The dangers of youth abstinence pledges are becoming clear

[Phys251]

How an Abstinence Pledge in the ’90s Shamed a Generation of Evangelicals (Published 2021)

The Christian “purity” movement promoted a strict view of abstinence before marriage. But two decades later, some followers are grappling with unforeseen aftershocks.

www.nytimes.com

Many people certainly found lifelong contentment because of having waited for the right mate. But for others, as the Retro Report video shows, the dictates of the purity movement were so emotionally onerous that their adulthoods have been filled with apprehension and, in some instances, physical pain. They are people like Linda Kay Klein, who embraced the movement in her teens but left it in disenchantment at 21, two decades ago.

She described the trauma and the shame she felt this way: “I would find myself in tears and in a ball in the corner of a bed, crying, my eczema coming out, which it does when I’m stressed, and scratching myself till I bled, and having a deep shame reaction.” Ms. Klein found she was far from alone. She collected tales of enduring anxiety in a book, “Pure: Inside the Evangelical Movement That Shamed a Generation of Young Women and How I Broke Free” (Touchstone, 2018). “We went to war with ourselves, our own bodies and our own sexual natures,” she wrote, “all under the strict commandment of the church.”

Conservative sexuality has done a wonderful job of masking itself as a "purity" movement, claiming that "saving oneself until marriage" is one of the best things a young person could do. Purity rings, purity balls (dances, not genital ornaments), purity pledges dominate this movement, all with one single goal: If you wait until marriage with someone of the opposite sex to do anything sexual, you are a good person. Otherwise, you are a bad person. Never mind if you are LGBTQ; the "purity" movement leaves you out entirely.

What this movement really is is a propaganda campaign to make conservative parents feel like they're in control of their children's sexuality. It denies youth the right to learn about and explore sexuality in a safe, healthy manner. Consider Western European countries, which have far fewer illusions about teenage sexuality yet have far lower rates of STIs. They don't shame their youth for having desires that are just as normal as the desire to eat.

The good news is that organized religion in the United States is collapsing, and hopefully, taking this toxic "purity" movement down with it.

 

[grip]

Emploring teens to be sexually responsible is not a bad thing. But parents and society also need to be realistic about that approach. Asking young folk to completely abstain, as they're going thru puberty with heightened desire, does not seem reasonable. Their sexuality is their own business, not really subject to approval.

 

[AmNat]

How an Abstinence Pledge in the ’90s Shamed a Generation of Evangelicals (Published 2021)

The Christian “purity” movement promoted a strict view of abstinence before marriage. But two decades later, some followers are grappling with unforeseen aftershocks.

www.nytimes.com

Conservative sexuality has done a wonderful job of masking itself as a "purity" movement, claiming that "saving oneself until marriage" is one of the best things a young person could do. Purity rings, purity balls (dances, not genital ornaments), purity pledges dominate this movement, all with one single goal: If you wait until marriage with someone of the opposite sex to do anything sexual, you are a good person. Otherwise, you are a bad person. Never mind if you are LGBTQ; the "purity" movement leaves you out entirely.

What this movement really is is a propaganda campaign to make conservative parents feel like they're in control of their children's sexuality. It denies youth the right to learn about and explore sexuality in a safe, healthy manner. Consider Western European countries, which have far fewer illusions about teenage sexuality yet have far lower rates of STIs. They don't shame their youth for having desires that are just as normal as the desire to eat.

The good news is that organized religion in the United States is collapsing, and hopefully, taking this toxic "purity" movement down with it.

You're really interested in children having sex, aren't you?

 

[COTO]

In one corner, we have a 21-year-old woman with "a deep shame reaction". In the other corner, we have 65 million Americans with incurable sexual diseases, 850,000 abortions per year, 34% of children living with an unmarried parent (up from just 9% in 1960, and 19% in 1980), and 70% of all US families being dysfunctional.

Phys251: Great Scott! There's a woman with "a deep shame reaction". It must be because saving yourself for marriage is a bad idea. It's a good thing there are no consequences to not saving yourself for marriage. Definitely nothing that could compete with a woman having a "deep shame reaction", in any case.

 

[Phys251]

In one corner, we have a 21-year-old woman with "a deep shame reaction". In the other corner, we have 65 million Americans with incurable sexual diseases, 850,000 abortions per year, 34% of children living with an unmarried parent (up from just 9% in 1960, and 19% in 1980), and 70% of all US families being dysfunctional.

Says someone who has no problem with over half a million dead Americans. Your poutrage means nothing.

Phys251: Great Scott! There's a woman with "a deep shame reaction". It must be because saving yourself for marriage is a bad idea. It's a good thing there are no consequences to not saving yourself for marriage. Definitely nothing that could compete with a woman having a "deep shame reaction", in any case.

You don't need to broadcast your ignorance of human sexuality that loudly, Coto. I can safely say that I know a hell of a lot more about this than you do.

 

[COTO]

In the news today:

According to a report that was just released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, cases of chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis in the United States reached the highest level ever recorded in 2019. Thanks to the popularity of Internet “dating apps”, there has been a boom in casual sex in recent years, and this has resulted in a tsunami of STD cases that is absolutely unprecedented in our history. Needless to say, this is not a sign of a healthy society.​

In other news, two more women and one man report experiencing "deep shame reactions" to sexual abstinence in Delaware this past week. The US Surgeon General plans to declare a "shame epidemic" and secure $600 million in funding for dating apps and sexual paraphernalia to combat the problem.

 

[joko104]

Says someone who has no problem with over half a million dead Americans. Your poutrage means nothing.



You don't need to broadcast your ignorance of human sexuality that loudly, Coto. I can safely say that I know a hell of a lot more about this than you do.

Still upset it's not 2 million dead, are you?

Keep going. Tell us all you know about adolescent sexual promiscuity. You had a lot of sex with a lot of people before marriage? Have a lot of sex with young unmarried teens now?

 

[roguenuke]

In one corner, we have a 21-year-old woman with "a deep shame reaction". In the other corner, we have 65 million Americans with incurable sexual diseases, 850,000 abortions per year, 34% of children living with an unmarried parent (up from just 9% in 1960, and 19% in 1980), and 70% of all US families being dysfunctional.

Phys251: Great Scott! There's a woman with "a deep shame reaction". It must be because saving yourself for marriage is a bad idea. It's a good thing there are no consequences to not saving yourself for marriage. Definitely nothing that could compete with a woman having a "deep shame reaction", in any case.

Many of those problems you mentioned aren't simply in that other corner. Purity pledges don't normally work. They lead to single mothers and secret abortions and STDs because children are "breaking" their pledges in secret, feeling ashamed for doing that, and then do these other things to cover it up or don't know how to establish healthy relationships or they have no clue how to prevent STIs and unwanted pregnancy since they were taught "just don't do it", instead of things that would help them.

 

[joko104]

Maybe the OPer should state the age he claims children should start having sex for their mental health? From the messages, I gather that is the moment they enter puberty - age 11 for girls and 12 for boys.

 

[joko104]

It seems like in the 1960s and into the 70s when it became necessary to be an enlightened person you must resist and tear down every tradition. As it became harder to find more thing about American society to hate and eliminate, the more bizarre and petty it becomes.

Marriage concepts have become bizarre. Marriage used to be so people could have sex, live with a person of the other sex, and join together collectively to form a home and family. Can't do that until married.

This has been reversed. The "enlightened" view is that people should - starting young - have lots of sex with lots of people - and quickly cohabit together one after another. A person should do this for years and until they had completed all their educational and service-to-corporations as their priorities of life. Only when a person accomplished all that - and only when a person has had all the sex for an entire lifetime - should the person marry.

Marriage to most Americans, therefore, is the anti-sex and anti-freedom relationship. Effectively, marriage is agreeing to a massive set of prohibitive and punitive rules - most of all the no-sex rule only married people must follow.

You people are nuts.

 

[Phys251]

In the news today:

According to a report that was just released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, cases of chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis in the United States reached the highest level ever recorded in 2019. Thanks to the popularity of Internet “dating apps”, there has been a boom in casual sex in recent years, and this has resulted in a tsunami of STD cases that is absolutely unprecedented in our history. Needless to say, this is not a sign of a healthy society.​

In other news, two more women and one man report experiencing "deep shame reactions" to sexual abstinence in Delaware this past week. The US Surgeon General plans to declare a "shame epidemic" and secure $600 million in funding for dating apps and sexual paraphernalia to combat the problem.

Point #1 was from a blog that gives the kind of distortion about human sexuality that is common to the social cons.

Point #2 requires a source. A good source, not a right-wing hack site.

 

[bomberfox]

In one corner, we have a 21-year-old woman with "a deep shame reaction". In the other corner, we have 65 million Americans with incurable sexual diseases, 850,000 abortions per year, 34% of children living with an unmarried parent (up from just 9% in 1960, and 19% in 1980), and 70% of all US families being dysfunctional.

Phys251: Great Scott! There's a woman with "a deep shame reaction". It must be because saving yourself for marriage is a bad idea. It's a good thing there are no consequences to not saving yourself for marriage. Definitely nothing that could compete with a woman having a "deep shame reaction", in any case.

Sex education can solve that.

 

[bomberfox]

As a funny aside an evangelical gave us earthworm jim. Kinda makes you think

 

[j brown's body]

I don't have a problem with teaching the value of abstinence, but it should be part of a comprehensive sex education program that and also making a wide variety of contraceptives available.

 

[joko104]

Why are so many men of this forum fixated on sex with children - and furious at anyone who doesn't declare that children should have as much sex with as many people as possible as young as possible?

That seems a common theme on this sexuality forum.

 

[joko104]

Emploring teens to be sexually responsible is not a bad thing. But parents and society also need to be realistic about that approach. Asking young folk to completely abstain, as they're going thru puberty with heightened desire, does not seem reasonable. Their sexuality is their own business, not really subject to approval.

And when their 15 year old has a baby they should refuse to assist because that also is none of their business, right? The sexual activities of children are ALWAYS "the business" of parents - and way, way up the list.

 

[roguenuke]

I don't have a problem with teaching the value of abstinence, but it should be part of a comprehensive sex education program that and also making a wide variety of contraceptives available.

I always like to think back and refer to my own, Catholic mother who was also a nurse in these discussions. She taught us that it was best and healthiest, wisest for us to wait until marriage or at the least until we were old enough to actually be able to accept the responsibility for any consequences for our actions (and she started early with the sex talks). She emphasized though that she understood that sometimes we may make poor decisions or irresponsible decisions in matters of sex, so then at the very least precautions should be taken, such as using a condom, using birth control, and knowing who the person is that you are having sex with. She talked about other things too, including developing strong relationships and how sex shouldn't be seen as something bad, but it usually came back to being responsible. She always told us that she would be more than willing to get us birth control if we told her we thought we may have sex when we were younger just to make sure we were at least protected there and that she would also provide condoms. There were no teen pregnancies or STIs in my immediate family.

 

[joko104]

Reading the entire NYT blog? Truly bizarre. The author, "Clyde," apparently frustrated he can't have sex with with children, blames the 1990s Baptist "abstention" campaign on Donald Trump. With such a bizarre TDS claim, can anyone take anything Clyde writes seriously?

Clyde is a sicko. He blames teen pregnancy and STDs results when children don't have sex. The ONLY way to avoid pregnancy and STDs is by sex. That's his claim. Pregnancy and STDs come from not having sex.

I'll let the OPer explain how Trump is responsible for the Southern Baptist Church of the 1990s. But since the OPer refused to answer at what age he claims children should start having sex it is unlikely this will be answered either.

 

[grip]

And when their 15 year old has a baby they should refuse to assist because that also is none of their business, right? The sexual activities of children are ALWAYS "the business" of parents - and way, way up the list.

The sexual activity of children is certainly the business of parents. I said whatever a teen's sexual identity turns out to be is their own business. You can try and force your ideas on another but it won't stick.

 

[joko104]

Many of those problems you mentioned aren't simply in that other corner. Purity pledges don't normally work. They lead to single mothers and secret abortions and STDs because children are "breaking" their pledges in secret, feeling ashamed for doing that, and then do these other things to cover it up or don't know how to establish healthy relationships or they have no clue how to prevent STIs and unwanted pregnancy since they were taught "just don't do it", instead of things that would help them.

Teaching abstention does not lead to teen pregnancy, secret abortions and STDs. If you have proof that all teen pregancies, STDs and secret abortions are by the children of Christian parents teaching abstention - prove it.

The blog is just typical hate-on-Christians, pro sex with children, and wrapping it all up bizarrely in hatred of Trump. It's just crap.

 

[joko104]

The sexual activity of children is certainly the business of parents. I said whatever a teen's sexual identity turns out to be is their own business. You can try and force your ideas on another but it won't stick.

You are shifting to sexual identity? THAT also very much is something parents should be concerned about. Our oldest daughter is a lesbian, now married to a woman. This town is extremely conservative in such regards. We, as parents, spotted her "sexual identity," while she was in self denial of it and was setting out to force herself in the other direction. She's cute as can be.
When some guy was increasingly pressuring her, even going to a junior prom with him, we injected, asking if she WANTED to be with him. "No, not really." So we ran him off - forcibly, banned her from ever being with him, and talked to his parents for him to keep him away because he was just showing up uninvited and her afraid to tell him to leave. To teach her when and why to say "no," and to make it happen, no matter what peer pressure demanded otherwise.

Teens are not particularly rational. Peer pressure is massively powerful. Often more powerful than weak milk toast uninvolved parents. A parent's job is to overpower that peer pressure - forcibly if necessary. To prevent bad judgment. Adolescents and young teens making decisions upon hormone changes is exactly NOT how to make decisions, including about relationships and sex.

I don't buy the sobbing blog of "what my parents did decades ago - telling me not to have sex until married - destroyed me for the rest of my life" stuff. But blaming everyone else for your own problems is the American way for most Americans now.

A minister's daughter who followed all the religious behavioral, my Mrs. only kissed 1 man - briefly - prior to marriage - a promiscuous man, but who would respect her declared beliefs. She didn't have an unwanted abortion, get an STD, or was confused of her sexual identity. She didn't become a druggie. Not an alcoholic. No man every broke her heart or dumped her. Not having sex prior to marriage didn't destroy her life like the author claims it would.

 

[roguenuke]

Teaching abstention does not lead to teen pregnancy, secret abortions and STDs. If you have proof that all teen pregancies, STDs and secret abortions are by the children of Christian parents teaching abstention - prove it.

The blog is just typical hate-on-Christians, pro sex with children, and wrapping it all up bizarrely in hatred of Trump. It's just crap.

Teaching abstinence only does lead to higher rates of teen pregnancy, secret abortions, and STDs.

I have not said all here. That is your attempt at a strawman. But I have indicated that purity pledges or abstinence only education does absolutely lead to increases in those things because kids/teens are not taught how to properly guard against irresponsible behavior rather just told "don't be irresponsible", which does not work when it comes to children all the time, every child, regardless of how "strong" your faith is.

Abstinence-Only Education and Teen Pregnancy Rates: Why We Need Comprehensive Sex Education in the U.S

The United States ranks first among developed nations in rates of both teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. In an effort to reduce these rates, the U.S. government has funded abstinence-only sex education programs for more than a decade. ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

"The more strongly abstinence is emphasized in state laws and policies, the higher the average teenage pregnancy and birth rate. "

Abstinence-Only Education Is Ineffective And Unethical, Report Argues

Researchers say that programs advocating abstinence until marriage fail to get teens to delay sexual activity and also prevent them from getting important information about pregnancy and STDs.

www.npr.org

How Purity Pledges Lead to Unintended Pregnancies and STDs

Teens who vow to be abstinent until marriage are more likely to contract STDs and have unintended pregnancies.

www.theatlantic.com

“Our research indicates that abstinence pledging can have unintended negative consequences by increasing the likelihood of HPV and non-marital pregnancies, the majority of which are unintended,” Paik said in a statement. “Abstinence-only sex education policy is widespread at the state and local levels and may return at the federal level, and this policy approach may be contributing to the decreased sexual and reproductive health of girls and young women.”

I have no issue admitting that the "secret abortions" part is an assumption on my part, but the other two are supported by research.

 

[grip]

You are shifting to sexual identity? THAT also very much is something parents should be concerned about. Our oldest daughter is a lesbian, now married to a woman. This town is extremely conservative in such regards. We, as parents, spotted her "sexual identity," while she was in self denial of it and was setting out to force herself in the other direction. She's cute as can be.
When some guy was increasingly pressuring her, even going to a junior prom with him, we injected, asking if she WANTED to be with him. "No, not really." So we ran him off - forcibly, banned her from ever being with him, and talked to his parents for him to keep him away because he was just showing up uninvited and her afraid to tell him to leave. To teach her when and why to say "no," and to make it happen, no matter what peer pressure demanded otherwise.

Teens are not particularly rational. Peer pressure is massively powerful. Often more powerful than weak milk toast uninvolved parents. A parent's job is to overpower that peer pressure - forcibly if necessary. To prevent bad judgment. Adolescents and young teens making decisions upon hormone changes is exactly NOT how to make decisions, including about relationships and sex.

I don't buy the sobbing blog of "what my parents did decades ago - telling me not to have sex until married - destroyed me for the rest of my life" stuff. But blaming everyone else for your own problems is the American way for most Americans now.

A minister's daughter who followed all the religious behavioral, my Mrs. only kissed 1 man - briefly - prior to marriage - a promiscuous man, but who would respect her declared beliefs. She didn't have an unwanted abortion, get an STD, or was confused of her sexual identity. She didn't become a druggie. Not an alcoholic. No man every broke her heart or dumped her. Not having sex prior to marriage didn't destroy her life like the author claims it would.

Shift?

sex·u·al·i·ty:
a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are typically attracted; sexual orientation

And yes, it's none of your business once they hit puberty. You can try and force your ideas on them but you'll just be driving them away.

 

[joko104]

In one sense, it depends how much a person trivializes having sex. The more trivial, the less reason to be selective

Teaching abstinence only does lead to higher rates of teen pregnancy, secret abortions, and STDs.

I have not said all here. That is your attempt at a strawman. But I have indicated that purity pledges or abstinence only education does absolutely lead to increases in those things because kids/teens are not taught how to properly guard against irresponsible behavior rather just told "don't be irresponsible", which does not work when it comes to children all the time, every child, regardless of how "strong" your faith is.

Abstinence-Only Education and Teen Pregnancy Rates: Why We Need Comprehensive Sex Education in the U.S

The United States ranks first among developed nations in rates of both teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. In an effort to reduce these rates, the U.S. government has funded abstinence-only sex education programs for more than a decade. ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

"The more strongly abstinence is emphasized in state laws and policies, the higher the average teenage pregnancy and birth rate. "

Abstinence-Only Education Is Ineffective And Unethical, Report Argues

Researchers say that programs advocating abstinence until marriage fail to get teens to delay sexual activity and also prevent them from getting important information about pregnancy and STDs.

www.npr.org

How Purity Pledges Lead to Unintended Pregnancies and STDs

Teens who vow to be abstinent until marriage are more likely to contract STDs and have unintended pregnancies.

www.theatlantic.com

“Our research indicates that abstinence pledging can have unintended negative consequences by increasing the likelihood of HPV and non-marital pregnancies, the majority of which are unintended,” Paik said in a statement. “Abstinence-only sex education policy is widespread at the state and local levels and may return at the federal level, and this policy approach may be contributing to the decreased sexual and reproductive health of girls and young women.”

I have no issue admitting that the "secret abortions" part is an assumption on my part, but the other two are supported by research.

I see NO distinction between a couple that marry and live together, and a couple that don't marry and live together. However, such stats exclude all couples who don't have a marriage license, making the stats deliberately false and distorted.

I'll add that of itself, I see no problem with "teen pregnancy." But, then, I don't believe everyone was born for which the purpose of their life is to serve as a minor clog in the gears of corporations and employers. Then again, I've posted now and then that USA has become one of the most anti-children countries in the world. What possibly worse could happen to a woman than have a child? That will destroy her life. Get an education so you can get a job serving a corporation - that should be the goal of everyone. Don't mess up your corporate employment future by destroying your life with a child. It is the duty of making certain every school girl is taught this.

We killed a practice of having girls in HS carry a bag of flour everywhere for a month to teach them the burdens of having a child. Teaching girls to hate babies? That having a child is nothing but a horrific burden? Oh hell no. We stomped on that big time. Successfully.

 

[joko104]

Shift?

sex·u·al·i·ty:
a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are typically attracted; sexual orientation

And yes, it's none of your business once they hit puberty. You can try and force your ideas on them but you'll just be driving them away.

Maybe that's what would happen for how you would parent. Not us.

We have often battled with the school trying to teach our children morality and how they should engage in relationships on so many levels. Declaring that boys are predators and girls are prey. How they should act on a date. How they should act in relationships. How awful it is to have a baby. Why they must get a college degree before marriage - and what marriage is. How to act in marriage. On and on - even interrogating the kids about their lives, relationships, and family life.

My Mrs. carries huge social and political power. School staff and the school board hold their breathe if she shows up. Yes they will change the cafeteria to accommodate vegans and vegetarians. No, they won't require our kid(s) or any kids to write papers on their views on relationships, their personal life or their family life. No, they won't ask children to talk or write about their home life. They will not teach children what marriage should be and shouldn't be. Our campaign to end the harassment of LGBTs was completely successful too - and all we wanted was the school staff to stay completely out of it, which they did.

If you are thinking that is from a rightwing religious perspective you are thinking 100% wrong. Government, treating our child like a cow in an endless herd of cattle for generic social doctrine of this year, isn't going to happen. We are exceptionally traditional and exceptionally counter culture, depending on the topic and circumstance. ALL of that, or any of that about our children, is NONE of the government's business. Not only will the school stay out of our bedroom, they'll stay out of our children's bedrooms - and every other aspect of their private life not related to academics and school activities.

Teaching:"People should not marry until they have completed their education and established their career - and then marriage is between 2 people in a monogamous relationship, regardless of gender." Oh hell no, you're not going to teach our children that and force them to state agreement. They are going to teach and test OUR children ONLY on academic topics. We, the parents, will decision how to try to guide, protect and empower our children. It definitely won't be to be like what they are dictating. We have and teach far more restrictions and vastly more liberties than they do. We'll take care of education on the topic of sex and relationship - by words, discussion, rules and example.

I do understand schools trying to make up for all the failures of lazy-ass don't-give-a-damn parents, which is the REAL problem, not overly involved Christian parents. Regardless, we are hyper helicopter parents and will not tolerate outsiders getting in the middle with their counter demands using the authority of tests and grades to enforce their values on our children. Screw up their own children with the ever-changing local PC and SJW controls, restrictions, rules and requirements of private life behavior.