TODAY has an interesting practice of publishing 'articles' by freelancers, people from different age groups, walks of life, etc. The one I'm going to talk about today is one such article, entitled 'Don't just slap down teen sex.' It is, as you might be able to tell from the title, related to that video saga.
And the reason why I'm looking at this particular article is because it contains some, well, rather surprising ideas. Here are some (in red):
1. If you take a sex video of yourself, you run the risk of having it being seen by more people than it was intended for, but that sort of risk should not be criticised by anyone. Her only fault was that she was careless.
Hmmm... her only fault was being careless? The way I see it, if you take a video or even photograph and store in on your phone, computer, iPod, or whatever, you should jolly well be aware that it could fall into someone else's hands. Therefore, if you are willing to take that risk, and it really happens, well, it was partly your fault for having those images/videos or whatever in the first place. Why, even a regular photo that's been printed out can fall into the 'wrong' hands. Those from my previous, previous, previous workplace, remember the photo our boss' secretary found? And, of all things, that kind of video. I mean, if you have a video of your lecturer lecturing away and your phone got stolen and someone uploaded it, people wouldn't care two hoots about it.
This para was followed by an 'attack' on the handphone thief for what he/she did. I do agree with the writer on that point. The thief seems to have gotten away rather lightly, in that not many people are actually talking about the immorality of stealing a phone, downloading its contents for the world to see, etc.
2. Responsible teenage sex doesn't cause problems.
Hmmm again. Both responsible and irresponsible teenage can cause a variety of problems.
3. What we need to admit to ourselves is that the need to mate is primal in physically mature human beings. It is not practical to attempt to suppress it. Abstinence, research has shown, is only questionably effective against unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases — indeed it has proven inferior to other methods of sexual responsibility that could be taught to teenagers.
Err... in what way is abstinence ineffective against unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted disease? I 'm pretty sure that if you abstain, you will definitely not get pregnant and you will not get an STD for sure. And yes, sure, the 'need to mate is primal in physically mature human beings'. But are human beings living in 'mature' societies roaming around in their 'primal' state?
4. We should accept that something may be unchangeable, and try to persuade the other side to come to a compromise.
No, no, no, teenagers wanting to have sex and not understanding what is wrong with it is not something that is unchangeable (although it is certainly becoming a worldwide trend). Coming to a compromise means compromising on your values (assuming that some of us who are older than teenagers have certain 'values' wrt to this). Do we want to do that? If your children - daughters and sons - are possibly going to grow up wanting to have sex with their boyfriends/girlfriends and not understanding why they shouldn't, are you going to do nothing about it but try 'persuade' them to 'come to a compromise'?
The long and short of it is that I cannot accept that we just have to accept teenage sex as 'one of those things'. I don't know what exactly the relation is but somehow I think there is a relationship between a cavalier attitude towards sex and a cavalier attitude towards relationships (I am not saying that all teenagers, or adults for that matter, who have sex before marriage are necessarily these cavalier types).
By 'a cavalier attitude towards sex', I mean seeing it as something you are free to engage in with a boyfriend/girlfriend, but not being prepared to accept, not wanting to be burdened by, or worse, not being aware of, its ultimate consequences. Which could include pregnancy, getting an STD, having your partner brag about it, having your video uploaded on the Internet, etc.
In an unrelated article in the ST, we are told that a study of 1700 divorces in Singapore revealed a number of 'risk factors' for marriages, including 'a hasty courtship' and couples not being 'prepared for marriage'. Why, in this day and age, with people more educated and socially aware, are couples getting married after a 'hasty courtship' or when they are not prepared? Obviously, some people do not take marriage seriously enough and perhaps they don't realise it till it's too late. Goodness (don't know why but the phrase 'upon my word' was at the tips of my fingers -- ha ha, so old-fashioned), even when you take marriage seriously, you are not guaranteed success. Anyway, what are the chances that these people are the same ones who also do not take relationships and sex seriously enough? Interestingly, there was an example given of a man who got married after a 6-month courtship and who said 'it was a physical relationship', and that he 'hardly knew' his ex-wife.
Sigh...
On a more positive note, the writer whose articles I really like is this Sec 4 boy called Jeremy Lin, who writes very well (he is interesting, humorous, etc) and reasons more maturely than some people older than him do. His latest article.
I am, of course, listening to my lovely, lovely, My Lovely Sam-Soon soundtrack CD. :-)
And the reason why I'm looking at this particular article is because it contains some, well, rather surprising ideas. Here are some (in red):
1. If you take a sex video of yourself, you run the risk of having it being seen by more people than it was intended for, but that sort of risk should not be criticised by anyone. Her only fault was that she was careless.
Hmmm... her only fault was being careless? The way I see it, if you take a video or even photograph and store in on your phone, computer, iPod, or whatever, you should jolly well be aware that it could fall into someone else's hands. Therefore, if you are willing to take that risk, and it really happens, well, it was partly your fault for having those images/videos or whatever in the first place. Why, even a regular photo that's been printed out can fall into the 'wrong' hands. Those from my previous, previous, previous workplace, remember the photo our boss' secretary found? And, of all things, that kind of video. I mean, if you have a video of your lecturer lecturing away and your phone got stolen and someone uploaded it, people wouldn't care two hoots about it.
This para was followed by an 'attack' on the handphone thief for what he/she did. I do agree with the writer on that point. The thief seems to have gotten away rather lightly, in that not many people are actually talking about the immorality of stealing a phone, downloading its contents for the world to see, etc.
2. Responsible teenage sex doesn't cause problems.
Hmmm again. Both responsible and irresponsible teenage can cause a variety of problems.
3. What we need to admit to ourselves is that the need to mate is primal in physically mature human beings. It is not practical to attempt to suppress it. Abstinence, research has shown, is only questionably effective against unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases — indeed it has proven inferior to other methods of sexual responsibility that could be taught to teenagers.
Err... in what way is abstinence ineffective against unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted disease? I 'm pretty sure that if you abstain, you will definitely not get pregnant and you will not get an STD for sure. And yes, sure, the 'need to mate is primal in physically mature human beings'. But are human beings living in 'mature' societies roaming around in their 'primal' state?
4. We should accept that something may be unchangeable, and try to persuade the other side to come to a compromise.
No, no, no, teenagers wanting to have sex and not understanding what is wrong with it is not something that is unchangeable (although it is certainly becoming a worldwide trend). Coming to a compromise means compromising on your values (assuming that some of us who are older than teenagers have certain 'values' wrt to this). Do we want to do that? If your children - daughters and sons - are possibly going to grow up wanting to have sex with their boyfriends/girlfriends and not understanding why they shouldn't, are you going to do nothing about it but try 'persuade' them to 'come to a compromise'?
The long and short of it is that I cannot accept that we just have to accept teenage sex as 'one of those things'. I don't know what exactly the relation is but somehow I think there is a relationship between a cavalier attitude towards sex and a cavalier attitude towards relationships (I am not saying that all teenagers, or adults for that matter, who have sex before marriage are necessarily these cavalier types).
By 'a cavalier attitude towards sex', I mean seeing it as something you are free to engage in with a boyfriend/girlfriend, but not being prepared to accept, not wanting to be burdened by, or worse, not being aware of, its ultimate consequences. Which could include pregnancy, getting an STD, having your partner brag about it, having your video uploaded on the Internet, etc.
In an unrelated article in the ST, we are told that a study of 1700 divorces in Singapore revealed a number of 'risk factors' for marriages, including 'a hasty courtship' and couples not being 'prepared for marriage'. Why, in this day and age, with people more educated and socially aware, are couples getting married after a 'hasty courtship' or when they are not prepared? Obviously, some people do not take marriage seriously enough and perhaps they don't realise it till it's too late. Goodness (don't know why but the phrase 'upon my word' was at the tips of my fingers -- ha ha, so old-fashioned), even when you take marriage seriously, you are not guaranteed success. Anyway, what are the chances that these people are the same ones who also do not take relationships and sex seriously enough? Interestingly, there was an example given of a man who got married after a 6-month courtship and who said 'it was a physical relationship', and that he 'hardly knew' his ex-wife.
Sigh...
On a more positive note, the writer whose articles I really like is this Sec 4 boy called Jeremy Lin, who writes very well (he is interesting, humorous, etc) and reasons more maturely than some people older than him do. His latest article.
bbbbbbbb
I am, of course, listening to my lovely, lovely, My Lovely Sam-Soon soundtrack CD. :-)
Oh, when is this Sam-Soon business going to stop?
Comments