>
<p>People have written that hookups are nothing new, but were students in 1960 or 1970 averaging seven partners? (I’d like to see a citation for this statistic.) There is a niche for colleges with single-sex dorms and visitation rules. I’ll admit that if my children get into a high-ranked school, we will tell them to go. But for parents of children with mediocre records who can only get into low-ranked residential schools, the option of having them commute to community college and/or take online courses may be appealing.</p>
<p>Um. What? Are you saying that you’re willing to face the possibility of your kids’ virtue being challenged, provided they get into a sufficiently highly-ranked school?</p>
<p>This may raise your eyebrows a bit, Beliavsky, but not every parent thinks it’s their place to protect an adult child’s virtue. Tell me, while the kids with “mediocre records” are pursuing non-residential college options, are Mom and Dad keeping track of their every move?</p>
<p>Health does not equal virtue, you know. Many parents discuss STD prevention extensively, preparing their kids to protect themselves. Some may choose to stress abstinence, but there are many non-abstaining people who do not contract STDs.</p>
<p>“Health does not equal vitrue?”. What does that mean? Abstinence equals a zero chance of STD’s and unwanted pregnacy. No form of “protection” provides that.</p>
<p>The article indicated that syphilis and gonorrhea were what the 1960s/70s faced. The article indicated that the number of different STD’s has increased. </p>
<p>The article said the surveys did not support that there was a rise in the percentage of youths engaged in sex, rather it indicated anecdotal evidence of risky behavior which included having sex without using latex condoms. It pointed out that the focus on abstinence had not resulted in lowering the number of infections in regard to the now more numerous STDs.</p>
<p>What “health does not equal virtue” means, riprorin, is that health doesn’t necessarily correlate with human virtue or what you may perceive to be the lack of it. There are people who engage in sexual activity in whatever way you may consider virtuous who nonetheless contract STDs - when a monogamous married partner is cheated on, for example. And there are people who engage in activities you may disapprove of who protect themselves from those same STDs.</p>
<p>Enlarging it a bit, there are people with diabetes and heart disease who exercise frequently and eat prudently; there are people with cancer who have never engaged in cancer-related activities. You may wish to see health as a reward for virtue, but it isn’t.</p>
<p>As a policy, abstinence has been a “fail” According to riprorin’s article half of sexually active individuals HAVE NOT contacted a STD/STI by age 25. The article also indicates that:</p>
<p>unfortunately abstinence only education leaves young people in the precarious position where they are ill prepared to protect themselves against STDS and pregnancy, if and when they do have sex.</p>
<p>our HS’s principal daughter graduated with my daughter. He was a big believer in abstinence only education. He became a grandpa when his 18 yr old daughter graduated high school. </p>
<p>There exists no scientific evidence that abstinence-only education delays the initiation of sexual intercourse in teenagers. It also does nothing to reduce teen pregnancies nor STIs. In fact, abstinence-only education is positively correlated with teen pregnancy and birth rates. Who would have thought that the less kids know about their bodies, birth control, and safe sex practices, the more likely they are to accidentally make babies?!</p>
<p>Condoms have to be used consistently and correctly, which isn’t always the case, and they reduces, not eliminate the risk of STD transmission. Furthermore, they are not very effective against some STDs.</p>
<p>If you are not promoting abstinence with your kids you are doing them a diservice. And we have only discussed the health ramifications.</p>