Topic: Chastity

[Wargamer]

What we need to do is educate them.

And by that I don't mean some beslubbering stupid video about "Johnny Condom", or some 40 year old explaining how the penis is around from placid to erect via physical or mental stimulation.

I mean teaching what sex is about; how to do it, how to get other people to do it, why people do it in the first place, the risks, the rewards, and so on.

Sex education for me, as far as I can remember it, consisted essentially of "boys have a penis, girls have a vagina. You must not have sex at all until you're 30 and married!" Yeah, like that'll stop teenage pregancy. Come on, when I started sex-ed me and my friends laughed at the word "vagina". We didn't take it seriously, we weren't ready to, on any level. Sex needs to be something we are told about when we need to know, not when we just hit puberty and are still wondering why the hell we aren't allowed on the climbing frame anymore.

[Col. Or'es'o (retired)]

Yup. Until it is treated in a reasonable way by education and people in general then teenagers are gonna rush to want it more. Who doesnt want something supposedly sacred? Especially if its dangerous and always meaningful? Its just silly, and dangerously so.

The evidence is abundantly clear: if you want to reduce teenage pregnancy, etc then you lower the age of consent to the same level as puberty (or as near as you dare) and you demystify the whole process on an emotional, not mechanical level through useful and positive sex ed.

Of course, America is going down the abstinance super-sacred route, which although it does raise the average age of people having sex, it increases the risk of people thinking that sex is so special that they dont need to protect themselves. Thus STD's and pregnancy is the order of the day.

Britain is largely confused, Sex ed is steadily getting better, but theres a big wash of odd legislation against progress. Recently they outlawed all sexual contact among children under the age of consent (16). This sounds fine until you realise that 'kiss-chase' and er, 'exploration' is banned. As soon as our children reach 16 they get everything at once with no opportunity at sexual contact in a safe environment beforehand (sexual contact also being simply holding hands, etc). This is besides the fact its entirely impossible to enforce and I reckons it can only damage peoples attitudes to sex in the long run.

[Wargamer]

Britain is largely confused, Sex ed is steadily getting better, but theres a big wash of odd legislation against progress. Recently they outlawed all sexual contact among children under the age of consent (16). This sounds fine until you realise that 'kiss-chase' and er, 'exploration' is banned.

...wow, so I broke the law about half a dozen times before I was 12... sweet.

[-Makenshi-]

Britain is largely confused, Sex ed is steadily getting better, but theres a big wash of odd legislation against progress. Recently they outlawed all sexual contact among children under the age of consent (16). This sounds fine until you realise that 'kiss-chase' and er, 'exploration' is banned. As soon as our children reach 16 they get everything at once with no opportunity at sexual contact in a safe environment beforehand (sexual contact also being simply holding hands, etc). This is besides the fact its entirely impossible to enforce and I reckons it can only damage peoples attitudes to sex in the long run.

Just reminded me, my old school was in the news at the beginning of the school year for making it agaisnt the rules to show any kind of public affection (you got a detention or two), what's the betting it resulted in more private affection?

~MTWC

[Devern, The Unsung Hero]

Having taken part in American sex-ed, there's one fundmental problem I see.  The first thing that comes out of their mouth is, "abstinence."  Don't have sex until you're married, that is the only way!  They preach that, for weeks on end.  Yet, they spend all of one day(in my class) explaining a condom and how to use it properly.  This seriously needs to be changed.

As for chastity.  To each their own.  Although, my advice, atleast do it with someone you share some bond with..and who wont turn into a psycho be-atch when you move and date your friend 2 hours later and begin a smear campaign about your reputation.  *cough* er..sorry about that.  As you can see, one of those cases that went badly.  

In the grand scheme of things, I think the whole view of sex needs some serious overhaul.

[rogueviper]

Maybe because were I grew up in Canada we had a fanatastic sex ed program, started in grade 4 or 5, sex has never seemed like a grand mystery. or sacred, or dangerous. Kids over here do it because it feels awesome. A good sex ed program didn't stop 15 or 16 year olds from having sex. I mean everyone has questions about their first time that no class can answer. ever. you just have to experiment and kids will always do that.

Cheers

Mitch

[Kage2020]

I don't suppose there are any individuals who can comment upon the Nordic (or at least Danish) system?  I heard some interesting approaches to sex/etc. from that country...

For me?  Yes, I remember the mid-teens (and earlier) when everyone was trying their hardest to have sex, or some form of sexual contact.  Heck, it even happened to some of the people who said it happened.  Overall, though?  I don't give a fig about 'chastity' whether for or against.  It's ultimately up to the individuals involved, assuming that they are consenting, legal and at least have half a brain about unwanted pregancies and contraception (unwanted or otherwise! ), STDs etc.  That's where the education comes in...

As rogueviper says, people are always going to experiment.  They've been doing it for... well, a rather lone time!

Oh yes.  One other thing.  Kids are vicious.  Especially school kids.  I've seen nicer piranha enraged by weeks of privation and cannibalism act nicer when a bleeding cow comes into the river than kids when they have 'gossip'.  And 'kids' here can also include the post-18 year old type.

Kage

[Lomendil]

I don't see Chastity as a moral virtue, but I can admire people who decide it's the way for them and have the endurance to stick to it.

[Col. Or'es'o (retired)]

I don't see Chastity as a moral virtue, but I can admire people who decide it's the way for them and have the endurance to stick to it.

Eh? Its not a virtue, but you admire them anyway? Contradiction surely?

As a side note, do you admire vegetarians or lactose intolerant people too? Or what about workaholic types who sacrifice not only their sex life, but their entire social life for a materialist ideal?
If Chastity is not inherently morally virtuous, then surely these people are doing roughly the same thing (denying things to themselves) for equivelent reasons; respectively: disgust of meat/promiscuity, fear for their life/afterlife and blind faith in the ideal of wealth/god's graces.

[Lomendil]

I don't see Chastity as a moral virtue, but I can admire people who decide it's the way for them and have the endurance to stick to it.

Eh? Its not a virtue, but you admire them anyway? Contradiction surely?

Nope. I don't see Chastity as a moral virtue in it's own right, but I admire the determination and self-control of people who decide they want to be chaste and actually stick to it. I see it in a similar way as I'd see a feat of strength or athleticism. It's the strength of will, nothing to do with chastity being morally good. IMO, chastity is morally neutral.

[Col. Or'es'o (retired)]

So what about the other stuff, are they equivelent admirable feats of will?

The point im driving at is, although its true its an excercise of will and that in itself is admirable, the petty goal itself really undermines the value of that. Its like a great feat of athleticism to reach a donut. Should we really admire that?

[Lomendil]

So what about the other stuff, are they equivelent admirable feats of will?

What other stuff?

Anyway; short answer, no.

In my opinion, provided the end goal isn't an immoral one then an act or practice that takes dedication or effort can be admired.

Obviously there are degrees of admiration. I'm not going to be cheering out of the window at joggers running past my house. I won't be writing letters of congratulation to people who've managed to stick to a diet and lose a few pounds.

Perhaps 'respect' would have been better than 'admire'.

Its like a great feat of athleticism to reach a donut. Should we really admire that?

Not comparable.

[Captain Leonidas]

Chaste as the pope:

*Snicker* Catholic accepts cleric and get them to swear chastity, but they did not nor care about past sexual life...what's important is future. I do know one particular casanova who 'saw the light of God' converted and became a cleric. He never touched women ever since.

As for me chastity...hmmm hard to say. I personally believe that people should not sleep around in abandon (due respect to the body) but if the feeling of ready is there, I'd suppose go ahead.

As for being 'slutty' and older woman....don't know if you are refering specific here....i lost mine to an older woman and attached twice to older gals 

[Col. Or'es'o (retired)]

What other stuff?

"As a side note, do you admire vegetarians or lactose intolerant people too? Or what about workaholic types who sacrifice not only their sex life, but their entire social life for a materialist ideal?
If Chastity is not inherently morally virtuous, then surely these people are doing roughly the same thing (denying things to themselves) for equivelent reasons; respectively: disgust of meat/promiscuity, fear for their life/afterlife and blind faith in the ideal of wealth/god's graces."

Why arent the goals comparable? If both donuts and chastity are morally neutral ideals, then surely an effort towards either is equally good?

[Da Moose]

Its not comparable because of nature, we don't have a natural urge to have a donut, no hormones for it, with sex we do, we have glands and testes and ovaries that tell us to go procreate because thats what we were born to do.

I agree with grey area here because thou i don't view it as a morally virtues but still it shows a certain amount of control that is admiral in a person.

[Lomendil]

Because it takes bugger all effort to do something as natural and mundane as picking up a doughnut.
 

Vegetarians: same thing as chastity
Lactose Intolerant: not so much, as it's more necessity
Workaholics: Depends on the morality of the work involved. A high-level bank worker tirelessly working to screw people out of money gets short shrift from me.

[Devern, The Unsung Hero]

*shakes fist at Grey Area* Why must you take the thoughts from my mind and put them into eloquent words...

[Col. Or'es'o (retired)]

Because it takes bugger all effort to do something as natural and mundane as picking up a doughnut.

Nah, im talking some major matrix kung fu involved in picking up the donut. 
I get you though.

Its not comparable because of nature, we don't have a natural urge to have a donut, no hormones for it,

What do you call hunger then? Especially the specific craving people have for donuts?

with sex we do, we have glands and testes and ovaries that tell us to go procreate because thats what we were born to do.

If resisting natural impulses is an okay goal as long as its hard to do, why not start a hardcore self-harm club?

[Devern, The Unsung Hero]

I have real issues with people who like to take the most bizzarre examples to support their point.

what Grey is saying is that he admires those people who maintain chastity because it takes a certain degree of will to hold back.  As a species, humans are designed to eat, procreate, and die. 
As a human, you are not driven to eat that donut.  You're not driven to harm yourself(well, 'normal' people are not).

But IMO, resisting to eat a donut isn't quite on par with resisting your body's main goal in life.   My g/f is a rather hardcore Christian, and that includes being chaste.  while I don't share her views, I respect her for her dedication.  If my g/f was like, "oh man, I had this craving for a donut today, but I resisted"  I would probably be less than impressed.

[Col. Or'es'o (retired)]

I have real issues with people who like to take the most bizzarre examples to support their point.

what Grey is saying is that he admires those people who maintain chastity because it takes a certain degree of will to hold back.  As a species, humans are designed to eat, procreate, and die. 
As a human, you are not driven to eat that donut.  You're not driven to harm yourself(well, 'normal' people are not).

But IMO, resisting to eat a donut isn't quite on par with resisting your body's main goal in life.   My g/f is a rather hardcore Christian, and that includes being chaste.  while I don't share her views, I respect her for her dedication.  If my g/f was like, "oh man, I had this craving for a donut today, but I resisted"  I would probably be less than impressed.

You are belittling my point.
As you note, there is a biological imperetive against Chastity and Self-Harm, and so, neither are 'normal'. Why is holding one as an ideal more legitimate than the other? 
To twist:

My g/f is a rather hardcore blood drinker, and that includes being a self-harmer.  while I don't share her views, I respect her for her dedication.

Would you be as impressed by this?

As you've obviously missed, the donut was not meant to be taken entirely seriously.