Condoms for kiddies

[The Shadow]

Condoms for kiddies (http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/06/24/condoms_secrecy_for_provincetown_pupils/)

Students in Provincetown — from elementary school to high school — will be able to get free condoms at school under a recently approved policy that takes effect this fall. The rule also requires school officials to keep student requests secret, and ignore parents’ objections.

“The intent is to protect kids,’’ said School Superintendent Beth Singer, who wrote the policy that the Cape Cod town’s School Committee unanimously passed two weeks ago. “We know that sexual experimentation is not limited to an age, so how does one put an age on it?’’

OK what glue have these people been sniffing? Condoms for high school students, sure. But elementary school age kids?! WTF!

[Greenday]

Why not? They ARE doing it. Not many but some are. Might as well let them be safe about it.

[jackfaire]

So how does one put an age on it? Uhm I don't know PUBERTY!?!?? Just a suggestion.

I mean yeah you got kids playing doctor but pre puberty pentration and such is rare especially on such a scale that condoms would be needed.

Plus if they are now availabe for those kids don't you have to teach those kids how to use them and what they are for does that mean kids now get sex education earlier in more explcit terms?

[Greenday]

So how does one put an age on it? Uhm I don't know PUBERTY!?!?? Just a suggestion.

I mean yeah you got kids playing doctor but pre puberty pentration and such is rare especially on such a scale that condoms would be needed.

What about STDs? What about kids having sex with older kids?

[Plaidman]

It's not illegal for them to have it. Hell, it's illegal to refuse sale of them to kids.

There are kids that are doing it before High School. I've known quite a few people that lost their virginity at 12. Not talk ether. One of them was pregnet twice by the time she was 14.

I think it's a good idea.

[jackfaire]

What about STDs? What about kids having sex with older kids?

Most often happens in abuse situations. I was 10 when I was in the 5th grade which is usually the last year of Elementary.

If doing things with older kids the older kids would still have acces to Condoms.

Sex ed at age 10 was about puberty and the changes our bodies were starting. We didn't cover sex untiil the 7th grade.

Seems to me the protection would be worthless without the education.



I think it's a good idea.


I agree it is a good idea for Junior High but Elementary school is typically 10 and younger.

[Rebel]

So how does one put an age on it? Uhm I don't know PUBERTY!?!?? Just a suggestion.

I started puberty just before I even turned 9.
You'd be surprised at how many sexually mature girls are only 9 or 10 years old these days (note I didn't say emotionally mature).

Another way of looking at it is that it takes away the immaturity of approaching condoms and other contraceptives when they're older. It would make the idea of purchasing and using condoms less overwhelming, meaning more people would use them.

I'm a bit more concerned about the parents making as big a deal about it. If you just react like it's all normal then kids are less likely to be super interested in them. You make a big deal of it and try to ban it, then kids are gonna want to get their hands on it and try them out, or try it without them because 'condoms are bad'.

But then again, I was taught about puberty and where babies come when I was about 5 or 6, and my parents answered any other questions I had about it.

[blas87]

Never ever tell your kids that sex is bad and only for married adults. Guaranteed virginity loss to an older, much more experienced guy before age 16.

[jackfaire]

But then again, I was taught about puberty and where babies come when I was about 5 or 6, and my parents answered any other questions I had about it.

My ex was taught about sex at age ten this inspired her to try and get sex from her classmates.

[Rebel]

My ex was taught about sex at age ten this inspired her to try and get sex from her classmates.

And....?

I think there's more to that story.
Maybe she was given a very brief rundown of sex (it feels nice), or she was not taught about the risks. Or maybe she was inspired by her friends or by an older boyfriend?
Maybe she wouldn't have sought out sex if she had been told about it at a younger age, before her hormones start up their rule over her.

The fact remains that education is the best way of letting children know about sex and the risks involved. If this education has to go hand in hand with free condoms and a caution to use them, then so be it.

That being said, even with all the education and cautions kids receive these days, there will still be kids who ignore it.

A crappy analogy would be to think of sex as a hot dinner plate (don't laugh).
If they don't know the plate is hot, they could touch it and get burnt.
If they are told it is hot, they could wait a while until it has cooled before they try to pick it up.
If they are told it is hot, they could also feel the need to confirm this for themselves, by touching it and getting burnt.

Kids starting puberty are driven by their hormones. At least give them a fighting chance and educate them about sex and what they can use.
I like the fact that the school is trying to strip away the negative ideas about condoms and show kids that it's really okay to use them. People demonize condoms too much.

[jackfaire]

I know but it just feels like we have worked so hard to let our kids just be kids and now we have to teach them how to be adults while they are still children so that if we miss them entering puberty they already know what they need to know.

And how young do we start teaching that? Does sex ed get taught alongside the alphabet? Where is the line for how young we teach this.

I have less of a problem with it if the parents still have a say in their kids learning about it or not before a certain age.

I think at some age it should no longer be the parents choice but I think parents should be allowed to decide if their prepubecsent children are taught about sex.

[BlaqueKatt]

I know but it just feels like we have worked so hard to let our kids just be kids and now we have to teach them how to be adults while they are still children so that if we miss them entering puberty they already know what they need to know.

And how young do we start teaching that? Does sex ed get taught alongside the alphabet? Where is the line for how young we teach this.


You are aware that the current average age for onset of puberty in girls(first sign is breast development) is now 8-10 years old*-so elementary school age.

*and no it's not due to "OMG hormones in the food/water"-it's actually childhood obesity-medically a body begins to mature physically when there is enough adipose tissue to support fetal development-it's why anorexics don't menstruate.

[Rebel]

And how young do we start teaching that? Does sex ed get taught alongside the alphabet? Where is the line for how young we teach this.

I have less of a problem with it if the parents still have a say in their kids learning about it or not before a certain age.

I think at some age it should no longer be the parents choice but I think parents should be allowed to decide if their prepubecsent children are taught about sex.

In a perfect world, parents would start to teach their children about their bodies when they first discover them (a lot of toddlers start exploring their own bodies). Their bodies and its reactions are normal parts of being human. But a lot of parents freak out when they discover their children doing this, and that's when it becomes a 'naughty' thing to do.
There are books out their that teach about babies and puberty and sex in a way that children are able to understand it, and they include cartoon pictures. The best ones I know of are "Where Did I come From?" and "What's Happening to Me?" by Peter Mayle. I read them when I was 5. I giggled at during the first reading, but actually followed up with questions in later readings.

The fact is, a lot of parents these days don't want to do the 'embarrassing' talk and so they avoid it. Some parents also refuse to accept that their babies are growing up and so try to shelter them from the horrors of sexual education.
My parents knew it was going to happen eventually, and they wanted me to know I knew all I could about it, and that I could come to them with any questions or problems.

Why don't we teach about the body when they're learning about their ABC's?
I don't know, maybe societal repression? But it actually sounds like a good idea.

[jackfaire]

Why don't we teach about the body when they're learning about their ABC's?
I don't know, maybe societal repression? But it actually sounds like a good idea.

I agree kids should learn about reproduction with their ABCs but we aren't talking about teaching them reproduction when we put condoms in their schools we are talking about teaching them safe sex which means looking at a 9 year old and saying, "Now when you give a blow job you should use a dental dam, anal sex is higher risk for STDs, etc. "

Reproduction is fairly benign but Safe Sex is about the sexual acts as much as it is the results of it. I can just see some kids going, "hmm that sounds interesting I am going to try it."

Kind of like me and my brother we didn't start swearing until our parents sat us down and said, "Here are all the swear words that exist that you didn't know before and your friends didn't know now don't say them" Yeah that was when we started swearing.

[Rebel]

I agree kids should learn about reproduction with their ABCs but we aren't talking about teaching them reproduction when we put condoms in their schools we are talking about teaching them safe sex which means looking at a 9 year old and saying, "Now when you give a blow job you should use a dental dam, anal sex is higher risk for STDs, etc. "

Wow.
That's like seeing a few drops of rain and jumping to the conclusion that a monsoon is starting.
(And I'm pretty sure that anal sex and the higher risk of STI's would be looked at in sex-ed, it's a health issue. Also, dental dams are for cunnilingus and rimming, condoms are used for blow-jobs, at least here they are).

Also, the article points out that the kids have to ask the nurse for the condoms, and that they would be required to explain why they need them. So no young children really have access to them at all. Only those who really need them have access to them, and a lot of these kids (me admitting they are still kids) are too embarrassed or scared to approach their parents about it.

Lastly, a lot of younger (11 and up) girls have older boyfriends (not condoning it), and they eventually want sex (still not condoning it), and quite a few of them use the old 'I don't like to wear condoms', 'I don't feel as much when wearing one', 'oops, don't have any'. This way the girl is able to provide for herself and keep herself safe. It's better than unwanted pregnancies or abortions.

Young girls have sex. They shouldn't be, but they are, despite education, warnings, and parental objections. Don't you want them to at least be safe?

[Lace Neil Singer]

Perhaps teaching self respect along with the basic mechanics of sex might be an idea? I don't know about anyone else, but what I was taught was the basic nuts and bolts, along with a vague idea of "don't do it before marriage".

Nothing about relationships, respecting your body, waiting til you're ready, peer pressure, pressure from partners, coercion, positive and negative feelings or indeed anything like that at all that would have given all the facts and made it easier to make a mature decision about having sex.

It's not enough to say, "Well, they're going to do it anyway, so we might as well make sure they're protected"; that's like saying, "Well, they're going to stab each other anyway, so we might as well make sure they're both supplied with sterile knives and plenty of plasters."

[jackfaire]

Wow.
That's like seeing a few drops of rain and jumping to the conclusion that a monsoon is starting.

Safe yes and if it is a case of a kid comes to get a condom and is then enrolled in a sex ed course good.

Not really actually Reproduction is teaching about eggs, vagina, penises etc.

Abstinence is teaching don't do this.

If the goal is to teach children to have safe sex then you can't leave sex out of it. I didn't get a comprehensive safe sex course until I was in college. Before then it was, Use a condom, as the catchall protective measure.

The reality is that your either going to teach the kids about sex ed or not. If you are then that means teaching them how to use a condom how to be safe in the standard sex acts etc.

People seem to want to think you can just tell a kid use a condom and that explains everything but it doesn't. Yes a sex ed course that was actually a sex ed course and not just a "here's condoms but don't use them" course will cover all different types of sex acts and how to be safe performing them especially since you already have older kids thinking, "Hey it wasn't covered in sex ed it's not sex"

[Plaidman]

Huh. Guess my schools were the exception to that. They were pretty indept about it. Both the mechinics at it. The emontions. They showed STDs of what happens, videos of teen girls that got pregnet. All this like, between 2 grade and through sixth.

Granted, I still suck at sex, but I at least knew alot about it.

[jackfaire]

Huh. Guess my schools were the exception to that.


Nah my schools pretty much taught the same stuff but they didn't teach how to put on condoms, to use condoms when giving blowjobs, anyway to protect yourself in any sexual acts.

All we were taught is penis goes in vagina all of that other stuff "wasn't sex" so people did freely and often unsafely.

[Greenday]

We covered everything you could imagine. In middle school. Then they just repeated the information in high school.

[Plaidman]

Nah my schools pretty much taught the same stuff but they didn't teach how to put on condoms, to use condoms when giving blowjobs, anyway to protect yourself in any sexual acts.

All we were taught is penis goes in vagina all of that other stuff "wasn't sex" so people did freely and often unsafely.

We were thaught that. They used bananas though to show us, and let us each practice male and female.
They briefy covered female condems, but didn't expand on it.

[jackfaire]

We covered everything you could imagine. In middle school. Then they just repeated the information in high school.


I think that is the way it should be I just object to a blanket sex ed for kids that haven't yet hit puberty because some may hit puberty before junior high case by case basis. Teach reproduction to my daughter, teach her about the changes that will happen to her body but I know she isn't in puberty yet and it would be nice if she got to be a kid as long as possible.

I don't have my head in the sand I know at some point she needs to learn it all and I hope her school teaches it comprehensive or that her grandmother can have that conversation with her I can but I will do it if necessary.

[blas87]

Katt, I don't mean to get too off topic or say I don't believe you, but can you elaborate on the childhood obesity = faster puberty?

The reason I ask for this is because I started developing breasts at age 10, and I have never been overweight in my life.

[AdminAssistant]

The reason I ask for this is because I started developing breasts at age 10, and I have never been overweight in my life.

And I was overweight when I was 10-11, and didn't start puberty until nearly 13, after I had lost a considerable amount of weight. :shrug:

By the time a kid is ten years old, they already know about sex. I did, all of my classmates did. None of us were doing it, but we all knew about it. I don't think that's too early to talk about 1) puberty and what the hell is happening to your body, and 2) sex and all of its consequences, both emotional and physical.

Abstinence-only sex ed doesn't work. Ignorance doesn't work. Tell kids what's up and do it repeatedly.

[BlaqueKatt]

Katt, I don't mean to get too off topic or say I don't believe you, but can you elaborate on the childhood obesity = faster puberty?

The reason I ask for this is because I started developing breasts at age 10, and I have never been overweight in my life.

did you have a low-fat diet or high fat, high sugar?

article here (http://www.livescience.com/health/070904_bad_puberty.html) goes into more detail

There is a range, and this has been part of the problem of establishing the "normal" age of puberty. Girls might enter full-blown puberty anytime between ages 9 and 15; boys between 11 and 17. There is a rise in "precocious Puberty" that is defined as the onset of puberty before age 7 or 8 in girls or age 9 in boys.

Also, historically, the age of first menstruation, called menarche, declined about 0.3 years per decade from the mid-1800s until the 1960s, attributed to better nutrition. Today the average age of menarche is 12.2 for African Americans and 12.7 for Caucasians. Notice it has declined or gotten earlier since the 1800's-so much for the old "girls were married and pregnant by age 12 a hundred years ago" fallacy.

[Hobbs]

Notice it has declined or gotten earlier since the 1800's-so much for the old "girls were married and pregnant by age 12 a hundred years ago" fallacy.

But they were. In some countries, they still are. So how is that a fallacy? I don't think it was limited to "a hundred years ago" since that would mean the early 20th century, but it was something done quite normally from before at least 1850 (estimate figure).

I remember my first sex-ed in 3rd grade. It just showed the basic functions and only boy-stuff for boys and girl-stuff for girls, if I remember correctly. Then in 4th or 5th we had the one where boys learned about girls and vice-versa. I think it was 6th grade or 7th when we learned about STD's the first time.

[Lace Neil Singer]

We were thaught that. They used bananas though to show us, and let us each practice male and female.
They briefy covered female condems, but didn't expand on it.

I don't know about anyone else, but if I ever met a guy with a yellow, bendy dick that peels, I would definitely NOT be having sex with him. :eek:

[Rebel]

We were thaught that. They used bananas though to show us, and let us each practice male and female.

Ahahahahahhahaa!!!!
Our class had a fake banana to use as well.
Only thing was, the top half of the yellow peel comes off and underneath was a very realistic looking penis. :eek:
Shocked the hell out of us.
And kinda put a few people off bananas for a while (couldn't stop laughing). :D

[jackfaire]

By the time a kid is ten years old, they already know about sex. I did, all of my classmates did. None of us were doing it, but we all knew about it.

Me and my classmates knowledge of sex at age 10 was limited to snickering when someone said Doing it because we thought of that as a way to describe two people having sex but we didn't actually know what sex was.

[Plaidman]

Me and my classmates knowledge of sex at age 10 was limited to snickering when someone said Doing it because we thought of that as a way to describe two people having sex but we didn't actually know what sex was.

Huh.... I knew sex was at 4.

I knew more when I was 8, though not so much by choice.

Since then, I was obsessed with it until I realized it wasn't going to ever happen. (I stopped obsessing over it at ....20...? 21?).

Naturally I had it a few years later, and I sucked. BAAAAAAAAADLY.


Now it's a passing feeling. Not going to happen again for a long time.

[Greenday]

I think that is the way it should be I just object to a blanket sex ed for kids that haven't yet hit puberty because some may hit puberty before junior high case by case basis. Teach reproduction to my daughter, teach her about the changes that will happen to her body but I know she isn't in puberty yet and it would be nice if she got to be a kid as long as possible.

Teaching kids how to be safe during sex doesn't make them an adult all of a sudden.

[jackfaire]

Teaching kids how to be safe during sex doesn't make them an adult all of a sudden.

No it doesn't but it makes them less innocent.

[Bright Star]

It doesn't matter in what context the school is doing it under, the parents MUST have a final say in this. The parents are the ones who raise the children, NOT the school.
Handing out condoms like they're candy is just asking for problems. It's almost as if the school wants the kids to have sex, no matter how old they are.

[McDreidel09]

Handing out condoms like they're candy is just asking for problems. It's almost as if the school wants the kids to have sex, no matter how old they are.

The thing is, they AREN'T handing them out like candy to the elementary school children. The nurses have to ask them questions and are most likely going to deny the younger children. I honestly don't see how the school wants the kids to have sex. They want the condoms available to the middle school children too because middle schoolers are having sex now. At most schools (that I know of), the middle school and elementary school were basically one place and had the same rules.

If parents weren't such prudes, then their children could probably be more open to them. If parents talked about sex more often and of the consequences, then children probably wouldn't be as stupid about their actions. This is why I have these talks often with my 15 year old sister. She feels she can be open with me and not with Mom because Mom doesn't want to deal with it.

[Greenday]

It doesn't matter in what context the school is doing it under, the parents MUST have a final say in this. The parents are the ones who raise the children, NOT the school.
Handing out condoms like they're candy is just asking for problems. It's almost as if the school wants the kids to have sex, no matter how old they are.

As McDreidel already pointed out, you have to go through some questions in order to get a condom. And even if you prevent kids from getting condoms, guess what? They will still have sex anyway. So in the end, which would you prefer?

Kids have sex and be safe.
Kids have sex and don't be safe.

[AdminAssistant]

It doesn't matter in what context the school is doing it under, the parents MUST have a final say in this. The parents are the ones who raise the children, NOT the school.

Fine. And if Little Suzy gets knocked up because she didn't know to insist her boyfriend use a condom, then her family should not be allowed to get any federal assistance for the raising of the child, because her family chose to keep her ignorant of sex and its consequences.

I don't usually scream and yell about "my tax dollars," but this is such a simple way to save money. Spend money on real sex education, and watch teen pregnancy rates go down. Or we can continue to spend a billion dollars per year on ignorance, because heaven forbid we offend a few ultra-religious parents who still think people wait until marriage to have sex.

[Greenday]

Seriously, if you don't want your kid to get decent sex ed, send them to a private school.

[McDreidel09]

Seriously, if you don't want your kid to get decent sex ed, send them to a private school.

I almost spit out my Dr Pepper because sadly, it is true. I know this from personal experience.

[Lace Neil Singer]

As McDreidel already pointed out, you have to go through some questions in order to get a condom. And even if you prevent kids from getting condoms, guess what? They will still have sex anyway. So in the end, which would you prefer?

Kids have sex and be safe.
Kids have sex and don't be safe.

There's a third option; teach kids to respect their bodies and for fuck's sake, wait to have sex with someone who respects them, too. You can talk about kids having sex all you want, but the fact remains that kids aren't mature enough to deal with all the emotions that come with sex. There's no shame in waiting; in fact, anyone who waited to have sex til they were truly ready, whether that's at age fifteen or fifty, rather than spreading their legs for everyone who winks at them, would get better respect from those around them.

[infinitemonkies]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the 'just say no/wait till you're older approach.'

After all, it's how we won the war on drugs, and why there aren't any teenagers who smoke and/or drink.


Seriously, we live in such a sexualized society. Find me a single episode of any prime time sitcom that doesn't mention sex. Sure there are some, but it's a hell of a lot easier to find an episode that is only about sex.
Look at billboards, tv ads, magazine covers. The 6 year old at the grocery store with mommy will see the cosmo cover that reads "6 secrets to giving the best blowjob EVEH!" Or any of the approximately 14 million entertainment mags that exclusively talk about which celebrity is cheating with whom.

I knew all about sex by the time I was in kindergarten. How? By watching tv. Now in the internet age, I guarantee every kid knows way more about sex at any given age than their parents did. I think our mistake as a society is that we're so obsessed with sex, yet at the same time have such huge hangups about it.

And it's seriously fucked up to live in a culture that views violence as entertainment but sex as taboo. I'd much rather find my kids watching hardcore porn than graphic murder/torture scenes found in a great many films.

Millions of poeple freaked out over the superbowl a few years ago. Not because there are 300+ lb steroid using guys in skin tight pants, many with criminal records involving violent crime and illegal drug use, pounding the crap out of each other. That's good wholesome all american entertainment for the whole family. But a not-even half-second flash of Janet Jackson's nipple 'scarred our children for life.'

[Lace Neil Singer]

By the way, I never said that kids shouldn't be given contraception; just that I don't see how just handing out condoms like candy is going to solve the problem of teenage pregnancy when there's no education behind it on the emotional side of sex as well as the physical. Like I said before, it's like saying, "Well, since gang members are going to stab each other anyway, let's hand out clean, sterile knives!" instead of trying to educate teens on not joining gangs and of finding other ways to feel that they belong.

[Red Panda]

No it doesn't but it makes them less innocent.



How is the innocence of children any kind of defense against controceptives? If they know about condoms and how to use them I don't think it will make them more innocent if you don't let them have them. Beisdes, the innocence of children is largely a myth. When have children ever been innocent? Children have always has worries, responcibilites, and pressures.

[Wingates_Hellsing]

By the way, I never said that kids shouldn't be given contraception; just that I don't see how just handing out condoms like candy is going to solve the problem of teenage pregnancy when there's no education behind it on the emotional side of sex as well as the physical. Like I said before, it's like saying, "Well, since gang members are going to stab each other anyway, let's hand out clean, sterile knives!" instead of trying to educate teens on not joining gangs and of finding other ways to feel that they belong.

That makes no sense at all. The free condoms aren't a catch-all, they're just one part. No one's saying that the other parts are completely useless or shouldn't be implemented, merely that this part is important too.

Also, providing condoms doesn't correlate at all with handing out knives. It's more like teaching students to use tourniquets and bandages and providing them so that, when they do get stabbed/shot they can at least treat themselves/each other and stand a better chance of surviving.

[AdminAssistant]

A better corollary might be the clean needle swaps available in major cities. Yes, in a way, they are enabling drug use. However, at least it's slowed down the spread of HIV/AIDS from dirty/shared needles.

[Lace Neil Singer]

Again, I NEVER SAID THAT IT WAS A BAD IDEA. I just would like to see respect etc TAUGHT ALONG SIDE.

It might just cuz I'm not clarifying properly; a better example would be how abortion clinics are. Which is better?

a) Abortions just handed out and women sent away right after without a word.

Or

b) Counselling offered before and after, negative and positives about the option given and the woman given every bit of information and allowed to make the choice.

Is that a better comparison?

[Greenday]

I get what you are trying to get at. You believe that people need to know more than just the physical repercussions of sex.

I don't like the comparison though because you should be forced into counseling like some places try.

[Lace Neil Singer]

I get what you are trying to get at. You believe that people need to know more than just the physical repercussions of sex.


That's it. I guessed that I hadn't explained it properly.