C&H sex discussion thread

I haven't felt any peer pressure to have sex. That's probably one of the only things I've never seen peer pressure for.

Edit: You know, I'd say most of peer pressure to have sex is probably from a partner, so maybe that's why I didn't experience the peer pressure. Who knows...

Novella

There is a series on 4oD, The Hospital, and last weeks episode focuses on the rise of STI's amongst teenagers. I thought it was pretty interesting.

Tbh, I was never overly concerned about STI's, bit of an, "Oh, that'll never happen to me" attitude but seeing that really opened my eyes. The figures for chlamydia are actually pretty huge, and because so many people are asymptomatic, it really is impossible to know without having a test, well, if you've had unprotected sex before just.

Safe sex is the way to go.

Grindylow

Novella wrote: »

There is a series on 4oD, The Hospital, and last weeks episode focuses on the rise of STI's amongst teenagers. I thought it was pretty interesting.

Tbh, I was never overly concerned about STI's, bit of an, "Oh, that'll never happen to me" attitude but seeing that really opened my eyes. The figures for chlamydia are actually pretty huge, and because so many people are asymptomatic, it really is impossible to know without having a test, well, if you've had unprotected sex before just.

Safe sex is the way to go.

I saw that too.
And yeah I know quite a few people who have had to go get checked for STD's, even though they've only been in the age group of 16/17. Tbh, I think its quite sad for someone that age to be sleeping around at all.

Novella

Noel2k9 wrote: »

I saw that too.
And yeah I know quite a few people who have had to go get checked for STD's, even though they've only been in the age group of 16/17. Tbh, I think its quite sad for someone that age to be sleeping around at all.

I know. So many of the teenagers in it are like fifteen, sixteen and it's just so shocking. It kind of makes me sad, how quickly kids are growing up these days. I can say it, 'cause I'm all old and stuff, but god, fifteen year olds should not be in STI clinics.

I couldn't believe that one girl who'd gotten pregnant at fifteen or so. She went on to have a miscarriage, and then she was prescribed the Pill... but she wouldn't take it. "So, how have you been getting on on the Pill?", "Er... I haven't taken it.", "Why not?", "I dunno, I couldn't remember.". Are you kidding me? You can't remember to take one bloody tablet and you think you're mature enough to be having sex? Give me a break! Just, seriously.

XxMCRxBabyxX

Deleted User wrote: »

I haven't felt any peer pressure to have sex. That's probably one of the only things I've never seen peer pressure for.

Edit: You know, I'd say most of peer pressure to have sex is probably from a partner, so maybe that's why I didn't experience the peer pressure. Who knows...

I don't know if that's strictly. I know that before I lost my virginity both my boyfriend and I had a good bit of pressure put on us because we'd been together "so long" and not had sex. (We were together about 2 years by then)

I could feel people judging me if I said we hadn't had sex yet. It was really none of their business thought! i don't regret waiting and my boyfriend and I are still together a year and a half later so it clearly didn't affect our relationship

Grindylow

Novella wrote: »

I know. So many of the teenagers in it are like fifteen, sixteen and it's just so shocking. It kind of makes me sad, how quickly kids are growing up these days. I can say it, 'cause I'm all old and stuff, but god, fifteen year olds should not be in STI clinics.

I couldn't believe that one girl who'd gotten pregnant at fifteen or so. She went on to have a miscarriage, and then she was prescribed the Pill... but she wouldn't take it. "So, how have you been getting on on the Pill?", "Er... I haven't taken it.", "Why not?", "I dunno, I couldn't remember.". Are you kidding me? You can't remember to take one bloody tablet and you think you're mature enough to be having sex? Give me a break! Just, seriously.

Exactly! Channel 4 had another show about the teenagers being pregnant/underage and having sex, etc. and most of them were around 15 who were going out having sex with randomers/older guys, etc. I thought it was really bad. I'm 17 myself and I think its sick like. Why put yourself in the situation where you can end up getting something that can ruin your life, eg: HIV. I bet most of them don't even know about it and never think about it.

XxMCRxBabyxX

Noel2k9 wrote: »

Exactly! Channel 4 had another show about the teenagers being pregnant/underage and having sex, etc. and most of them were around 15 who were going out having sex with randomers/older guys, etc. I thought it was really bad. I'm 17 myself and I think its sick like. Why put yourself in the situation where you can end up getting something that can ruin your life, eg: HIV. I bet most of them don't even know about it and never think about it.

Some people see it as "cool" to sleep around for some reason. They don't appear to realise that everyone else just judges them and sees them as "easy." I'd rather be seen as completelly frigid than a slut personally!

OopsyDaisy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRdJ49ItMnc

Probably not the place, and if it isn't soz! But wtf?

Grindylow

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

Some people see it as "cool" to sleep around for some reason. They don't appear to realise that everyone else just judges them and sees them as "easy." I'd rather be seen as completelly frigid than a slut personally!

Same! I'd rather take whatever crap I get for not sleeping around instead of getting an STD. :P Its far worse on girls though IMO. If a boy sleeps around its seen as being cool, etc. But if a girl sleeps around she gets a reputation as being a whore!

Insect Overlord

Noel2k9 wrote: »

Its far worse on girls though IMO. If a boy sleeps around its seen as being cool, etc. But if a girl sleeps around she gets a reputation as being a whore!

I really hate these double standards! If a girl sleeps with loads of guys she's called a slut, but if a guy does the same thing he's a "homosexual"...



:pac:

Grindylow

Insect Overlord wrote: »

I really hate these double standards! If a girl sleeps with loads of guys she's called a slut, but if a guy does the same thing he's a "homosexual"...



:pac:

Pfft ripped from Post of the day a while ago! :P:pac:

Pygmalion

Noel2k9 wrote: »

Its far worse on girls though IMO. If a boy sleeps around its seen as being cool, etc. But if a girl sleeps around she gets a reputation as being a whore!

People say that every time any sex-related discussion comes up, but I rarely encounter anyone who actually thinks that way.
There are of course people who think that, but they're usually dicks, and aren't representative.

Grindylow

Pygmalion wrote: »

People say that every time any sex-related discussion comes up, but I rarely encounter anyone who actually thinks that way.
There are of course people who think that, but they're usually dicks, and aren't representative.

Well it happens in my school all the time. No joke! There are girls who get labelled as whores for just getting with one person, even though the people are actually fairly nice/been with the person for ages.

storm2811

Noel2k9 wrote: »

Well it happens in my school all the time. No joke! There are girls who get labelled as whores for just getting with one person, even though the people are actually fairly nice/been with the person for ages.

Immaturity at it's best there.:pac:

There's this one girl in my year,who's been with nearly everyone from 1st year up and instead of getting called a whore she's praised for it by the other girls.

The lads on the other hand just use her and know she's easy.

Noel2k9

Noel2k9 wrote: »

Well it happens in my school all the time. No joke! There are girls who get labelled as whores for just getting with one person, even though the people are actually fairly nice/been with the person for ages.

I think the point is that if a guy sleeps around most people just think he's a feckin' tool.

sock puppet

Deleted User wrote: »

I think the point is that if a guy sleeps around most people just think he's a feckin' tool.

Why what's wrong with sleeping around? I'm sure most of the girls know what they're getting into.

jumpguy

Deleted User wrote: »

I think the point is that if a guy sleeps around most people just think he's a feckin' tool.

Not really, just so long as he doesn't go around boasting about it or anything. Not being a dick.

Grindylow

sock puppet wrote: »

Why what's wrong with sleeping around? I'm sure most of the girls know what they're getting into.

Its called having self respect?

jumpguy wrote: »

Not really, just so long as he doesn't go around boasting about it or anything. Not being a dick.

Exactly, if he's in a cliche group of just more guys, then its pretty much set in stone for him to be deemed as cool by them. Where as if a girl does it and her group find out she's deemed as the slut of the group.

Novella

Insect Overlord wrote: »

I really hate these double standards! If a girl sleeps with loads of guys she's called a slut, but if a guy does the same thing he's a "homosexual"...



:pac:

It actually took me about ten minutes to get this...

Noel2k9 wrote: »

Well it happens in my school all the time. No joke! There are girls who get labelled as whores for just getting with one person, even though the people are actually fairly nice/been with the person for ages.

It's school. Everyone is young, and sex and what not is new and it's scandal and it's probably better fun and more interesting to talk about than French verbs or what Maths homework you got. I suppose not everyone is doing it either, but the novelty does soon wear off.

There is a difference between being a 'slut' and sleeping with a lot of people, imo. I don't care how many people anyone has slept with, as long as they've done so maturely, for the right reasons, with respect and been careful. Being discreet is sort of what matters. The kind of girl who thinks it's 'cool' that's she been with half the class and uses every opportunity to say so, that'd bother me. If the same girl slept with everyone of those guys, just 'cause she liked sex or whatever, and didn't feel the need to make it known and brag about it, great.

A lot of the time, girls who are known as 'easy' are actually just really insecure and the reason they feel the need to be with so many guys is because they just want some affection. I think I've seen of less of this kind of thing as I've gotten older.

Anyway, what am I talking about again? Yeah, STAY SAFE!

sock puppet

Noel2k9 wrote: »

Its called having self respect?

So abstinence or monogamy is a prerequisite to having respect for yourself?

Pygmalion

Noel2k9 wrote: »

Well it happens in my school all the time. No joke! There are girls who get labelled as whores for just getting with one person, even though the people are actually fairly nice/been with the person for ages.

In secondary school sure, but most people who aren't just dicks will grow out of it.
Casual sex is, for better or worse (can't say I'm personally a fan), pretty much seen as the norm for both genders of a certain age range, claiming that this double standard persists outside of the minds of the immature and the sexist is a bit much.

Konata

Novella wrote: »

A lot of the time, girls who are known as 'easy' are actually just really insecure and the reason they feel the need to be with so many guys is because they just want some affection. I think I've seen of less of this kind of thing as I've gotten older.

I was just about to comment saying this exactly :P

Luckily, I've never been labelled a "slut" or anything, and I haven't slept around, but I have been with a fair few guys. It's never something I've been proud of - in fact it's something that used to tear me apart with guilt. About 75% of those "hook ups" were purely part of a desperate need to "prove" myself to be lovable, to not feel alone momentarily, to be desirable. I know what that feels like, and I think a lot of girls who sleep around feel similiar. Not all of course, but many.

Obviously, it's not the way to go about proving these kinda things to yourself - in the long run it only makes you feel worse, aswell as ashamed and guilty. I think we learn these things more as we grow up, and that's why so many younger girls think the way to get to affection is to have engage in intimate activities with every Tom, Dick and Harry.

I don't think it's fair to immediately label a girl as a slut - you just don't know what kinda things are going on in the background.

sock puppet

sock puppet wrote: »

Why what's wrong with sleeping around? I'm sure most of the girls know what they're getting into.

No, it's grand. It's fine when both people know the score and all that.

You'd call a guy a tool for doing something that would get a girl called a 'whore'. Maybe if he's cheating on his partner or something.
I'm not knocking sex or anything, just saying that most people I know would give guys and girls the same kinds of labels for the same kinds of behaviour.

EuropeanSon

Just thought I'd post this cos it made me LOL before, not that I agree with it, but it is funny.


Personally I feel both are twats.

Pygmalion

sock puppet wrote: »

So abstinence or monogamy is a prerequisite to having respect for yourself?

In my opinion it depends entirely on the reason for the actions, people having sex outside of any kind of relationship because they find each other attractive and want to is fairly normal nowadays, but there are a lot of people of both genders who seem to do it to "prove" to their friends (or themselves, an even harsher judge in many cases) that they can.
In the latter cases I'd argue that it's not the right circumstances to go about it.

MavisDavis

I've started watching this show The Secret Life Of The American Teenager. I know it's a tv show, but it's still freaking me out. Fifteen year olds bítching about being virgins? What the fúck?!

lou91

MavisDavis wrote: »

I've started watching this show The Secret Life Of The American Teenager. I know it's a tv show, but it's still freaking me out. Fifteen year olds bítching about being virgins? What the fúck?!

It's so awful!
Really preachy and doesn't really try to hide it's christian agenda.
It was made by the woman who made 7th Heaven though, so I guess that shouldn't be a surprise.

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

This thread has been abandoned for a while... Nobody in C&H must be getting any these days :pac:

Ginja Ninja

Duffy the Vampire Slayer wrote: »

This thread has been abandoned for a while... Nobody in C&H must be getting any these days :pac:

would you prefer one of those thinly veiled;"I got some last night" posts?

here's one;what would class as "sex"?whats the defining line?

Grindylow

Ginja Ninja wrote: »

would you prefer one of those thinly veiled;"I got some last night" posts?

here's one;what would class as "sex"?whats the defining line?

When you kiss xxxxxxxx

SarahBeep!

Ginja Ninja wrote: »

here's one;what would class as "sex"?whats the defining line?

Sex or sexual contact?

Seren_

Ginja Ninja wrote: »

here's one;what would class as "sex"?whats the defining line?

Ridin'

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

But does it count if its not...

Never mind.

Pygmalion

Ginja Ninja wrote: »

here's one;what would class as "sex"?whats the defining line?

You see Ginja, when a mammy and a daddy love each other really much...

almostnever

Up until fairly recently I would only have said that full sexual intercourse "counted" as sex, but I'm more inclined to think it encompasses sexual contact now. The line is quite blurry though, but I think it comes down to what each individual person thinks themselves.

KnifeWRENCH

I'd probably only classify it as sex if it was actual intercourse; penetration and whatnot. Anything else I'd classify as "sexual contact" but not sex.

But I'm old fashioned, y'see. In my day, we only had sex after marriage. And 'twas an entirely functional mechanism, so it was. None of this "enjoyment" malarkey that the young'uns get up to these days.

And another thing.....

almostnever

KnifeWRENCH wrote: »

I'd probably only classify it as sex if it was actual intercourse; penetration and whatnot. Anything else I'd classify as "sexual contact" but not sex.

But I'm old fashioned, y'see. In my day, we only had sex after marriage. And 'twas an entirely functional mechanism, so it was. None of this "enjoyment" malarkey that the young'uns get up to these days.

And another thing.....

Where does that leave sex between two women, though? It was that question that made me reevaluate how I defined it.

Grindylow

almostnever wrote: »

Where does that leave sex between two women, though? It was that question that made me reevaluate how I defined it.

That's called tribadism or something though.

Sex, as described on Wikipedia is "In biology, sex is a process of combining and mixing genetic traits, often resulting in the specialization of organisms into a male or female variety (each known as a sex)."

It's impossible for two women to recreate through tribadism so realistically calling it 'sex' doesn't make sense.

Insect Overlord

Can of worms...

Open!

almostnever

Noel2k9 wrote: »

That's called tribadism or something though.

Sex, as described on Wikipedia is "In biology, sex is a process of combining and mixing genetic traits, often resulting in the specialization of organisms into a male or female variety (each known as a sex)."

It's impossible for two women to recreate through tribadism so realistically calling it 'sex' doesn't make sense.

I dunno if I'm entirely comfortable with basing the definition of sex on that, though. If two infertile people have sexual intercourse and it is impossible for them to procreate, is that then not sex as a result? Plus I don't think that sex is entirely about biology, either. It's a lot more complex and multi-faceted.

Tell me if I'm completely misinterpreting that, btw. 2 am, and all that.

Grindylow

almostnever wrote: »

I dunno if I'm entirely comfortable with basing the definition of sex on that, though. If two infertile people have sexual intercourse and it is impossible for them to procreate, is that then not sex as a result?

Tell me if I'm completely misinterpreting that, btw. 2 am, and all that.

Nah it's still *possible* for two infertile people to recreate, although it may not happen.

It's not possible for two fertile women to recreate.

almostnever

Noel2k9 wrote: »

Nah it's still *possible* for two infertile people to recreate, although it may not happen.

It's not possible for two fertile women to recreate.

If the woman has had a radical hysterectomy (womb, ovaries, fallopian tubes), it isn't possible.

Grindylow

almostnever wrote: »

If the woman has had a radical hysterectomy (womb, ovaries, fallopian tubes), it isn't possible.

I think you misinterpreted what I said.

It's possible for any male/female combination to reproduce, in general. Whereas it's impossible for any female/female combination to reproduce a fertile offspring in any situation.

Just to clarify, by possible I mean it has happened, it will happen, and it is happening.

KnifeWRENCH

almostnever wrote: »

Where does that leave sex between two women, though?

See, there was no such thing in my day! :pac:

But yeah, that's a fair point. Eh......I dunno really. Sex between two women wouldn't exactly be my specialist subject on Mastermind. :P

Insect Overlord

Recreation involves board-games, sports and parks.
Procreation doesn't always involve those things... >_>

Grindylow

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Recreation involves board-games, sports and parks.
Procreation doesn't always involve those things... >_>

Reproduction involves the fusion of both parents gametes, ie: the recreation of the parents..

KnifeWRENCH

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Recreation involves board-games, sports and parks.
Procreation doesn't always involve those things... >_>

But it's much more fun when it does. :cool: Neglecting to use a condom adds a whole new element to a game of Risk.

Insect Overlord

How many posters here have access to the S&S forum?

randylonghorn

Noel2k9 wrote: »

It's impossible for two women to recreate through tribadism so realistically calling it 'sex' doesn't make sense.

Oh, it's very possible for them to recreate, believe me!!

I could link you to some sites if you like ...

Pygmalion

almostnever wrote: »

Plus I don't think that sex is entirely about biology, either.

Well the word does have a certain meaning in that context.
Essentially you're asking whether the definition of the word as we use it in common speech matches the one biologists use when they talk about reproduction.

You're not really going to get a conclusive answer, because there isn't one, it depends entirely on the context in which it is said and the opinions of the person speaking at the moment.
This be the problem with non-formal languages.