Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yea, Urban Sasquatch, there y'are. Who said they like having shlt in their face? Didn't see that anywhere. This is an interesting thread, but it never ceases to amaze me how people twist statements. Would like to see where you got that inference. I think my post was the only one that even bordered on it. If it was, I'll address it if you tell me where you got it.
Actually, BJ, I was referring to several instances where UNLIKE in your post (where you said you waver in your estimation of teen girls since sometimes sex is empowerment and other times DISempowerment) some are pretending sex is all about ONLY sex and/or procreation and apparently has nothing whatsoever to do with self esteem either before or after a girl has spread her legs.
Since you're so disgusted with my statement (which was figurative, NOT taking anyone's statement and twisting it and not referring to you at all) read back through the thread and please, deny to me that there are folks here attempting to do exactly what I stated: Pretend and/or justify that there is NO image and/or self-esteem factor for girls and young women with regard to easy sex.
I've provided my source of inference, broad as it is (I prefer to look at things as a whole rather than spending my time nit-picking); now tell ME why you've got such a problem with what I said in my post(s). If this was the only thing you could pick out to try and exhibit your apparent disdain for me as a poster then you're clutching at straws and thin air, baby.
It's not a single cause; it's many, many causes. I blame a plethora of things ranging from Mtv and the evolution of "sexual liberation" all the way to Feminism (as differentiated per my thinking from Women's Lib -- NOT the same thing) and its faux-empowerment and aggrandized entitlement; from both male and female patterns of thought all the way to the illogical patterns of socio-cultural development since the 1940's.
Everyone wants to blame someTHING but it's not any one thing, it's MANY things.
More ludicrous (or perhaps "sad and pathetic" is the most apt description since there is a marked tragedy in this phenomenon) people want to either revile or justify negative behaviour, pointing out the successful exceptions rather than face the facts of the prevalent UNsuccessful rule.
Just because you can insist you LIKE having crap on your face doesn't mean the rest of us have to believe it. That's okay, though; you GO, Lone Wolf, you GO!
Back on topic, this most assuredly IS, as already pointed out, present in both boys and girls today.
It's well and good to say "so long as they're not getting pregnant or spreading STD's what's the harm" by way of justifying what one is clearly trying to label "sexual empowerment" -- and so long as they aren't doing any of that, there's NOT a SEXUAL difference between boys and girls, no reason one should be labeled a **** while the other slapped on the back.
(NOTE: to the chick who labeled this action "typically male", GET BENT! That was amazingly offensive and derogatory toward men as a whole and wouldn't be tolerated for a second if the genders were reversed.)
However, as much as we walk around pretending there's no difference between boys and girls and worse, pretending there should be no difference -- there still is. There always has been and always will be so long as females carry the babies and males can't. Not "won't" -- CAN'T. Believe me, I'd love nothing more (except a loving and trustworthy partner) than to select an egg donor, fertilize that egg and have a healthy child of MY own without being saddled by a woman -- but that's NOT possible, so discussing it is absolutely POINTLESS.
This topic, however, is NOT pointless.
Children are raised without parents present for much of the time, due to various factors. Like it or not, the demise of the "Traditional American Family" has left children without positive influence of one parent or the other, or sometimes without either. Often there are no responsible elder sibs to help make up for the gap.
Someone asked what the effect of the microwave was, how it could be detrimental. The microwave was a symbol of a life of luxury and ease, not a shout for help against all things electronic. THAT's how it's detrimental. Kids no longer know the meaning of honest labour or the sense of reward it can yield. Everything is handed to them. I'm not advocating Dark Ages child enslavement, but we're living in an age where many kids will QUIT a job because the manager asks them to stay late and help lock up.
Someone commented how any male who looks at a female in a derogatory fashion just because she slept with him is a misogynistic dbag. TYPICALLY female remark, and amazingly narrow-minded as well since it's disregarding the male view of not THAT she slept with him but HOW and WHY she slept with him that matters regarding whether a male respects her afterward or not.
That's NOT all-inclusive; some boys/men are simply jerks the same way some girls/women WILL simply spread their legs for any swinging penis that comes down the pike.
If she slept with him because she really liked him and she ended up getting used, that's a crying shame but it's life. He needs to get punched by other boys or men but it's still just Life.
If she slept with him because she thought it would make him like her, then she's perpetuating her own low self-esteem problems and the fault lies with her a bit more than with him BECAUSE she had choice and control over her own body while he simply had desire. Don't give me that garbage about social pressures; if a boy succumbs to social pressures we slap him around verbally and demean him for being "weak" and "giving in"; if girls do, we blame the social pressures for "making these girls do it". It's another BS victim card, so long as we're decrying double standards.
Kids today aren't just reared in a highly sexualized society where bump-and-grind is thrust in your face at every turn; they're raised in a high-pressure highly sexualized society.
Girls see Paris Hilton behaving badly and getting rewarded with attention and glamour. They see Britney wearing less and less clothing and doing her slow grind, surrounded by adoring man-candy -- and they want that life too.
(I just know SOME budding little Women's Studies collegiate is going to renounce that because "girls are smarter than that and can see through it" -- but before you do, ask yourself whether you consider yourself "of above average intelligence", because if you do then you have to admit those who are merely average or below average just MIGHT succumb to that form of "pressure", mightn't they?!? EVERY girl out there can't be above average, can she? And "average" or below makes up the MAJORITY by sheer numbers, right?)
Boys see thug-hip-hop stars speaking poorly of females in general WHILE scantily clad women with unbelievable physical attributes grind all over them. They don't take into account that this is acting and these women are paid to do this in a video, they see these men denouncing women and being rewarded with SEX. They see MONEY and POWER.
Respect yourself and others will learn to respect you. Pretending you do... hell, eventually everyone sees through that garbage. A thing is REAL or a thing is NOT -- and if you don't respect yourself no one else will respect you, either.
And another thing: Edward Cullen is a fictional character. He's never coming for you!
this was golden! definitely worth the read....thanks
Since you're so disgusted with my statement (which was figurative, NOT taking anyone's statement and twisting it and not referring to you at all) read back through the thread and please, deny to me that there are folks here attempting to do exactly what I stated: Pretend and/or justify that there is NO image and/or self-esteem factor for girls and young women with regard to easy sex.
Aha. Well, thank you for clarifying. Hmmm. If I were going to try to nail the naysayer pulse of the thread overall, I'd say that most posters generally feel that our culture is overreacting to teen sex, that concerns about teen sexuality are historically ubiquitous, and that assessments of current teen sexual behavior, deemed promiscuity in comparison with past generations, are exaggerated and inaccurate. While I can see that this suggests that teen sexual behavior has little relationship to self-esteem, I don't think that equates to enjoying degradation. Which is why I didn't understand where you got that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban Sasquatch
I've provided my source of inference, broad as it is (I prefer to look at things as a whole rather than spending my time nit-picking); now tell ME why you've got such a problem with what I said in my post(s). If this was the only thing you could pick out to try and exhibit your apparent disdain for me as a poster then you're clutching at straws and thin air, baby.
I dig your confrontational ways, Urban Sasquatch, which is why I responded. That said, your comment that, ideally, you would like to procreate on a self-contained island, eliminate your associations with women, and control your child's upbringing completely suggests that you are a bit... ridiculous! Nah, but it does make you sound angry and suspicious.
[quote=GypsySoul22;14265599]I blame the girls for some of it, the boys for some, and the parents for some.
I know my niece has had minimal supervision and at 21 she is pregnant AGAIN by some guy. She claims this is her 'love of her life' but 1) I have never seen any photos of him or her together up on any of her social network sites. What young girl doesn't love showing off her guy?
2) She had a baby with another player 2 years ago. Yes, he has kids already by various women.
Where my niece lives apparently she is part of a big enclave of single girls with various babies by numerous men...There is no stigma with having these babies. The girls glorify in it as they scrape by living off the state w/mom and dad or mom and her latest fling...
In the culture of these men (avoiding racism here) it is considered good to have many kids by many women and a badge of manhood. Too bad these 'men' don't take responsibility and hand over $$$ in stead of expecting the state to foot the bill.
Her brother is no better. He has a kid with his LT girlfriend, but at least they are in a relationship, if barely. He's not really responsible enough to be a father.
To men, the whole thing is stupid. At 19 or 20 or 22 use birth control. Don't prove that you love these losers by bearing their kids...kids they don't even pay for...
I hate how ghetto culture has been embraced by mainstream young people...[/quote]
very sad state of the union.......
I think the real question is that as long as the teenage girls aren't getting pregnant and making babies and as long as they aren't getting or spreading STD's, are promiscuous girls really a problem? I'm talking societally here, not religiously. Obviously if it's against your religion to have sex before marriage, then it's a problem whether or not you're a teen girl.
Your answer exemplifies THE REASON for this problem. THE CULTURE tells girls that it's good to give it up. But it really isn't ok. And here is a big reason: responsibility. Sex requires responsibility. Kids have none.
With perfect use, condoms are 1% ineffective. Which means that after one year 1 sexually active girl in 100 will become pregnant. And we all know that real world numbers are far worse. The more promiscuous girls there are, the more unplanned pregnancies there will be. Then we open up a pandora's box of unwed young mothers, kids being raised without fathers, or worse, millions of aborted babies.
If, and I do mean if, teenage girls are more promiscuous today than they were 50 years ago, I think it has more to do with the parenting or lack of, than Miley Cyrus or Brittney Spears. Don't forget, back in the 50's parents thought Elvis was evil and that their teens were going to become criminals merely on the influence of rock and roll. Funny thing is, those same teens who were twisting to Chubby Checker, later echoed their parents concerns when the Beatles and Rolling Stone came on the scene. Each generation looks for something or someone to blame for their children's bad behavior.
I will admit that with each passing generation, the music does get more suggestive and more offensive, and teens today are exposed to way more violence and sexuality than ever before. But that just means parents need to be more diligent. Monitoring your child's computer usage, cell phone usage, whereabouts, and friends. Teens have been trying to get away with whatever they can since the beginning of time. Not much has changed in how a teen's hormones are on fire 24/7, whether we're talking about teens from 1960 or 2010. When I was a teen, some girls were easy and some weren't. Mostly it came down to how they were raised and how much influence their parents had over them.
IMO, The problem is local culture, or family culture, surrounding the people in question. It is nonsense to blame it on national or global culture.
As a parent, it is your fault if you allow national media culture to become the dominant force in your child's life, instead of your own family culture, or that of your local town and social class. Part of this is putting your child in a place where he/she is surrounded by the best influences.
This is why upper-middle class Americans can be so obsessive about getting their kids into the right neighborhoods/school districts/preschool programs.. to have the right friends, et cetera. The behavior of your child's peers rubs off on them.
Thank you. Finally, someone with some sense posting here!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That said, your comment that, ideally, you would like to procreate on a self-contained island, eliminate your associations with women, and control your child's upbringing completely suggests that you are a bit... ridiculous! Nah, but it does make you sound angry and suspicious.
There is no stigma with having these babies. The girls glorify in it as they scrape by living off the state w/mom and dad or mom and her latest fling...
