Oral sex lessons to cut rates of teenage pregnancy

[Raeghin]

Originally posted by Frobozz
How discriminating is your average horny male?

Translation: I am not discriminating.

[Damieux]

Originally posted by Zyth
The Guardian however is a broadsheet with pretty good credibility.

This article is by the "Observer" which appears to be part of "Guardian Unlimited." If this article represents their work, then the Observer doesn’t deserve credibility. Just by carefully reading the article, you can see that they are distorting the study and the program in order to create a sensational headline.

Compare their headline and first sentence:

Encouraging schoolchildren to experiment with oral sex could prove the most effective way of curbing teenage pregnancy rates, a government study has found.

with this explanation that is buried toward the end of the article:

Those behind the course stress the scheme does not suggest teenagers experiment with oral sex. Instead they say A Pause promotes the message that other forms of physical intimacy are safer than full intercourse.

As far as I can tell from reading the article, this “APause” program just alters traditional sex ed courses by teaching students that they can stop before having full intercourse. That seems eminently reasonable to me. The program isn’t about “encouraging” oral sex. Its about discouraging full intercourse among students who are going to be sexually active regardless.

Unfortunately, there’s nothing terribly racy or interesting about that story. So the Observer decided to spice it up with a headline and a lead sentence that misrepresents the program as encouraging oral sex. Then the Observer protects itself from a libel charge by including accurate information further down. The Observer knows full well that most readers don’t pay little attention after the first couple paragraphs, and, even if they do, by then they've already tricked you into reading the article, so what does the Observer care?

I think this sort of journalism is unprofessional and irresponsible. It’s the kind of thing that causes citizen and religious groups to oppose programs that could actually be doing some good. Let’s instead tell all the kids to “just say no” to extramarital sex. Yeah, right. That’s going to work.

If you are interested here is a more responsible article about the concerns that some people have with the APause program: Sex lessons 'go too far'. (Note that the BBC reported on these concerns back in February.)

For the position of the program's supporters, here is a link to information from Exeter University: Added Power and Understanding in Sex Education .

[kestra]

finally, they're teaching skills in schools that will be usable in the workplace.

[Isaviel]

In the workplace? gah!

[Kianier]

It's to bad...
I just got out of high school and my nurse was beautiful

[tharun]

Originally posted by Aristotle
No kidding.

I'm just glad this one is taking place in the UK.

I'm waiting for Tharun to tell me how The Guardian compares to The Sun so I can understand the source a bit better.

Well the Sun is a touch right of centre, whereas the Guardian is a left-wing newspaper. Furthermore The Sun is 'downmarket' in that it focusses on sensationalist news, and celebrity gossip, whereas The Guardian is a broadsheet which carries 'real news'. The Sun does get quite a few scoops and interesting stories though because it has quite a bit of money, what with it being the best selling newspaper in the UK. (It sells more than the Wall Street Journal and New York Times combined)

Obviously as was pointed out by some others, the articles were somewhat twisted to make the story more racy (british readers like reading about teen oral sex, its much more interesting than boring 'dont have sex' stories). Interesting as it would be, I don't think schools are going to be giving out "I only do Oral" and "Headjob Queen" stickers in school during sex-ed lessons about giving head.

Whilst it would cut pregnancy rates if everyone just had oral sex instead, one imagines that encouraging teenagers to have oral sex wouldn't help, because as everyone knows, one thing leads to another and..

Anyway, here's a handy guide from left to right of major British tabloids (everyone of which outsells the NY Times =) ) and Broadsheets. Most left at the top, most right at the bottom.

mirror/record (a bit left of centre, basically like the Sun but duller)
--
centre:
Express (kind of, I don't think they really know, they support the conservatives now..)
Sport (well the Sport is tough to place because its more of a celebrity gossip and soft porn daily..)
--
sun (Read by everyone from 5-95. Pile of shit. Some news, lots of sex stories, a few topless women)

star (Excellent 'problem' page, and good celebrity gossip. Likes to run campaigns like "stop this perverted filth" when a soap wanted to have a gay kiss.)

mail (worst newspaper in the world. Shit. if you read it I will smack you. I hate it.)

And for the broadsheets:
Guardian (Lovely and left wing)
--
Independent (Interesting take on most stories)
---
Times (best newspaper in the world)
Telegraph (Lovely and right wing)


-tharun

[Aristotle]

Thanks for the run down, Tharun.

But the best newspaper in the world is The Sablean Times.

Duh.