Teen Sex Study Doubts "Technical Virginity"

[Zeno Swijtink]

Teen Sex Study Doubts "Technical Virginity"
WILL DUNHAM - Reuters

https://www.reuters.com/articlePrint...30677920080520

WASHINGTON -- A survey examining sexual practices of U.S. teens has undercut the notion that many engage in oral sex rather than intercourse to stay "technically" virgins, researchers said on Tuesday.

The findings, published in the Journal of Adolescent Health, were based on answers by 2,271 females and males age 15 to 19 in 2002 in response to a government survey.

The researchers found about 55 percent of the teens said they had engaged in oral sex but that this practice was far more common among those who also had engaged in vaginal sex.

Teens said they began vaginal and oral sex at roughly the same time -- by six months after first vaginal intercourse, 82 percent had also engaged in oral sex, according to the study.

"There is a widespread belief that teens engage in nonvaginal forms of sex, especially oral sex, as a way to be sexually active while still claiming that, technically, they are virgins," Laura Lindberg of the Guttmacher Institute in New York, who led the study, said in a statement.

"However, our research shows that this supposed substitution of oral sex for vaginal sex is largely a myth. There is no good evidence that teens who have not had intercourse engage in oral sex with a series of partners."

The Guttmacher Institute studies sexual and reproductive health issues.

About one in 10 of the teens said they had engaged in anal sex. These teens were far more likely to have also engaged in vaginal sex.

"Teens of white ethnicity and higher socioeconomic status were more likely than their peers to have ever had oral or anal sex," the researchers wrote.

Lindberg said the new findings illustrate that the Bush administration's emphasis on school programs teaching sexual abstinence until marriage "does not give teens the skills and information they need to be safe."

Statistics released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in March showed that more than one in four U.S. teen girls was infected with at least one sexually transmitted disease. The CDC said in December the birth rate for U.S. teens rose in 2006 for the first time since 1991.

Lindberg said the Guttmacher Institute's findings have health policy implications.

"While oral and anal sex carry no risk of pregnancy, engaging in these behaviors can nevertheless put teens at risk of sexually transmitted infections," she said.

"Counseling and education should take into account total STI risk by addressing the full range of behaviors that teens engage in, including oral and anal sex."

WASHINGTON -- A survey examining sexual practices of U.S. teens has undercut the notion that many engage in oral sex rather than intercourse to stay "technically" virgins, researchers said on Tuesday.

The findings, published in the Journal of Adolescent Health, were based on answers by 2,271 females and males age 15 to 19 in 2002 in response to a government survey.

The researchers found about 55 percent of the teens said they had engaged in oral sex but that this practice was far more common among those who also had engaged in vaginal sex.

Teens said they began vaginal and oral sex at roughly the same time -- by six months after first vaginal intercourse, 82 percent had also engaged in oral sex, according to the study.

"There is a widespread belief that teens engage in nonvaginal forms of sex, especially oral sex, as a way to be sexually active while still claiming that, technically, they are virgins," Laura Lindberg of the Guttmacher Institute in New York, who led the study, said in a statement.

"However, our research shows that this supposed substitution of oral sex for vaginal sex is largely a myth. There is no good evidence that teens who have not had intercourse engage in oral sex with a series of partners."

The Guttmacher Institute studies sexual and reproductive health issues.

About one in 10 of the teens said they had engaged in anal sex. These teens were far more likely to have also engaged in vaginal sex.

"Teens of white ethnicity and higher socioeconomic status were more likely than their peers to have ever had oral or anal sex," the researchers wrote.

Lindberg said the new findings illustrate that the Bush administration's emphasis on school programs teaching sexual abstinence until marriage "does not give teens the skills and information they need to be safe."

Statistics released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in March showed that more than one in four U.S. teen girls was infected with at least one sexually transmitted disease. The CDC said in December the birth rate for U.S. teens rose in 2006 for the first time since 1991.

Lindberg said the Guttmacher Institute's findings have health policy implications.

"While oral and anal sex carry no risk of pregnancy, engaging in these behaviors can nevertheless put teens at risk of sexually transmitted infections," she said.

"Counseling and education should take into account total STI risk by addressing the full range of behaviors that teens engage in, including oral and anal sex."

[Valley Oak]

This is very sad news. Indeed, it's genuinely pathetic.

Thanks to the Bush admin and their stupefyingly reactionary ideology.

Edward

Teen Sex Study Doubts "Technical Virginity"
WILL DUNHAM - Reuters

https://www.reuters.com/articlePrint...30677920080520

WASHINGTON -- A survey examining sexual practices of U.S. teens has undercut the notion that many engage in oral sex rather than intercourse to stay "technically" virgins, researchers said on Tuesday.

The findings, published in the Journal of Adolescent Health, were based on answers by 2,271 females and males age 15 to 19 in 2002 in response to a government survey.

The researchers found about 55 percent of the teens said they had engaged in oral sex but that this practice was far more common among those who also had engaged in vaginal sex.

Teens said they began vaginal and oral sex at roughly the same time -- by six months after first vaginal intercourse, 82 percent had also engaged in oral sex, according to the study.

"There is a widespread belief that teens engage in nonvaginal forms of sex, especially oral sex, as a way to be sexually active while still claiming that, technically, they are virgins," Laura Lindberg of the Guttmacher Institute in New York, who led the study, said in a statement.

"However, our research shows that this supposed substitution of oral sex for vaginal sex is largely a myth. There is no good evidence that teens who have not had intercourse engage in oral sex with a series of partners."

The Guttmacher Institute studies sexual and reproductive health issues.

About one in 10 of the teens said they had engaged in anal sex. These teens were far more likely to have also engaged in vaginal sex.

"Teens of white ethnicity and higher socioeconomic status were more likely than their peers to have ever had oral or anal sex," the researchers wrote.

Lindberg said the new findings illustrate that the Bush administration's emphasis on school programs teaching sexual abstinence until marriage "does not give teens the skills and information they need to be safe."

Statistics released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in March showed that more than one in four U.S. teen girls was infected with at least one sexually transmitted disease. The CDC said in December the birth rate for U.S. teens rose in 2006 for the first time since 1991.

Lindberg said the Guttmacher Institute's findings have health policy implications.

"While oral and anal sex carry no risk of pregnancy, engaging in these behaviors can nevertheless put teens at risk of sexually transmitted infections," she said.

"Counseling and education should take into account total STI risk by addressing the full range of behaviors that teens engage in, including oral and anal sex."

WASHINGTON -- A survey examining sexual practices of U.S. teens has undercut the notion that many engage in oral sex rather than intercourse to stay "technically" virgins, researchers said on Tuesday.

The findings, published in the Journal of Adolescent Health, were based on answers by 2,271 females and males age 15 to 19 in 2002 in response to a government survey.

The researchers found about 55 percent of the teens said they had engaged in oral sex but that this practice was far more common among those who also had engaged in vaginal sex.

Teens said they began vaginal and oral sex at roughly the same time -- by six months after first vaginal intercourse, 82 percent had also engaged in oral sex, according to the study.

"There is a widespread belief that teens engage in nonvaginal forms of sex, especially oral sex, as a way to be sexually active while still claiming that, technically, they are virgins," Laura Lindberg of the Guttmacher Institute in New York, who led the study, said in a statement.

"However, our research shows that this supposed substitution of oral sex for vaginal sex is largely a myth. There is no good evidence that teens who have not had intercourse engage in oral sex with a series of partners."

The Guttmacher Institute studies sexual and reproductive health issues.

About one in 10 of the teens said they had engaged in anal sex. These teens were far more likely to have also engaged in vaginal sex.

"Teens of white ethnicity and higher socioeconomic status were more likely than their peers to have ever had oral or anal sex," the researchers wrote.

Lindberg said the new findings illustrate that the Bush administration's emphasis on school programs teaching sexual abstinence until marriage "does not give teens the skills and information they need to be safe."

Statistics released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in March showed that more than one in four U.S. teen girls was infected with at least one sexually transmitted disease. The CDC said in December the birth rate for U.S. teens rose in 2006 for the first time since 1991.

Lindberg said the Guttmacher Institute's findings have health policy implications.

"While oral and anal sex carry no risk of pregnancy, engaging in these behaviors can nevertheless put teens at risk of sexually transmitted infections," she said.

"Counseling and education should take into account total STI risk by addressing the full range of behaviors that teens engage in, including oral and anal sex."

[Lenny]

This is very sad news. Indeed, it's genuinely pathetic. Thanks to the Bush admin and their stupefyingly reactionary ideology. Edward

Let see: she is 15, so eight years ago she was 7.
When she was seven our president and all the media was talking about oral sex.
And you wish to blame WHO? Not EVEN close to

[Braggi]

Let see: she is 15, so eight years ago she was 7.
When she was seven our president and all the media was talking about oral sex.
And you wish to blame WHO? ...

Yeah, Lenny. She was 7!!! Got it? She didn't pay any attention to what they were talking about on the news. Sex ed in schools begins at 10 or 11. So, guess what? It wasn't about cigars and blue dresses. It was about remaining ignorant of choices and being told that the best birth control pill was an aspirin; held firmly between the knees. (Ha Ha Ha) Of course, that doesn't stop oral or anal action, necessarily.

The current misadministration has blown just about everything they've put their lips to. I can't think of a single thing they've done right. The most corrupt and inept presidency in history. Carter doesn't come close.

So yeah, it's Bush's fault.

-Jeff

PS. In the countries with the most complete sex education they also have far lower STD rates and teen pregnancy rates than we do.

[MsTerry]

"While oral and anal sex carry no risk of pregnancy, engaging in these behaviors can nevertheless put teens at risk of sexually transmitted infections," she said.

"Counseling and education should take into account total STI risk by addressing the full range of behaviors that teens engage in, including oral and anal sex."

So who has been teaching them these extracurricular activities???

[Valley Oak]

Nature calls before people are 18.

Edward

So who has been teaching them these extracurricular activities???

[Lenny]

Yeah, Lenny. She was 7!!! Got it? She didn't pay any attention to what they were talking about on the news. Sex ed in schools begins at 10 or 11. So, guess what? It wasn't about cigars and blue dresses. It was about remaining ignorant of choices and being told that the best birth control pill was an aspirin; held firmly between the knees. (Ha Ha Ha) Of course, that doesn't stop oral or anal action, necessarily.
The current misadministration has blown just about everything they've put their lips to. I can't think of a single thing they've done right. The most corrupt and inept presidency in history. Carter doesn't come close.
So yeah, it's Bush's fault. -Jeff
PS. In the countries with the most complete sex education they also have far lower STD rates and teen pregnancy rates than we do.

She wasn't in the pantry waiting for the door to open, not hearing, listening, watching, and taking in her environment, was she? I mean, she was just a stupid little non-absorbing rock, not a sponge, yes? The news blaring 24/7 never said the words "oral sex" did it? Walking around the house, playing with stuff while dad listen to the nightly news, or talk around the dinner table? No? They weren't wearing burqas, were they? Obviously not! Did sex ed in school speak about oral sex three years later? Probably. You are adding fuel to my position!
Sarcasm mode: on/off.
It shows that reinforcement is important in any education, not just state mandated sex! I mean, what do parents know about sex? Teaching about sex should be left only to the state, and one of the great models for the current activity listed in this thread WAS the president of the US, when she was at no age of discernment.
Jeff, I am sorry to note that some folks have a Pavlovian response to the this president. It appears that you may be under that spell. Yeah, he screwed US somewhat, and how much yet I cannot figure out. I don't know if he'll be remembered like Lincoln (who was hated during his time) or more like Harding, but it is clear that the guy pushes your buttons. Don't let him, best you can.
PS: those countries with low rates of STD have other intangibles going for them that make such stats skewey so the statements have a ring of truthiness to them, but simply stand as factoids. You know that's true.

[MsTerry]

To take it up the A?????????????

Nature calls before people are 18.

Edward

[Valley Oak]

No need to go into so much detail because sexual preferences vary greatly from person to person; it's a very individual choice. The point is that people have strong sexual needs before they are legally adults. In Denmark, the legal age of consent is 15. We continue to live in a very, very sexually repressed society here in the U.S.

Edward

To take it up the A?????????????

[Lenny]

No need to go into so much detail because sexual preferences vary greatly from person to person; it's a very individual choice. The point is that people have strong sexual needs before they are legally adults. In Denmark, the legal age of consent is 15. We continue to live in a very, very sexually repressed society here in the U.S. Edward

I believe you regarding the age of consent.
Is there any stats regarding that in Denmark?
I keep hearing such things and must wonder. A Dutch friend of mine told me that the Dutch people themselves are SO repressed that almost none use the dope or prostitution in that country. And that goes for so many of the other things offered there.
It seems all the stereo types of those "progressive" countries would lead me to believe that it is "going on" there, but I keep finding out that it is not usually the "natives" but their guests.
Any rumor to the truth of the matter?

[Neshamah]

People can figure out the mechanics on their own. Nothing we do is as momentous as bringing new life into the world. We should be teaching everyone to take full responsibility for that power. Biologically, a couple can become parents at 13, or even younger. Yet, they cannot legally work, (and even if they could, their income legally belongs to their parents/guardians,) and cannot marry. Economically, being self-sufficient before the age of 25 in our society is a rare achievement.

Obviously people at 13 should not be encouraged to bring children into the world, but neither can the government require them to act contrary to their own biology. That means giving them the opportunity to support themselves and have legal independence from their parents/guardians.

~ Neshamah

[MsTerry]

I am not sure how you came to that conclusion since the article states, not just sex for teens but anal and oral as a casual alternative.

We continue to live in a very, very sexually repressed society here in the U.S.

Edward

[Valley Oak]

Evidence of sexual repression in the U.S. abounds. Just use your imagination a little.

For example, look at what's going on now regarding same sex marriage. A poll recently showed that 52% of Californians are against it. Meanwhile, in other countries such as Spain, Denmark, etc, have had same sex marriage legally recognized for years now. What's up with us American shit-heads?

It is a FELONY to have sex with a minor, even if he or she is 17 years and 364 days old, you will spend years in prison and have to register as a sex offender for the rest of your life. There is one case of a young man of 20 who went to prison for two years for having sex with his 17 y/o girlfriend.

Want more examples?
In many states throughout the U.S., it is still illegal for MARRIED couple to engage in oral or anal sex, not to mention the prohibition that exists if you're gay, etc. Married people today still pay fines if they are caught engaging in these activities, even if it's in the privacy of their own home. In one instance, a couple of children trespassed onto a couple's property, saw the husband and wife engaging in oral, went running home to mom and dad and told them what they saw. They ended up paying a $50 fine in court, ordered by the judge.

The truth is, Ms. Terry, that the list goes on and on and on and on of just how sexually repressed we are in this 'great' country of 'freedom' and 'tolerance.' When I explain these things to people overseas their chins hit the ground and they shake their heads from side to side in disbelief.

I am not sure how you came to that conclusion since the article states, not just sex for teens but anal and oral as a casual alternative.

[Zeno Swijtink]

Evidence of sexual repression in the U.S. abounds. Just use your imagination a little.

For example, (...)

The truth is, (...), that the list goes on and on and on and on of just how sexually repressed we are in this 'great' country of 'freedom' and 'tolerance.' When I explain these things to people overseas their chins hit the ground and they shake their heads from side to side in disbelief.

Afrikaner, the language spoken by descendants of mainly Dutch settlers in what is now South Africa, is closer, I venture, to the Dutch of the 17th century, when the ancestors of present day speakers settled in the Cape of Good Hope area, then the Dutch of the people who now live in the Netherlands.

This is an odd feature of an immigrant, settler society, that you see repeated in other domains of culture. It's like circling the wagons, sticking to the good traditions of the old home country.

Something similar is going on with (public opinion about) sexual behavior in the USA. As a settler culture it sticks closer to the old mores than the various mother cultures in the homelands, which have moved on. Maybe it expresses a sense of insecurity, having wandered off in strange territory. An additional explanation may be found in the fact that settlers often came from the least successful, most repressed part of the mother society.

[MsTerry]

Edward,

You are giving examples of LEGAL repression.
That is not the same as repression in daily life.
Do you know of any same sex people openly living together?
How many have been prosecuted for their sexlife?
Sexlife in the US is on the whole more excessive than in Europe, maybe because it is so much more repressed officially.

Evidence of sexual repression in the U.S. abounds. Just use your imagination a little.

For example, look at what's going on now regarding same sex marriage. A poll recently showed that 52% of Californians are against it. Meanwhile, in other countries such as Spain, Denmark, etc, have had same sex marriage legally recognized for years now. What's up with us American shit-heads?

It is a FELONY to have sex with a minor, even if he or she is 17 years and 364 days old, you will spend years in prison and have to register as a sex offender for the rest of your life. There is one case of a young man of 20 who went to prison for two years for having sex with his 17 y/o girlfriend.

Want more examples?
In many states throughout the U.S., it is still illegal for MARRIED couple to engage in oral or anal sex, not to mention the prohibition that exists if you're gay, etc. Married people today still pay fines if they are caught engaging in these activities, even if it's in the privacy of their own home. In one instance, a couple of children trespassed onto a couple's property, saw the husband and wife engaging in oral, went running home to mom and dad and told them what they saw. They ended up paying a $50 fine in court, ordered by the judge.

The truth is, Ms. Terry, that the list goes on and on and on and on of just how sexually repressed we are in this 'great' country of 'freedom' and 'tolerance.' When I explain these things to people overseas their chins hit the ground and they shake their heads from side to side in disbelief.

[Zeno Swijtink]

Sexlife in the US is on the whole more excessive than in Europe, maybe because it is so much more repressed officially.

I wrote: "Something similar is going on with (public opinion about) sexual behavior in the USA," since I wasn't clear whether the behavior itself is more repressed here or whether it's just the verbal expressions that show more anxiety.

Mr MsTerry, with his undoubtedly wide bi-continental experience, thinks there is more excessive sex, more hanky-panky here in the US. (Or was it maybe that he has been more sexually active since he left the homeland??)

According to "European Approaches to Adolescent Sexual Behavior and Responsibility," a report of the Advocates for Youth, Washington, D.C., 1999

In the Netherlands, Germany, and France, sexual development in adolescents is a normal and healthy biological, social, emotional, and cultural process. Education focuses on informed choice and sexual responsibility for all members of the society, including adolescents. To protect sexual health, public campaigns coordinate with school sexuality education, condom and contraceptive access, and nonjudgmental attitudes from adults.

In the schools of these three nations, no topic is prohibited, and teachers are free to teach in response to students’ questions. No topics are too controversial if young people want to discuss them. Public and private schools in the Netherlands and Germany acknowledge that sexuality education is important and concentrate it most heavily in middle and secondary years. While sexuality education is taught as a specific health unit in Germany and France, it is also widely and naturally integrated wherever it is relevant—in literature, languages, social studies, religion, sciences, or current events in all three nations. The teaching is a collaborative effort among school personnel, community youth workers, reproductive health clinicians and volunteers.

In the United States, wide variations occur in sexuality education, ranging from mandates to exclusions, of particular sexual topics. Politics, not research, usually dictates the content of sexuality education programs. In some school districts, teachers are prohibited from discussing some topics—such as condoms, safer sex, homosexuality, and masturbation—while in some other school districts, teachers refrain from discussing the topics out of fear. Parents want sexuality education which will promote the health of young people, but conservative politics creates a sexuality education agenda that fails to provide youth with important personal and public health information.

The report talks more about how sexuality is talked about than about what people do. But then, isn't sex determined by how you talk about it? Doesn't sex happen mostly in the head?

A 1969 report says that "sexual behavior were also lowest among North American students." (see attached) Who has some more recent data? Personally I haven't noticed much difference in behavior (there is a difference in feeling of guilt) but then I have moved mostly in pretty liberal groups.

[MsTerry]

Mr MsTerry, with his undoubtedly wide bi-continental experience, thinks there is more excessive sex, more hanky-panky here in the US. (Or was it maybe that he has been more sexually active since he left the homeland??)

Bi-continental??? Is that all I have seen of the world?

A 1969 report says that "sexual behavior were also lowest among North American students." (see attached) Who has some more recent data? Personally I haven't noticed much difference in behavior (there is a difference in feeling of guilt) but then I have moved mostly in pretty liberal groups.

1969? written by somebody named B.Luckey?
Aren't you getting any?

[Lenny]

This is an odd feature of an immigrant, settler society, that you see repeated in other domains of culture. It's like circling the wagons, sticking to the good traditions of the old home country.
Something similar is going on with (public opinion about) sexual behavior in the USA. As a settler culture it sticks closer to the old mores than the various mother cultures in the homelands, which have moved on. Maybe it expresses a sense of insecurity, having wandered off in strange territory. An additional explanation may be found in the fact that settlers often came from the least successful, most repressed part of the mother society.

I'd not put that together myself. Very insightful. Thanks.
Your last sentence threw me though. Seems the folks that came here were all losers. Folks that couldn't hack it back in the motherland, misfits, misanthropes, those that wouldn't or couldn't hokey-poky. And the countries they came from seemed economically viable entities booming from imperialism. "Least successful" is not a characteristic I'd label them. And that goes for both major migrations, early US as well as 1880s on.