delericho
Legend
All true. Can't disagree with anything in this post.
Affairs
- Thread starter Bullgrit
- Start date
All true. Can't disagree with anything in this post.
Kramodlog
Naked and living in a barrel
It's an analogy that is regularly used. Like all analogies they have their limits, I am aware of it.
Not really. There are plenty of books for kids that explain where babies come from that do not traumatize them. You just need to adapt it to what they can process and understand. The Swiss sex box has plush genetalia for the kids examine and play with. This is no different than kids playing doctor, except for the adult supervision and guidance of course.
A lot of kids just do not get sexual education at home or get an incomplete/innaccurate one. This should just be part of any curriculum, like hygene and home cooking. Do they still teach those?
tomBitonti
Hero
I should say, there is a difference between the simple mechanics of reproduction, and the associations, in terms of the immediate and more subtle consequences. Immediate consequences include the chance of pregnancy and the risk of STD's. Subtle consequences have to do with what happens inside peoples heads: How they think about themselves, how they think about the other; how issues of responsibility and trust are impacted. Plus, the complications of strong self interest and internal chemical influences. Plus, social issues (agree with them or not; they are present).
I'm pretty confident that a child can understand the simple mechanics. All the rest seems to be understandable only as the child reaches higher levels of maturity.
Thx!
TomB
I'm pretty confident that a child can understand the simple mechanics. All the rest seems to be understandable only as the child reaches higher levels of maturity.
Thx!
TomB
On anatomy and physical health, sure. I've no problem with that.
On sexual activities, as you put it? That's a different kettle of fish, depending on what you mean by "activities".
Kramodlog
Naked and living in a barrel
Mod note: Section redacted for Grandma. Sorry, but that's a level of detail inappropriate for this site. ~Umbran
Granted I'm not a professional and I'm sure it all can be improved, but you get the spirit of things.
Last edited by a moderator:
EscherEnigma
Adventurer
That entirely depends on you. If you're a good father, then the monogamous approach is probably better for you. If you're a
father, then going for as many spawn in as many places is probably better for you. The same reason you'll get women settling down with the "nice guy" but sleeping around with the "bad boy".This is well documented in other animals, though for obvious reasons it's purely observational data with humans.
tomBitonti
Hero
What I've read about primate reproductive behaviors is that there is a huge variation, both across species, and within them.
I wouldn't take that to say that particular behaviors aren't preferred for particular social policy goals (say, for less transmission of STD's). I do take that to mean that for individuals finding simple fixed rules will likely be hard (if not impossible).
Thx!
TomB
I wouldn't take that to say that particular behaviors aren't preferred for particular social policy goals (say, for less transmission of STD's). I do take that to mean that for individuals finding simple fixed rules will likely be hard (if not impossible).
Thx!
TomB
tomBitonti
Hero
To say ... this is a space where what is advocated can be rather at odds with what is actually done.
To have more partners, one would prefer to have less risk of STD's. If others have fewer partners, there will be less STD's. Therefore, one who wants to have more partners will encourage others to have fewer partners. The whole situation seems inherently unstable.
Thx!
TomB
To have more partners, one would prefer to have less risk of STD's. If others have fewer partners, there will be less STD's. Therefore, one who wants to have more partners will encourage others to have fewer partners. The whole situation seems inherently unstable.
Thx!
TomB
Zombie_Babies
First Post
I'm pretty sure that the prevalence of STDs throughout history is a decent indicator of just how monogamous we tend to be.
I understand the point. Not sure I personally agree that it is appropriate for kids, though. That you present it in a way that seems "soft" to us does not mean it is usefully preparing kids to deal with the issues - because emotionally, they just aren't ready to deal with sexual relationships at that age.
The fact that it generated complaints, and that we have a Grandma Rule such that I had to redact it, rather indicates that our culture, on the whole, is not ready for such to be presented to children on the whole. If you have kids, do what you will, but don't expect to see that in public school kindergartens any time soon.
Similar Threads
