Dear AJ,

This may not be appropriate but your previous post
about what Christians were taught about sex reminds
me of the following story:

Sister Mary Virgilius was giving her usual Wednesday
morning 'fire and brimstone' lecture on sex - at her Catholic
Girls' High School. She was telling the girls how one hours
of pleasure would damn them to hell for all eternity and so
on. As she was ranting on in full flight on the subject
a young voice came from the back of the assembly hall:

"Sister, how do you make it last an hour?"

It should be possible to have a sexual health discussion without the tedious intrusion of politics. Cartoonist (late) Bill Leak is being proved right in this thread.

I find gay politics utterly boring and predictable with seemingly no prospect of avoiding the activists from either side, a complete turn-off. -Including the slippery activists who claim they are 'only' about 'balance' and 'information'. Yeah, right! Pull the other one.

However a few comments are necessary and (hopefully accepted as dispassionate as intended), before leaving yet another thread to the political partisans to revel in their prejudice:

- ultimately, numbers and facts will always prevail. That is even where (and often because) the politically motivated and lobbyists try to fudge them to suit their own agenda;

- it is only to be expected that authorities and the researchers would be most conciliatory to MSM whose cooperation is absolutely crucial to any containment of HIV/AIDS;

- there is apparent blame-shifting by one section of MSM (Men who have Sex with Men) to the other. For instance from self-identified, so-called 'Gays' (some admit sex/boast sex with women), to 'Bisexuals' or claimed 'Straights' (who have sex with men!);

- reliance on antiviral drugs to contain a disease is fraught with dangers. Not the least being any impression created that highly successful and robust proactive controls, such as women refusing the anal sex they don't want anyhow, are now unnecessary,

- if safer (but not 100% safe) sex practices like wearing a condom are now being cited as an invention by 'Gays', they are misleading themselves but no-one else.

Noticed too was the post from someone who does not understand that having a pool of disease (and source of transmission), even if it is for now being 'contained' to recent historical numbers, is a compromise, but NOT a good result for humanity.

contd..

Astounded, then maybe not given the politics and incidence of selfishness, that some are so frivolous where the health of women is concerned. -Particularly girls and young women who might wish to start a family one day.

It does seem a 'no brainer' that it is up to women, parents and carers alone and as the last line of defence, to counter the spruikers whose aim it is to normalise anal sex with youth and young adults.

The unethical, self-centered, media-manipulating spruikers are winning the battle for minds of girls and young women, having already convinced boys and young men (apparently). The risk messages of the regrettably boring, overly diplomatic health education brochures are being overwhelmed (incl., by political correct censorship) and lost, especially in the feckless media where sensationalism rules.

To conclude, of course there should be a formal requirement for any intending male sex partner to declare any MSM history to a woman. How else can she exercise due regard for her health and body and make an informed decision? Why do some here want to deny women that right?

@AJ Philips, Wednesday, 12 April 2017 9:31:38 AM

You linked to some personal blog leading in turn to the personal blog of one Dan Savage. It is a wonder how you might come across stuff like that.

You do add a heck of a lot of your own creative interpretation to Gay activist Dan Savage's already rather 'free' (to be very diplomatic) interpretation.

Below is the same study as reported at length in a newspaper. Where even a staff journalist and editor failed miserably to make it as exciting and arrive at the same conclusions as you and Dan did (although you did stretch the envelope even further, which was quite an accomplishment considering Dan's record),

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/28/AR2008122801588.html

An excerpt,
"By 2001, Rosenbaum found, 82 percent of those who had taken a pledge had retracted their promises, and there was no significant difference in the proportion of students in both groups who had engaged in any type of sexual activity, including giving or receiving oral sex, vaginal intercourse, the age at which they first had sex, or their number of sexual partners. More than half of both groups had engaged in various types of sexual activity, had an average of about three sexual partners and had had sex for the first time by age 21 even if they were unmarried.

"It seems that pledgers aren't really internalizing the pledge," Rosenbaum said. "Participating in a program doesn't appear to be motivating them to change their behavior. It seems like abstinence has to come from an individual conviction rather than participating in a program."

While there was no difference in the rate of sexually transmitted diseases in the two groups, the percentage of students who reported condom use was about 10 points lower for those who had taken the pledge, and they were about 6 percentage points less likely to use any form of contraception."

Thanks for the funny, Foxy. I need that today!

--

leoj,

The connection between abstinence-only sex education, anal sex, and STDs is well known. I didn’t even feel compelled to provide a link, but decided to at the last minute so I Googled the above and grabbed the first link that looked relevant after scanning it.

I don’t know who this Dan Savage is, but apparently you have a problem with him and the fact that the page I linked to was only a blog, so here’s some peer-reviewed articles on the topic:

Abstinence and abstinence-only education: A review of U.S. policies and programs: http://www.moappp.org/Documents/articles/2006/SantelliAbstinenceonlyEducationReviewPaper.pdf

After the promise: The STD consequences of adolescent virginity pledges:
http://goo.gl/3rKgJO

Understanding ‘Abstinence’: Implications for Individuals, Programs and Policies:
http://www.pauldavidtuff.com/PDF%20Files/Guttmacher%20Abstinence%20Only.pdf

Oral Sex Among Adolescents: Is It Sex or Is It Abstinence?:
http://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/article_files/3229800.pdf

Anal Intercourse among Young Heterosexuals in Three US STD Clinics:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5019823

Abstinence-Only and Comprehensive Sex Education and the Initiation of Sexual Activity and Teen Pregnancy:
http://goo.gl/I9Vwxv

Rest assured, despite their titles, they all discuss anal sex to one extent or another.

So your conservative Christian brethren are not off the hook just yet, I'm afraid.

Even if you can get them off the hook, the fact remains that your focus on gay and bisexual men is disproportionate (as some of Foxy's links also suggest), which suggests that the spread of STDs isn't your main concern. Which was the main point of my last post, and your subsequent attempts to downplay or discredit any role that your fellow conservatives may play in the spread of STDs helps confirm that.

AJ Philips,

It is necessary for you to poison the well against any critic. That is the way of the activist.

You did get caught out inventing findings and stretching the envelope way past Dan Savage's wild lead, which was already extreme and way out there past that seventh planet from the Sun.

Is there anything you would like to disclose? You can trust all here. After all, it IS the internet. LOL