Abstinence-only magazine

[Washington]

Part of me wants to laugh at this and another part of me feels really bad. There's a bit of misinformation in this magazine. There are a few things that were okay, the overall I find this magazine disgusting.

http://www.humanlife.org/j4g.php

I got a kick out of their misrepresentation on their Q&A page

"About 4-11% of the time [the birth control pill] interferes with implantation.Implantation happens 5-9 days after conception when the baby tries to implant in the uterus. The pill blocks this implantation by thinning the lining of the lining of the womb, and the baby is aborted."

[emphasis mine]
​

As if a blastula could be considered a baby. This was almost as bad as reading creationist literature. Of course it does serve as a warning that if they can misrepresent such a simple thing as this there's most likely a lot more serious misrepresentation going on in their little, biased rag.

Their alleged "baby" six days after conception. (Graphic: Wikipedia)

​

 

[SallyNow]

Sex leads to pregnancy? What? When did this happen? Hollywood has been keeping this from me! They never told me that! Yet at the same time they showed me sex all the time!

Men value control over what they have. Many men around the world have control over their homes and their women. American pumps out the opposite of this around the world 24/7 on cable/satelite tv. Imagine your great grandfather watching cable tv and you get an idea of what the rest of the world thinks of America. Sure Pam Anderson looks good on baywatch but you don't want your wife or daughter out there...

Pam Anderson is Canadian, FYI.

The rest of the world thinks that America's hangups over sex are what leads America to have so much graphic, often violent pornography.

There is a difference between crossing the street carefully and playing in the street.

There are places were streets are only for pedestrians. What about those streets? They're made to be played in.

I have to go with the old seatbelt analogy on this one: sure, you don't expect your kids to drive, but because you know once they leave your house they may get a driver's licence, and because it helps with their general overall safety, you teach them the basic rules of the road, such as what green, yellow, and red lights mean.

Or the drunk driving issue: you teach them never to go to parties where heavy drinking is going to happen, but because you know they might, you warn them how dangerous it is to get into a car with a drunk driver, and you make sure they know how to call a taxi if such a case arises. You also remind them that if they get into a dangerous situation they can call you to assist them.

 

[Corey]

Part of the reason why much of the world hates us so much is because of the trash they push.

No...it's not. The US is despised because it helps prop up autocratic rulers that suppress by any means necessary its people...because we have a strong tendency towards arrogance in foreign policy...because we start wars...

Want more?

 

[Corey]

Statistically speaking the horrible consequences are there for premarital sex which are not there for abstinence.

1) it's qualitatively...

2) statistically speaking, safe sex closely approximates abstinence.

 

[Athene]

Men value control over what they have. Many men around the world have control over their homes and their women. American pumps out the opposite of this around the world 24/7 on cable/satelite tv. Imagine your great grandfather watching cable tv and you get an idea of what the rest of the world thinks of America. Sure Pam Anderson looks good on baywatch but you don't want your wife or daughter out there...

No the world does not hate America because of it's obsession with sex and it's un-natural standards of female beauty (size zero with huge fake boobs).

 

[IzzyPop]

No the world does not hate America because of it's obsession with sex and it's un-natural standards of female beauty (size zero with huge fake boobs).

Hey! They don't have to be fake!

 

[Washington]

Hey! They don't have to be fake!

In fact, I prefer they not be. . . . . . . . within certain limits of course.

 

[Athene]

Hey! They don't have to be fake!

I've yet to see a size zero woman with large real boobs though I'm sure there are one or two out there.

 

[Gremlins]

'Saving sex for marriage means your wedding night will be something special' ? Only if you consider fumbling around then going off in about 4 seconds and your new wife never wanting anything to do with you again 'something special' .

Also, their dating ideas suck. Dance Dance Revolution? How old is the average reader of this magazine supposed to be?

ALSO, the for girls part of that magazine gives the impression that guys are just a bunch of looks-obsessed hormonal nutjobs.

 

[Maren]

ALSO, the for girls part of that magazine gives the impression that guys are just a bunch of looks-obsessed hormonal nutjobs.

They aren't?

 

[mpok1519]

You are using a presupposition. ie Have you stopped beating your wife yet?

To answer the question requires accepting something as truth when it may or may not be, ie you beat your wife.

It is good to warn adults and children about Hollywood. Part of the reason why much of the world hates us so much is because of the trash they push. That trash is also a large part of why America has a problem with single women raising children under the poverty level. Mind control can be ughly.

I'm pretty sure the world hates us because of our imperialistic economic policies. not because Hollywood makes bad movies.

and mind control comes in various forms; hollywood..religion...school books....scientists...scholars...philosophers....priests....rabbis....etc etc etc.


Abstinence Only Magazine? A better name could be "Intimacy Issues".

 

[keith99]

I agree theres nothing wrong with teaching the benefits of abstinence, but trying to force people to abstain by using scare tactics is wrong. I seen a great movie about abstinence-only education called "everybody's doing it", in the movie one of the first things the teacher of the health class says is "If you have pre-marital sex just ONCE you may contract a disease or even DIE!" I lol'd so much!

Darn, if I knew you could die I wouldn't have done it. I thougth that going 'all the way' before you were married just made you go blind.

I only did it until I needed glassses!

 

[PassionFruit]

I'm pretty sure the world hates us because of our imperialistic economic policies. not because Hollywood makes bad movies.

and mind control comes in various forms; hollywood..religion...school books....scientists...scholars...philosophers....priests....rabbis....etc etc etc.


Abstinence Only Magazine? A better name could be "Intimacy Issues".

LOL!
Yeah, the actual name is Just for Girls and Just for Guys, but it's an abstinence only magazine. You can tell by the content.

Did anyone read the one for guys and how it talked about porn? And I still don't understand that duct tape experiment.

 

[mpok1519]

the thing is its not teens and kids writing the magazine; and if it was, it'd be filled wiht grammatical and spelling errors, hehe. Its written by adults trying to speak from a teen's perspective, which is not only misleading, it botches and butchers the principles of journalism.

of course, not all magazines are made by journalists. ~nod~ These magazines are made by bloggers. =P

so much hate-fueled everything nowadays.

ever get this feeling that everyone thinks they're good, but really, we're all just evil with different wrappers?

 

[Athene]

LOL!
Yeah, the actual name is Just for Girls and Just for Guys, but it's an abstinence only magazine. You can tell by the content.

Did anyone read the one for guys and how it talked about porn? And I still don't understand that duct tape experiment.

I don't understand it either, I suspect that's because it's a load of rubbish.

 

[DeathMagus]

That's a fun story regarding pornographic addiction on page ?14?. Apparently, if you get turned on by naked women, suddenly your wife (a naked woman who you also have emotional ties with) won't turn you on. I'm not sure how that's supposed to work, but whatever.

 

[FaithLikeARock]

Hey if you want to go for abstinence talks you go to Pam Stenzel. She's entertaining and she at least will come out and say "But hey, if you don't want to listen, at least protect yourself". She's fun. Maybe I'll find one of her videos later.

 

[IzzyPop]

LOL!
Yeah, the actual name is Just for Girls and Just for Guys, but it's an abstinence only magazine. You can tell by the content.

Did anyone read the one for guys and how it talked about porn?

Yep. I thought that was pretty humorous. I watch porn a few times a week and I still get aroused when my wife is changing clothes. I guess I just don't watch the right stuff.

And I still don't understand that duct tape experiment.

I think it has a nice little subtext to it. They made a point of putting the duct tape around a guy and a girl's arm and then changing the guy out. After three or four guys, the tape is dirty. I think that was a typo. They meant to say 'vagina'. I can see how easy it is to make that mistake.

Also, check out the reference cited for that article. A Powerpoint presentation at an abstinence conference.

 

[SallyNow]

I'm pained to admit it, but the Do's and Don't page is almost useful. But then it goes on with nonsense such as, "it is not always possible to ward off an attack" (as if sometimes it is and a woman should blame herself in those cases).

Yes, abstinence is a wonderful option for those who choose it, but that does not excuse a lack of education, nor does it justify giving out misleading information.

The duct tape experiment... what? Why is there no peer-reviewed studies mentioned? Why is just based on a powerpoint? Why include something as fact if it's only based on a powerpoint presentation?

I find it funny that the "Ten Great Dating Ideas" list does not include any cultural events. Discussing a cultural event with someone after the fact can be a real eye-opener into the person's personality and beliefs.

 

[Washington]

And I still don't understand that duct tape experiment.

​

A stupid experiment to be sure, it's an attempt to equate the inevitable uselessness of duct tape that occurs from using it over and over on new and different hairy skin, TO the claimed ineffectiveness of oxytocin that results from having sex with different partners. The claim is that oxytocin, which is necessary to "bond" (whatever that means), is "damaged." Doing a quick survey of on-line literature on oxytocin turned up nothing that correlated decrease oxytocin levels with multiple sex partners, or any other voluntary interpersonal behavior.

In fact, looking up their source, Keroack Eric, "Oxytocin is this nano-peptid a chemical type of super glue?" I came across THIS little expose of him and his claim.

In short, it's an asinine comparison.