| A
age
41-50,
writes: OK lately I see a lot of questions here where children from the age of 14-16,17 years think that they are old enough to have sex. They don't understand anything about it. They think that they are ready. There are even parents who agree with the idea of their 16 year old child having sex! I think that this is ridiculous! Is it wrong from me to think that even though the legal age of consent is 16 in some states that they are still just children at that age and it's up to the parents to guide them the right way and to explain to them what sex is all about, that it's not just fun and games. The adults should be a bit more strict to their kids and make sure that they understand the important stuff in life and not make mistakes that they will regret. Reply to this Article
Share |
You can add your comments or thoughts to this article A
female
reader, ShadowGirl  +, writes (4 October 2010):
See pregnancy and STI's/STD's are less of a risk these days due to all the different contraceptives. God knows that when I have sex in a month or so (I'll be 16 then, and we've planned ahead)I'm going to be on The Pill and my boyfriend will use a condom. Safe Sex!
We're teenagers. Who are you to tell us that we shouldn't have sex because we don't understand how important it is? We're only going to live once, and if we want to do it, by God, we'll do it.
peace out!
xox
A
female
reader, wee_neko  +, writes (28 September 2010):
@ Jimrich
"At eleven years old, I understood enough to know that I WANTED IT!"
So at the age of 11 you're saying you completely understood what a life-changing event it could be. Because you could potentially impregnate your partner, get an STD that could significantly shorten your lifespan, or just have a shitty experience that colored the rest of your experiences in the future?
There's understanding and then there's an adolescent's ability to regurgitate information they've heard at some point.
When I was a kid I KNEW that I WANTED to eat every bit of my Halloween candy as soon as I got home. Had my parents not discouraged me I'd have ended up sick to my stomach.
Clearly WANTING something desperately as a kid always ends up well!
@ the OP
I think that they should make the choice to have sex or not...I mean, parents are supposed to guide their kids so that they make the "right" choices. Granted, if your kid ends up trying to meet some 40 yr old creeper off the net, by all means intervene. But I think parents should provide their kids with the information they'd need to make good decisions - even if it is to have sex at a young age. If you can at least teach your kids to do it safely then you've done your job.
...............................
A
male
reader, N3m0  +, writes (28 September 2010):
i agree the same with sammi. There are many 15/16/17 yr olds that are immature and have sex and yet they dont uderstand the consequences, but also there are many of the same age who can be more mature than any 19 or or even 22 yr old. so i mean im 19 i started at 14 but i mean its all on everyone, my brother for example had a kid at 16 and hes youger than me at the moment now he's 17 and he hasnt grown up. In my case its different i didnt get anyone pregnant but i wouldve taken care of my baby. he hasnt done the least bit. so It really depends on the person and if they are ready for the responsibility, but i dont think its other people's business to get involved. Just watch yours and ill watch mine.. nothing more.
...............................
A
male
reader, jimrich +, writes (24 September 2010):
I'm not a parent but.........re: OK lately I see a lot of questions here where children from the age of 14-16,17 years think that they are old enough to have sex. They don't understand anything about it. ... Says who? At eleven years old, I understood enough to know that I WANTED IT!They think that they are ready. .... And they probably are. I was 'ready' at about 11 when I started having erections. All that stood between me and sexual activity was FEAR and social taboos, so I jerked off.There are even parents who agree with the idea of their 16 year old child having sex! ... May as well admit that if and when the kid is ready, not much you can do to stop them other than help them be safe about it.The adults should be a bit more strict to their kids and make sure that they understand the important stuff in life and not make mistakes that they will regret..... Not sure what 'strict' has to do with that but it's a good policy, IMO. There's a lot of stuff that adults SHOULD do and I'd guess most want to but just don't know how or what to teach their kids - my parents didn't!It would be useful to at least send parents to some place or link where they can get specific and detailed information about what they SHOULD teach their kids re: sex.Exactly what is the "important stuff in life" and exactly what are these "mistakes that they will regret". Some folks may agree with you but have no idea what any of that means unless taught and told in great detail. Do you have any suggestions where such knowledge and skills can be found?
...............................
A
female
reader, Miamine +, writes (24 September 2010):
 opps.. sorry odds...my bad
"We cannot go back to a situation where WOMEN AND *MEN are beaten, abused, cheated on, demeaned or disrespected, but are expected to stay in fear and be unhappy, because it's much better for their children."
Personally I feel the problem is that we have extended the idea of "childhood" which now lasts in some cases up to 21years old. We keep children economically inactive and allow them few responsibilities. We have a group of economically inactive, bored, teens. Maybe if their was more focus on what this age group brings to society, some of the problems would decrease. In the "old days", you left school at 14, worked long hours and went to church on Sunday. Not much time for thinking about sex, dating or getting pregnant. Not much privacy or money either to try to impress a man or lady of your age. Radical I know, but maybe more responsibility and less money would slow down their ability to practice sex..
Again them Swedish/Nordic folk, are more likely to live together than get married and their kids do very well in international comparisons, so I'm not sure about the link between marriage and young sexual activity.... not sure about their divorce figures though, but I bet it's pretty high.
Problem is again, what works for one culture, isn't easily translated to a working model for everyone worldwide. Unfortunately we can't go back to the time when people got married and stayed married no matter what. I'm not sure how we bring back shame and guilt, remove contraception, bring back fixed gender roles, and a belief in religion and punishment for sin. We live a lot longer now, we have more money and more options in life.
We got to find some way of working with the world we have and find ways to solve the modern problems that our financially successful world has brought.
...............................
A
male
reader, Odds +, writes (24 September 2010):
 @ Miamine
If I had to guess (and I don't have stats to back this up, so feel free to dismiss it if it sounds wrong to you), I'd say the reason a father's presence has such an effect on kids' sex lives is that he and the mother serve as a model for the children. The vast majority of what kids learn is not what their parents tell them, but what they do.
If their model is two people who are monogamous, faithful, and respectful, that's what they will internalize as the norm. If their model is that daddy leaves (or is kicked out) when they are young, then he and mommy both start dating a succession of new people, that's what they internalize as the norm.
I'd imagine that it's more difficult to keep track of what teenagers are doing, and to discipline them, with only one parent to do it. Of the kids with a natural tendency to act up, more would be able to get away with it if they only had to sneak by one person.
Additionally, in the case of daughters, there is evidence to suggest that they actually enter puberty at a younger age if the father is not around.
"We cannot go back to a situation where women are beaten, abused and cheated on and are expected to stay in fear and be unhappy, because it's much better for their children."
I respect a lot of what you have to say, Mia, even when I disagree with it, but it's hardly fair to claim that only women are suffering (beaten, abused, cheated on) in marriage. Not sure how it is on your side of the pond, but here in the States, a substantial portion of divorces are "no-fault," mostly initated by women (let's assume the number of false accusations for "at-fault" cancels out the number of cases in "no-fault" where there is fault that simply cannot be proved, however generous an assumption that may be). Demonizing menfolk is hardly going to convince the good ones that marriage is a good decision for them.
...............................
A
female
reader, Miamine +, writes (23 September 2010):
Yes the statistics do show that children living in families with single parents do get pregnant earlier and do have sex earlier?
However I'm confused about this... Even in a two parent household, the job of teaching sex to girls is still the responsibility of the mother and not the father. Men sometimes do sex education with boys, but on the whole it's the mother's responsibility to tell children these things.
Many one parent families, were once happily married couples. We cannot go back to a situation where women are beaten, abused and cheated on and are expected to stay in fear and be unhappy, because it's much better for their children.
Sexual education done properly at home is always the best,, but parent's aren't doing this. Parent's complain about their children looking at adult xrated stuff, but when asked, few adults feel comfortable talking about sex, or finding out how to put child locks on the internet, or other technology.
...............................
A
male
reader, Odds +, writes (21 September 2010):
@ The folks below upset about denigration of single parents:
I'm glad you all turned out alright, I really am. I thought it was implicit, but will clarify now: when I say kids from single-parent houselholds are more promiscuous et al, I mean on average. I mean most. There are, of course, exceptions, just as your anecdotes show.
However, the fact that single parenthood has a deleterious effect on children is pretty much a given in western society (not sure about the rest of the world, but I suspect it's true there too). There are a number of studies out there demonstrating that, but here's a link to one that's quite comprehensible without any statistics education:
http://www.civitas.org.uk/pubs/experiments.php
Anyway, I'm not calling you all evil. Or your parent for that matter. I'm not saying that widows are evil, or that anyone should stay with an abusive spouse "for the children," because that should just be assumed (I'm not a monster, just an asshole).
But the vast increase in single parenthood over the past several decades is one of the key causes of this article's issue - increased promiscuity among young teens. It's "choice mommies," irrisponsible men who don't use condoms, fathers walking out on their families, and mothers uncerimoniously kicking fathers out of their families through no-fault divorce that is a significant cause of this issue.
I focus on this cause in particular because it's something we can all individually choose not to do ourselves. Pop culture is it's own thing, political lobbies and school districts are another, and they are not under our control. What kind of parents we become, and what kind we encourage, will determine the fate of the next generation.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (21 September 2010): Hmm... I don't know how sex education is in America and the UK, but in Australia I remember getting bloody sick of hearing the same thing over and over and over... and I don't doubt that sex-ed has gotten even better over the years since I left school. I went to three different schools in 3 years... a small country town school, a public inner city three story monstrosity and a semi-regional expensive private school. They all absolutely drilled this stuff into us. While I don't have the exact figure of teenage pregnancies here... I know it ain't impressive.
See, here's the thing... If parents pass their responsibility of teaching their kids about sex onto the schools (assuming they'll do all the work), can they really be surprised when their 13 year old comes home one day walking for two?
Sex ed in schools is good for teaching the mechanics of sex, showing diagrams of sexual organs, even putting condoms on bananas, std's and their effects, technical questions and wot-not... But its supposed to be the 2nd line of defense, backup if you will. The first line of defense is the parent/s and they need to realise that this is a part of being a parent... teaching your kids the morals and about the emotional side of sex, the value of waiting, talking about always wearing a condom and make them aware of STD's and just what pregnancy/abortion will do to affect them for the rest of their life. It need not be too awkward.
There are a million reasons why kids are having sex earlier and earlier and sex education here is getting taught earlier and earlier... to the point where some kids don't even know what they're looking at when they see a diagram of genitals... I've seen the baffled looks on their faces.. its really gotten that bad. Its the parents that really need to step up in my opinion- the schools here already have.
...............................
A
female
reader, dmartin89 +, writes (19 September 2010):
 "Odds"
That is a ridiculous hurtful accusation.
I was raised in a single parent home with my mum. And I didn't lose my virginity until I was 18 and I don't regret it!!
...............................
A
female
reader, xanthic +, writes (18 September 2010):
 While I definitely agree with Odds' answer concerning the influence of media and inconsistency on the parent's part, I don't agree with the theory of single parenthood having an effect of this nature on a child. My father was present until my parents divorced when I was ten, though I can recall him almost never being around during that time. I basically grew up being raised by one parent, yet my morals and convictions seem to be much stronger and more definite than those of my age group that did grow up with a 'complete' family. Even at 14 I knew I wasn't ready. Meanwhile, others in my year were fooling around without really knowing anything about sex, thinking their flings were 'adult' relationships. Some started dating in fifth grade, at ten years old, and their parents encouraged it. Most of them still had both parents present. In no way am I saying I was better than them, but I do believe my mother definitely prepared me for the challenges we all face during our teen years and even adulthood.The problem starts with the parents and their approach to raising their children. Too many have taken to using tv as a babysitter, and fail to discuss important subjects and guide their children in making the right decisions until it's too late. They grow up ignorant and turn to bullshit shows like Gossip Girl for guidance. They're not taught to weigh in the consequences and be smart, instead these children grow up to be impulsive and attention-starved.Now, as for sex education, there's clearly not enough of a presence of it in schools, or in general. This is obvious in how many questions this site gets from teenagers asking if doing one thing or another can get them pregnant, or if they may be pregnant even though the girl's period is on time. The answers should be common knowledge, yet apparently it's not. Concerning the availability of contraception, I think it's better to provide a safe method rather than not and hope they won't just have sex anyway. They will, and taking that into consideration, they might as well be smart about it and have the resources to prevent an unwanted pregnancy.Bottom line? Too many parents avoid the subject of sex because it's awkward or they're uncomfortable speaking about it. This leaves their children to get all their information from their friends and media, which if anything, is misinformation.
...............................
A
male
reader, Odds +, writes (14 September 2010):
"The big problem is not having adequate sex education in school and access to contraception. Too many religious groups interfere with that because they want to remain in DENIAL that kids are going to experiment so they deny them access to a sexual education."
No, the big problem is that so many kids are raised in fatherless homes - or, worse, in homes with a succession of temporary father-figures who just want into single-mommy's pants.
Kids raised without fathers have sex earlier, are more promiscuous, are more likely to have kids in their teen years, and are more likely to catch diseases. Kids *ought* to be educated by their parents (plural) - this is the most effective form of sex ed around. If people would actually take child-rearing and marriage seriously, it would be much less of an issue.
I don't know if it's because single parenthood is just fundamentally different from having a spouse, or if the people who choose to be single parents are different, but something about it makes sex ed much less effective.
Schools will always be subject to the sort of special-interest lobbying that will ruin sex education. Whether it's Religious groups and abstinence-only education, or women's groups spreading rape hysteria, or liberal groups advocating proper condom use to twelve-year olds, *your* children will be subject to the whims of whatever lobby was most effective that year. Laws are harder to change than policies, but they still don't represent everyone's views - and your kids will be stuck with them longer.
The inconsistency is what does the most damage to children. With the differing messages from TV, peer groups, and everything else, the last thing they need is to hear different styles of sex ed every year. Only parents can provide that kind of consistency.
The only solution to today's problems I can think of is for family to step into missing parents' roles and educate the kids themselves.
...............................
A
female
reader, Miamine +, writes (13 September 2010):
"So in your opinion a 15 year old is more childish then a 16 year old? So just in a short period of time This child will understand what sex is all about?"
mmm.. you misunderstand, I support sex education for children much younger than this. I don't think it's a problem with them not understanding, but the fact that sex education often comes late and is taught very badly.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (13 September 2010): This is verified as being by the original poster of the question "I'm mostly concerned about the 13,14 and 15 year olds having sex.. that's the group that worries me a lot" -
So in your opinion a 15 year old is more childish then a 16 year old? So just in a short period of time This child will understand what sex is all about?
"Why is it anyone's business? " - Why are there new posts every day about KIDS at the age of 14,15 who are pregnant and doesn't know what to do. We want to help them so that they know what's right for them and what's not.
"they seem to being losing their innocence younger and younger" - exactly, this is another reason why sex at that age isn't recommended. If they weren't childish at that point they would know that they should wait and not just do what they want.
...............................
A
female
reader, tennisstar88 +, writes (13 September 2010):
 Honestly I didn't lose my virginity at 18, and that was back in the days where girls regretted unless, they married their first which wasn't too common. Nowadays, the don't regret they're just on to their next victim. It kills me to see this sexually charged world we have today, they seem to being losing their innocence younger and younger, I knew a 12 year old pregnant. This is why when I have a daughter she will be locked in her room until she's 21. Just kidding.
We can say there needs to be a more sex education, and child development classes, possibly throw in more shocking statistics. I remember having to watch a graphic video of a woman delivering a baby, the only thing that was left in my head was "ow". Honestly, at 15 I did pay attention in those classes hence why I waited till I was of legal age to have sex. But to those who didn't, had short attention spans or attention deficit disorders.
There is a lot of sex in the media, but they have put a lid on some of it with the channel ratings and parental locks. Magazines there's nothing stopping a young man flipping through his dad's stash of Playboys unless they were kept under lock and key. I felt there was only so much my parents' could do trying to enforce their moral values on me..I would put that to the test when it came time for high school, where the girls were losing their virginity at 16. So it did hold up. Ultimately, I feel that we can only educate and influence our children so much and pray that they hold those values close to their heart.
...............................
A
female
reader, Miamine +, writes (13 September 2010):
Nordic countries = very good sex education = low teen sex activity and low teen pregnancy
I also support better sex education for all teenagers
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (13 September 2010): Im 14 and to be perfectly honest doesnt it really depend on the person. Everyone is different some people might be ready and some might not. I know my own mind and its up to the individual to decide weather they want sex. Why is it anyones buisness? You cant put every teenager in the same category.
...............................
A
female
reader, Miamine +, writes (13 September 2010):
I'm mostly concerned about the 13,14 and 15 year olds having sex.. that's the group that worries me a lot. Not the legal 16 year olds (UK) who are making the choice to do what the law allows.
In America, the laws are different, so no they should not be having sex until 18.
...............................
A
female
reader, Miamine +, writes (13 September 2010):
I agree, and I think the point I'm trying to make is that not all teens are childish or irresponsible. Although the can have sex at 16 in the UK, not all of them do. America has a legal age of consent at 18, but that doesn't stop us getting tons of post from 14 year olds who are pregnant. The USA has the highest level of teenage pregnancies. Culture is important though, the Nordic countries who have a very different attitude to sexuality seem to have less teenage pregnancies than most parts of the world.
Telling kids no wait until your 18, is wrong I feel for our UK teenagers. It's hard enough for them to wait until 16. The example of America makes me feel our age of consent is right for us, and our teenagers do no wrong for enjoying their sexuality at the age agreed by law.
You say because it's legal doesn't make it right. But surely doing what is legal is better than doing what a few people think is right for us. Law is a reflection of a countries morality and culture. I'd prefer to follow that than the opinion of what a couple of people say. More democratic and fairer that way. If you want to change the age of consent laws, then it's preferable to do it through the democratic system adn change the law.
...............................
A
female
reader, CindyCares  +, writes (13 September 2010):
 @Miamine . Yes, the stats include all teens 13 to 19.
I see what you mean, Miamine - but, IMO , it does not make a huge difference.
That something is legal means that it's not a crime. Not that is right, or advisable, or a great idea. If you can do something, it does not mean that it is good for you or that you HAVE to do it.
Anyway,sex is a very personal decision, some will be ready at 16 , some will be not.
My point was simply that teens are not that great at avoiding unwanted pregnancies ! ( which ,again,has big social costs )
...............................
A
female
reader, Sweety Pie +, writes (13 September 2010):
 @Cindycares
Yes actually I do know the social costs etc of all this and I don't agree with it, but I was making the point that in the grand scale of all teenages that have sex, only a few actually end up falling pregnant, and because of that we are all labled as idiots who can't sort out our own contraception, which is unfair as most can.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (13 September 2010): This is verified as being by the original poster of the questionCindyCares you made a wonderful point.
...............................
A
female
reader, Miamine +, writes (13 September 2010):
"In your country , they account for "only " 5-7 percent."
Is this teenagers over 16 and legally able to have sex, or under that age. Does this also include those at 19, who are adults and legally able to marry?
...............................
A
female
reader, CindyCares +, writes (13 September 2010):
@SweetyPie : shock stories ? Teenage pregnancies are actually quite rare ?
In USA, there are about 750.000 teen pregnancies every year . A good percentage of them ends in abortion, yet 10 percent of all babies are born to teen mothers.
In your country , they account for "only " 5-7 percent.
Is that not enough for you- would you like more ?
Do you know anything about the huge social costs of that ? Would you even care , if you knew ?
...............................
A
female
reader, Miamine +, writes (13 September 2010):
Again, culture and experience is different for different people. When you are used to looking after your family, can survive by yourself, are able to get work, and have been cooking, cleaning and looking after children from the age of 12, it's very difficult for people to say your a child at 16. Yes, many 16year olds are childish, but many are not, and in the UK can legally work, get married, and do most things that an 18year old can do.
Really depends on the young adult, once they have passed the age of consent and can legally choose to have sex.
...............................
A
female
reader, Miamine +, writes (13 September 2010):
One word of explanation. In the UK the legal age of consent is 16, and the average age of sexual intercourse is 17. You have to take culture and law into account. 16-18 is alright by me and normal in the UK.
...............................
A
male
reader, C. Grant  +, writes (13 September 2010):
 I agree with much of what you've said, nightfairy. And as a parent I can only say I wish it was as simple as being strict.
My parents were raising kids in the 1950s. My father's attitude was that you wait until marriage. Period. When one of my sisters turned up with tangible proof that she had not in fact waited, he beat the hell out of her. I think it's safe to say that his approach wasn't particularly effective.
Having rejected his approach, I was left with having to come up with an alternative. While in many ways having your first be the person you're going to spend you life with is a great thing, it's not terribly practical if you don't get married until you're 30+. The message a parent sends has to be realistic if it's going to be heard. At the same time when you see what kids are exposed to in the media, saying that sex is something important and not to be taken lightly can sound a bit alien.
Nevertheless that's the message I've tried to convey. I've told my daughters that their mother and I see sex as something not to be treated lightly. That it's a good thing once you're old enough to handle the consequences. To never let pressure from the boy influence their decision. And to let them know that they can always come to us with questions or problems, that no mistake on their part will jeopardize our love for them.
Unlike my father, I recognize that I don't own their bodies or their minds. Simply forbidding them means they won't tell us things that we do need to know about. And it can lead to them doing something stupid just as 'F-you'. So I send the message that later is better, and to be true to themselves. And I provide enough supervision to minimize the chance that they'll find themselves is a situation they can't control. And then I cross my fingers.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (12 September 2010): This is verified as being by the original poster of the questionAshley0112358 you are right - TV, music and the internet all have a role to play in children's desire to have sex. This isn't right, that's where the parents come in. To make sure their kids will understand that some stuff are not for them. Of course they can do that only to some point, but if they and the schools do their job properly the young ones will know that there is a time for everything and that they can't always do what they want, that's not the way life works. This is for their own good
...............................
A
male
reader, Ashley0112358 +, writes (12 September 2010):
 I agree with you to some extent.
(I had sex at 16 with my girlfriend of almost 5 years)
But i see so many young people who have had several sexual partners already, i dont think its solely the parents responsibility to guide children, but the entire community as a whole.
TV, music and the internet all have a role to play in childrens desire to have sex, and this shocks me, that within a decade things have changed so much.
I personally believe its down to the maturity of the 16 years olds (like me and my girlfriend for example)
My younger brother, now 16, had his son at 15 when his girlfriend who was 14 going on 15. These two are no where near responsible enough to have sex let alone have a child, i wouldn't trust them to look after a goldfish. But fortunately for them their parents will look after them and the child and support them. I was fuming mad when i found out and feel its irresponsible of both my brother and my parents.
In conclusion, i agree with you, but with slight exeptions.
I only wish that i had waited til wedlock, but then again im still with my girlfriend so i dont mind.
In response to your question we could also ask the qustion,
"Is it right for people over 60 to have children?" as the same arguments can be made.
...............................
A
female
reader, Beccccccy  +, writes (12 September 2010):
 I think these Kids are FAR too young ..I encourage all ..Please where possible , wait ..wait ..until you are Older . I wish I did . Its an emotional time , especially for a female .
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (12 September 2010): This is verified as being by the original poster of the questionYeah marriedlady that's exactly my point, they are still just children. But I'm glad to hear that it all worked out for you and your family.
My boyfriend was a virgin when we met. He was 26 years old and I was 18. We waited one year before we both lost our virginity to each other. I'm glad we waited. There is nothing wrong with being a virgin at that age, I actually felt special because he saved it for the perfect girl, who was me. There is more to a relationship then just having sex. Don't tell me that a relationship at the age of 16,17 can't work without sex. If there is love then you can make it work and you won't regret it because when that special moment comes then it will all be more meaningful.
...............................
A
male
reader, Odds +, writes (11 September 2010):
Well, a few generations ago (and for all of our history before that) people were having sex and building families at that age. They still do in some countries. Biologically, our bodies and brains are about the same as they were then - unless you count the influence of hormone sin our food which make us hit puberty earlier.
People that age had the emotional maturity then. Perhaps they have it now.
The difference is, most of them were getting married during that time as well. With the age of puberty staying constant (or going down), and the age of average first marriage going up, there are just too many years between the too where people are going to fool around.
One caveat - people obviously mature at different rates. There are smart 14-year olds who could probably manage a family, and 35-year olds who should not be trusted to dress themselves in the morning. Age of consent is the line we have to draw, legally, to decide when we hold them responsible.
People will fool around at that age no matter what we set the age of consent to. Most of them can handle it; the ones that don't will just be a warning to others. Raising the age of consent will not do any good except to punish otherwise normal behavior.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (11 September 2010): thank you hunny. By the way, I am still married to "the one." We went on to have 5 more children. I dont regret the man or the marriage, the kids or the sex. What I do regret is that I did it all so early. I was still a child myself, whether I saw that then or not. Growing up must be much easier when you arent married and raising babies.
I have never heard one person say, I only regret that I didnt have sex before I was 18. But I have read many many posts that read, I wish I had waited...I thought he was the one...13 and pregnant and scared....16 and pregnant, how do i tell my mum....I gave him my virginity and i havent heard from him since.
I am not judging these kids, i know that the world we live in has made it feel like if you are a virgin at 16...you are weird. There must be something wrong with you. And God forbid that you actually make it to 15, 17, 20 without a kiss. You must be a freak. And a virgin at 26? What a loser! The peer pressure out there is unbelievable.
Im reminded of a girl I dealt with in the early days of my time on DC...
She was pregnant, sick, trying to finish school and her boyfriend had moved on to fresh non~pregnant meat. She lost the baby, 3 wks later slept with a girl friend, the next week a married tattoo artist, and then went back to the original bf. And she told me in a moment of rare candor, she only wanted to be loved. Thats what they all want..in fact what we all want. Isnt it?
No I'm really not wise, but I've lived 44 years and learned a few things. I may have it all wrong but it is sex and teenagers as I see it. mal
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (11 September 2010): This is verified as being by the original poster of the question"marriedlady" - your story really touched me, I will remember this one day to tell my children. I really wanna thank you out of the bottom of my heart! We as adults don't always succeed, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try and that doesn't mean, like you said, that we should stop trying. You are a very wise person :)
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (11 September 2010): I totally agree with Nightfairy11. I dont know what the age would be, and I think it is probably different for different people.
I can relate to those who feel ready at a young age. I got married at the age of 16. I wasnt pregnant in fact I was a virgin. People tried to tell me I was too young, but I was much more mature than the other girls my age....(sound familiar?) I "knew" he was the one, and I knew that I was ready.
I used birthcontrol, I was careful. I married in October and miscarried the first week in January. Had my first child in October, and the second 15 months later.
I dont know if I was really that mature, I dont know if I would have been ready for sex...but I do know I was not ready to be a wife and mother. At the age of 18 and a half, I had two babies and a house to take care of and I was no where near ready for that huge responsibility.
I am reminded of a story I read, about Corrie TenBoom who lived thru WWII and the concentration camps.
She told of being a young girl and walking with her father to the railroad station. He was carrying their large and heavy suitcase. Something happened in front of them that was inappropriate for a small girl to see, and she questioned her father about it. He responded by sitting the suitcase down...and asking her to carry it. She struggled to lift it and then said, "but Father, I cannot lift it." He acknowledged that it was too heavy for her, and gave her this analogy. Corrie there are some things in life that are too heavy for you to carry. As you grow older and stronger, you will be able to lift and carry more things."
I have thought of that a lot of times...and it is true. I see young people struggling with such heavy baggage, and my heart weeps for them.
I cant set an age, but we as parents are failing our kids when we do not explain this to them.
Simply saying they are going to do it anyway and taking them down to the clinic for birthcontrol pills is not the answer.
I do think they need to be educated and if they are going to have sex, they should be responsible, but Heaven help us when we have allowed a generation of 12+ children to carry the baggage that they do these days. mal
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (11 September 2010): This is verified as being by the original poster of the questionIf we educate them right they'll know that there is a time for everything.
...............................
A
female
reader, Sweety Pie +, writes (11 September 2010):
Actually i'm 17, I just havn't updated my info in a while. I think yes, maybe 18 is mature enough for some people. It depends on the person really, but underage sex is always gonna happen, so its better to educate "kids" about it rather than try to prevent it.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (11 September 2010): This is verified as being by the original poster of the questionWell "Sweety Pie" as I can see you're only 16 yourself. Well I guess that around 18,19 would be appropriate. But that's my opinion.
...............................
A
female
reader, Sweety Pie +, writes (10 September 2010):
I think mainly adults tend to hear the shock stories of teenage pregnancies and stuff, when in reality whilst that happens, its actually quite rare and most teenagers can work out how to put a condom on and get by quiet happily.
What age would you suggest to be 'old enough'?
...............................
A
female
reader, sammi star +, writes (10 September 2010):
 I totally get what you're saying and respect your point of view but I have to say I disagree.Yes, there are some 16 year olds who don't have the maturity to be having sex and there's no way they can understand the emotions involved and therefore shouldn't be doing it at all. These 16 year olds are still children but some 16 year olds are adults. At 16 it's possible to really fall in love with someone and wanting to sleep with that person is the most natural next step. I don't see the problem with that if it's part of a genuine loving relationship. In my opinion it depends greatly on the individual and educating young people on the importance of safe sex should take priority over preaching to them about age.
...............................
|
