Bareback

rainbowtrout

Timans wrote: »

Schools won't do it?

We've been doing Sex Ed. since 2nd year. I'm in 6th now.

I could probably list the ingredients of the Pill by now.

Relationships and Sex Education is listed in the prospectus for the school I teach in - I've never ever seen it on a timetable. One of my friends was asked (because she's a young teacher) to teach it through Social, Personal and Health Education. She gave the students all the information they could possibly need, about sex, pregnancy, contraception and STDs. It was pulled from her timetable the following term due to complaints.

Seems that some people think knowledge encourages sexual activity rather than preventing unwanted diseases or pregnancy.

ztoical

utick wrote: »

just wondering if anyone know what the average % risk of pregnancy after unprotected sex?? 5%, 10%?????

well as a few of us discussed earlier in the thread it really depends on what time of the month you have sex - the % of risk would be different at different times. The simple answer is you can in theory get pregnant at any time. If one you want %, over all you have an 11% chance of getting pregnant in one month but there are actually only 2 days in that month that a woman is fertile so those odds really mean nothing [sperm can live for up to 5 days inside a woman] One medical journal had that a couple having unprotected sex has a 85% chance of being pregnant within one year - but again using maths to work out the odds really isn't a sound idea if your trying to decided wither to have unprotected sex or not. There's lots of mammy's in the world who will tell you they only had sex the once - my friend has a 7 year old boy from a one night stand.

barneysplash

MYOB wrote: »

Infection rate is (according to the US Govt CDC) 1 in 100000 for the giver and .5 in 100000 for the receiver (presumably if the giver has open wounds in their gob or something, or serious herpes); and I don't think I've even *heard* of people using condoms for blowjobs. Although I guess thats why "flavoured" ones are made.

To be honest it is something we are just going to have to get used to.
You and your infections can be anywhere on the planet in 48 hours at the most.

Also, we know about HIV/AIDS, what do we not know about?
I mean how long was HIV on the scene before it was detected and confirmed?
So who knows what's out there that does not have a name or infection rate yet.

ztoical

MYOB wrote: »

and I don't think I've even *heard* of people using condoms for blowjobs. Although I guess thats why "flavoured" ones are made.

I've never given one without a condom - due mainly to STD's but also I just find un-cut guys [as most irish men are] aren't always the best for cleaning that area. Not sure if i'd have a prob with cut guys but any cut guy I've been with has been either american or canadian and they always put a condom on without me asking.

barneysplash

ztoical wrote: »

I've never given one without a condom - due mainly to STD's but also I just find un-cut guys [as most irish men are] aren't always the best for cleaning that area. Not sure if i'd have a prob with cut guys but any cut guy I've been with has been either american or canadian and they always put a condom on without me asking.

I read somewhere recentely that un-cut, that is uncircumcised men, are much
more likely to transmit/receive an STD, anyone else hear of this or have a source?

L1011

ztoical wrote: »

I've never given one without a condom - due mainly to STD's but also I just find un-cut guys [as most irish men are] aren't always the best for cleaning that area. Not sure if i'd have a prob with cut guys but any cut guy I've been with has been either american or canadian and they always put a condom on without me asking.

I'd be of the opinion that regular maintenance is of extreme importance for preventing getting other kinds of nob rot to begin with....

barneysplash - the first death to what we now know was HIV/AIDS was 1959; the reclassification of AIDS from GRIDS (gay-related immune deficiency syndrome, how charming...) was 1981ish. Prior to then it was assumed heterosexuals couldn't get it!

L1011

barneysplash wrote: »

I read somewhere recentely that un-cut, that is uncircumcised men, are much
more likely to transmit/receive an STD, anyone else hear of this or have a source?

Uncircumcised men are more likely to catch HIV from insertive penetrative sex, I would presume the same applies for other bodily fluid transferred STDs. Never seen any study that deals with if they have a higher chance of transmission.

patrickolee

barneysplash wrote: »

To be honest it is something we are just going to have to get used to.
You and your infections can be anywhere on the planet in 48 hours at the most.

Also, we know about HIV/AIDS, what do we not know about?
I mean how long was HIV on the scene before it was detected and confirmed?
So who knows what's out there that does not have a name or infection rate yet.

They (pointy headed people) think it originated in the 1930s.

MIN2511

So uncircumcised men are more likely to pass STD...

kowloon

There was no sex ed in my school.
And there really should have been.

ztoical

cus I hate going out on new years and have nothing better to do, I had a flick through some medical journals [joy of having a doctor for a mother]

If you use no protection you have an 85% chance of it failing.

If your useing Fertility awareness ie keeping track of your cycles and what not its 25% failure rate.

using a Diaphragm its 20% [all % are failure] Suprised at that, thought Diaphragm would be a little better

The pill is 8% though they've got a massive breakdown on that as theres a bunch of different types of pills.

They've actually got condoms between at 15% but I think thats counting for human error [putting it on wrong etc] that the condom companies don't include in their %

This numbers are the top end of estimates so I wouldn't go freaking out about it but still interesting numbers to look at.


Wikipedia have some of the same numbers but they have the typical % rate vs the prefect use % rate and its all pretty and coloured coded.

barneysplash

Using condoms is a skill that gets better and more reliable the more you practice.

Here is an interesting article from the United States National Library of Medicine service Pubmed

Efficacy of the simultaneous use of condoms and spermicides.
Kestelman P, Trussell J.

Fam Plann Perspect. 1991 Sep-Oct;23(5):226-7, 232.

Pub Med ID : 1743276



The topic of this paper is the demonstration of the
combined effectiveness of condom and spermicide use. It is reasoned
that 2 methods, which separately provide only moderate efficacy, act
together independently and the probability of both failing is the product
of the 2 probabilities of failure.

Spermicides have a typical user failure
rate of 21% and condoms 12%; combined, the 1st year probability of
failure among typical users is 2.5%. Under perfect use, where there is
correct use for every act of intercourse, the assumption of independence
is very likely, and efficacy would be a high as steroidal implants. In addition to
highly efficacious protection from pregnancy, there is protection form HIV and
other sexually transmitted infections (STD). Spermicides referred to are rubber
compatible, not oil based, and conform to the IPPF Agreed Test for Total Spermicidal
Power.

Condoms are defined as good quality which resist breakage and conform to the
International Condom Standard, 1990. It is also advised that, in the event of condom
breakage without spermicide, genitalia be washed immediately with soap and water to
minimize risk. Also, proper douching that directs liquid sideways, not toward the cervix
, should further reduce risk, It is underscored that contraceptive efficacy is not an
effectiveness rate, but a failure rate.

Effectiveness is the proportionate reduction
in the risk of conception per cycle or infection per coitus caused by use of a method.
The per cycle probability of conception is fecundability. The model described for combined
use and STD use; it is based on the assumption that 1) the probability of conception and
effectiveness and thus the per cycle probability of failure for the method is constant over
time, and 2) there are 13 cycles per year. What is ignored is that failure rates decline
among typical users with duration of use, so that life table procedures are not necessary.
The annual probability of failure during perfect use of condoms and spermicides
would by .00045, and if failure doubled, the probability would still be only .00186.
Any lubricant also helps to reduce breakage of condoms, thereby enhancing efficacy.


The probability of failure for spermicidally lubricated condoms during perfect use
would be .005. If the annual probability of condom failure were doubled to 4% and
spermicide effectiveness were the lowest at 73%, then the failure rate would be only 1%.

Further Reading

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PubMed
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez/


Any Maths heads out able there put these percentages into everyday numbers?

AARRRGH

Thaedydal wrote: »

Educated by whom ?

The schools won't do it, and most parents won't either.

That's not completely true.

http://www.sex.ie/interviews.php?id=4 wrote:

Sex.ie: Are you a specialist sex education teacher, or do you teach sex education as part of another subject, for example, Religion or Science?

Anonymous: Sex education is a small module in the subject Social Education. Social Education is taught to fifth and sixth year students taking Leaving Cert Applied and covers topics such as drug education and life skills, for example, how to budget for the week and how the voting system works. There's an exam in this subject at the end of sixth year.

Sex.ie: Does every school have a similar sex education curriculum, or is your school a rarity?

Anonymous: Every school facilitating Leaving Cert Applied must teach Social Education.

So it seems people who do the Leaving Cert Applied get "proper" sex education, but people who do the "normal" Leaving Cert don't.

AARRRGH

People are not normally honest about their sexual activity, so I would be suspicious of the poll results. Also worth bearing in mind is that the people who use boards.ie are generally fairly well educated and (dare I say) a little bit nerdy. This is not what the average Irish person (never mind person in a non-first world country) is like.

doonothing

having done 5th and 6th year in a all male school in 2005-2006, no, there was no sex education. apart from 2nd year, and 6th class...

ztoical

doonothing wrote: »

having done 5th and 6th year in a all male school in 2005-2006, no, there was no sex education. apart from 2nd year, and 6th class...

Went to an all girls primary and secondary school and sex ed was two 30 minute videos in 6th class followed by a Q and A with a nun who refused to answer any questions about condoms or the pill [and oral sex but I think people were taking the piss asking that one]

Nothing in secondary school. Bunch of town GP's did try but no luck.

Best sex ed I ever got was in a gay bar. Went along with some gay friends one night and was shocked to find free condoms at ever table and a sectioned off area with health professionals waiting to answer any and all questions and give out leaflets. They answered all my pregnancy questions even thou it was mainly a bar for gay men. Great stuff, pity some of the other bars and night clubs didn't do something like that.

Toto Wolfcastle

ztoical wrote: »

Went to an all girls primary and secondary school and sex ed was two 30 minute videos in 6th class followed by a Q and A with a nun who refused to answer any questions about condoms or the pill [and oral sex but I think people were taking the piss asking that one]

Ya we had something similar in 6th class, with our parents present (mainly mothers), but it was very tame, and a lot of the questions (which we wrote down anonymously) went unanswered. One of the girls asked the nurse what happens to a baby after a miscarriage (she genuinely was just curious) and the nurse told us it goes to heaven, nothing about the physical side of things.

I know my brother, who is in secondary school, has had a few classes dealing with sexual issues.

L1011

ztoical wrote: »

Best sex ed I ever got was in a gay bar. Went along with some gay friends one night and was shocked to find free condoms at ever table and a sectioned off area with health professionals waiting to answer any and all questions and give out leaflets. They answered all my pregnancy questions even thou it was mainly a bar for gay men. Great stuff, pity some of the other bars and night clubs didn't do something like that.

Pity they don't do this here; theres still some level of misinformation and lack of knowledge among what should be the mostly rightly paranoid group STD (although not pregnancy!) wise.

ztoical

MYOB wrote: »

Pity they don't do this here; theres still some level of misinformation and lack of knowledge among what should be the mostly rightly paranoid group STD (although not pregnancy!) wise.

the gay bar that happened in was the george in dublin and as far as I know they still do it every other month. No reason why they couldn't do something like that in a few other nightclubs.

L1011

ztoical wrote: »

the gay bar that happened in was the george in dublin and as far as I know they still do it every other month. No reason why they couldn't do something like that in a few other nightclubs.

Wouldn't be in there frequently enough to notice; I assumed it was in NY as you'd mentioned living there. Oops

constitutionus

i wouldnt go near a girl with a ten foot barge pole without a condom. just too freaking paranoid, this country is STD central. last time i checked we still have the higest incidence of syphlis in the western world and im mad and blind enough as i am.

if i was serious about a girl and she was on the pill i'd probably do it as i'd have no problem handling the consequences then but no way for a one night stand or casual relationship

Stercus Accidit

I've been with my girlfriend now for nearly two years, and she is on the pill.

We dont use condoms anymore, she always remembers her little white friend each day.

Old Johnny used to give up every now and again, once we only realised afterwards so next morning was a fun trip to get the morning after pill.

I think considering we are both clean and only with each other for two years, the pill is enough.

Is this wrong? Bear in mind I'm the only guy shes been with.

Toto Wolfcastle

Motosam wrote: »

I've been with my girlfriend now for nearly two years, and she is on the pill.

We dont use condoms anymore, she always remembers her little white friend each day.

Old Johnny used to give up every now and again, once we only realised afterwards so next morning was a fun trip to get the morning after pill.

I think considering we are both clean and only with each other for two years, the pill is enough.

Is this wrong? Bear in mind I'm the only guy shes been with.

You can still get pregnant while just on the pill, and it's not obvious like when a condom breaks, so you don't know to go get the morning after pill. As for STIs, I don't really know, but I presume they have to start somewhere! It's something I've always wondered about.

Stercus Accidit

janeybabe wrote: »

You can still get pregnant while just on the pill, and it's not obvious like when a condom breaks, so you don't know to go get the morning after pill. As for STIs, I don't really know, but I presume they have to start somewhere! It's something I've always wondered about.

Yes but at first indication, missed period etc. I would be over to england, we're together on this one.

I know you can continue to get a period for a while even during pregnancy but we are playing it fairly safe, she keeps track of things and has a fairly normal cycle.

I always assumed I knew these things but theres no harm in clarifying were on the right track.

barneysplash

A sexually transmitted disease (STD), a.k.a. Venereal disease (VD), is an illness that has a significant probability of transmission between humans or animals by means of sexual contact,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexually_transmitted_disease

- From Wikipedia

Just a general definition that includes the key point that you can get these infections outside the sexual arena.
Then if you are not using protection, they can be transmitted during sex.

Since it has not been mentioned in this thread yet, here is a link to the Government's
safe sex and contraception site http://www.thinkcontraception.ie/

AARRRGH

Condoms won't protect you from Genital Warts or Herpes. Just a FYI :eek:

davyjose

I trust the only person I have intimate relations with, and if she gets preggers, then that'd make me happy, actually. So I go option 3.

MIN2511

We all make stupid mistakes at 16/17 by having unprotected sex and i blame that on lack of good sex education. And i think now is the time to rectify that if we can.
And yes using Condoms e.t.c still doesn't protect against genital warts, like honestly apart from ABSTINENCE what else can we do to protect ourselves completely seeing as abstinence wouldn't be an option

ztoical

If anyone is looking for a good laugh and something to make you think check out the comic book series Monsters by Ken Dahl - the story of a couple who gets genital herpes and then the name calling starts over who gave it to who and how they deal with new relationships after finding out...great comic

davyjose

MIN2511 wrote: »

We all make stupid mistakes at 16/17 by having unprotected sex and i blame that on lack of good sex education. And i think now is the time to rectify that if we can.
And yes using Condoms e.t.c still doesn't protect against genital warts, like honestly apart from ABSTINENCE what else can we do to protect ourselves completely seeing as abstinence wouldn't be an option

Well having a less cavalier attitude to casual sex than most. Sticking to someone you trust for the ol' in-out would, IMO, be a great way of protecting oneself