Condom Adverts
Discussion
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1254750/Co...
Can anyone give me a good reason why adverts for condoms should only broadcast after 9pm?
Can anyone give me a good reason why adverts for condoms should only broadcast after 9pm?
Quite right.
I was APPALLED at the literature handed out to my daughter in her first year at high school, she was openly embarrassed and the whole "program" did not relate to her at all.
For "balance" they had the Guidians come and speak about morality and abstinence, which 50% of the kids skipped anyway.
Why can't we just let children develop at their own pace instead of forcing it on them?
I was APPALLED at the literature handed out to my daughter in her first year at high school, she was openly embarrassed and the whole "program" did not relate to her at all.
For "balance" they had the Guidians come and speak about morality and abstinence, which 50% of the kids skipped anyway.
Why can't we just let children develop at their own pace instead of forcing it on them?
Mojocvh said:
Quite right.
I was APPALLED at the literature handed out to my daughter in her first year at high school, she was openly embarrassed and the whole "program" did not relate to her at all.
Is she gay or something?I was APPALLED at the literature handed out to my daughter in her first year at high school, she was openly embarrassed and the whole "program" did not relate to her at all.
These young people are all at it, I've read it in the papers.
Edited by SunderJimmy on Tuesday 2nd March 11:26
Mojocvh said:
Quite right.
I was APPALLED at the literature handed out to my daughter in her first year at high school, she was openly embarrassed and the whole "program" did not relate to her at all.
For "balance" they had the Guidians come and speak about morality and abstinence, which 50% of the kids skipped anyway.
Why can't we just let children develop at their own pace instead of forcing it on them?
Yeh, let's just leave them to it because I'm sure that'll work really well. Developed countries that have good stats on teenage pregnancy and STDs all start sex ed from a very young age.I was APPALLED at the literature handed out to my daughter in her first year at high school, she was openly embarrassed and the whole "program" did not relate to her at all.
For "balance" they had the Guidians come and speak about morality and abstinence, which 50% of the kids skipped anyway.
Why can't we just let children develop at their own pace instead of forcing it on them?
Mojocvh said:
Quite right.
I was APPALLED at the literature handed out to my daughter in her first year at high school, she was openly embarrassed and the whole "program" did not relate to her at all.
For "balance" they had the Guidians come and speak about morality and abstinence, which 50% of the kids skipped anyway.
Why can't we just let children develop at their own pace instead of forcing it on them?
I think you've misunderstood me - its absurd to hide condom adverts from kids. Absolutely absurd.I was APPALLED at the literature handed out to my daughter in her first year at high school, she was openly embarrassed and the whole "program" did not relate to her at all.
For "balance" they had the Guidians come and speak about morality and abstinence, which 50% of the kids skipped anyway.
Why can't we just let children develop at their own pace instead of forcing it on them?
It's a stupid idea - as are those adverts regarding other forms of contraception, that don't make it clear that this is for long termer relationships IMHO....surely the only form of contraception to advertise should be condoms....if you're sensible enough to be in a proper relationship, you are senisble enough to find out about other forms of contraception....the scrouts that these adverts are aimed at should use condoms, it's the only way to reduce the spread of their diseases!
Schoolkids know a lot more than they used to and these days, things like shaving your snatch and pissing on each other are pretty "commonplace".
When I was at uni, you'd rarely see anything other than a full Gorilla Autopsy, these days they are very rare indeed.
Kids are exposed to other kids and a lot of them are exposed to stuff that they perhaps shouldn't be.
The conversations I've overheard from across the room with my amazing hearing are enough to make your toenails curl. Seriously, put your head in the sand.
14 year olds taking it up the arse are more common than "Did I arrive by stork" in sec school comments.....
You have to accept the changes. I think those of us who are 30+ are probably the new victorians.
When I was at uni, you'd rarely see anything other than a full Gorilla Autopsy, these days they are very rare indeed.
Kids are exposed to other kids and a lot of them are exposed to stuff that they perhaps shouldn't be.
The conversations I've overheard from across the room with my amazing hearing are enough to make your toenails curl. Seriously, put your head in the sand.
14 year olds taking it up the arse are more common than "Did I arrive by stork" in sec school comments.....
You have to accept the changes. I think those of us who are 30+ are probably the new victorians.
Edited by tangent police on Tuesday 2nd March 13:33
Mojocvh said:
Quite right.
I was APPALLED at the literature handed out to my daughter in her first year at high school, she was openly embarrassed and the whole "program" did not relate to her at all.
For "balance" they had the Guidians come and speak about morality and abstinence, which 50% of the kids skipped anyway.
Why can't we just let children develop at their own pace instead of forcing it on them?
Because when this is done the UK ends up with high Teenage Pregnancy, at 11 there is a possibility that her first sexual encounter could result in pregnancy.I was APPALLED at the literature handed out to my daughter in her first year at high school, she was openly embarrassed and the whole "program" did not relate to her at all.
For "balance" they had the Guidians come and speak about morality and abstinence, which 50% of the kids skipped anyway.
Why can't we just let children develop at their own pace instead of forcing it on them?
We are a massively puritan country or atleast heading that way, Children should know as much as possible about the mechanics, the social and the medical implications of sexual activity.
Engineer1 said:
Mojocvh said:
Quite right.
I was APPALLED at the literature handed out to my daughter in her first year at high school, she was openly embarrassed and the whole "program" did not relate to her at all.
For "balance" they had the Guidians come and speak about morality and abstinence, which 50% of the kids skipped anyway.
Why can't we just let children develop at their own pace instead of forcing it on them?
Because when this is done the UK ends up with high Teenage Pregnancy, at 11 there is a possibility that her first sexual encounter could result in pregnancy.I was APPALLED at the literature handed out to my daughter in her first year at high school, she was openly embarrassed and the whole "program" did not relate to her at all.
For "balance" they had the Guidians come and speak about morality and abstinence, which 50% of the kids skipped anyway.
Why can't we just let children develop at their own pace instead of forcing it on them?
We are a massively puritan country or atleast heading that way, Children should know as much as possible about the mechanics, the social and the medical implications of sexual activity.
I can't understand why sex is such a taboo subject here.
Sex is openly discussed with the family in Holland, France, Germany and Italy. There is no big problem with under age pregnancies.
tangent police said:
Schoolkids know a lot more than they used to and these days, things like shaving your snatch and pissing on each other are pretty "commonplace".
Wow. PE lessons have changed from my days.There is a case both ways. For the moral/social relevance, it is reasonable that condom ads should be visible to their target audience, but most parents would prefer them not to be shown during SpongeBob Squarepants (TV or cinema). Perhaps a 19.00 or 20.00 watershed is more appropriate?
Engineer1 said:
Mojocvh said:
Quite right.
I was APPALLED at the literature handed out to my daughter in her first year at high school, she was openly embarrassed and the whole "program" did not relate to her at all.
For "balance" they had the Guidians come and speak about morality and abstinence, which 50% of the kids skipped anyway.
Why can't we just let children develop at their own pace instead of forcing it on them?
Because when this is done the UK ends up with high Teenage Pregnancy, at 11 there is a possibility that her first sexual encounter could result in pregnancy.I was APPALLED at the literature handed out to my daughter in her first year at high school, she was openly embarrassed and the whole "program" did not relate to her at all.
For "balance" they had the Guidians come and speak about morality and abstinence, which 50% of the kids skipped anyway.
Why can't we just let children develop at their own pace instead of forcing it on them?
We are a massively puritan country or atleast heading that way, Children should know as much as possible about the mechanics, the social and the medical implications of sexual activity.
Sex needs to stop being treated like a taboo subject, whilst children do grow up at different rates I think the statistics show how terrible the current approach of sex ed works. If it means one or two precious daddys little girls who would never dream of getting some before getting married come home a bit embarrassed from what they have learnt so be it, I would rather that than her friend in the same class believing the rumours that you cant get pregnant the first time you have sex or that if you wash your vagina with coke afterwards it prevents STD's.
elster said:
Engineer1 said:
Mojocvh said:
Quite right.
I was APPALLED at the literature handed out to my daughter in her first year at high school, she was openly embarrassed and the whole "program" did not relate to her at all.
For "balance" they had the Guidians come and speak about morality and abstinence, which 50% of the kids skipped anyway.
Why can't we just let children develop at their own pace instead of forcing it on them?
Because when this is done the UK ends up with high Teenage Pregnancy, at 11 there is a possibility that her first sexual encounter could result in pregnancy.I was APPALLED at the literature handed out to my daughter in her first year at high school, she was openly embarrassed and the whole "program" did not relate to her at all.
For "balance" they had the Guidians come and speak about morality and abstinence, which 50% of the kids skipped anyway.
Why can't we just let children develop at their own pace instead of forcing it on them?
We are a massively puritan country or atleast heading that way, Children should know as much as possible about the mechanics, the social and the medical implications of sexual activity.
I can't understand why sex is such a taboo subject here.
Sex is openly discussed with the family in Holland, France, Germany and Italy. There is no big problem with under age pregnancies.
BECAUSE in Holland the 'family' is seen as 'extremely' important, unlike here.
The 'family' used to be important here, kids in my days developed at our own pace (and remember we had the free love and sex of the 60s!) and the pregancy levels were just as high but 'we married!' Now we have the liberalisers, the nanny state, and not forgetting the pc brigade who have got their way.
An added reason for high teenage pregnancy here is 'partly' because it's 'in your face everywhere!' and, of course, there's the easy route to never working, benefits, no father figure needed and naturally, free housing!
The more you let them know, the more they'll want to have it - whether it be sex or the easy free-this, free-that life!
Proven!! Simples!
Edited by dandarez on Tuesday 2nd March 19:57
dandarez said:
elster said:
Engineer1 said:
Mojocvh said:
Quite right.
I was APPALLED at the literature handed out to my daughter in her first year at high school, she was openly embarrassed and the whole "program" did not relate to her at all.
For "balance" they had the Guidians come and speak about morality and abstinence, which 50% of the kids skipped anyway.
Why can't we just let children develop at their own pace instead of forcing it on them?
Because when this is done the UK ends up with high Teenage Pregnancy, at 11 there is a possibility that her first sexual encounter could result in pregnancy.I was APPALLED at the literature handed out to my daughter in her first year at high school, she was openly embarrassed and the whole "program" did not relate to her at all.
For "balance" they had the Guidians come and speak about morality and abstinence, which 50% of the kids skipped anyway.
Why can't we just let children develop at their own pace instead of forcing it on them?
We are a massively puritan country or atleast heading that way, Children should know as much as possible about the mechanics, the social and the medical implications of sexual activity.
I can't understand why sex is such a taboo subject here.
Sex is openly discussed with the family in Holland, France, Germany and Italy. There is no big problem with under age pregnancies.
BECAUSE in Holland the 'family' is seen as 'extremely' important, unlike here.
The 'family' used to be important here, kids in my days developed at our own pace (and remember we had the free love and sex of the 60s!) and the pregancy levels were just as high but 'we married!' Now we have the liberalisers, the nanny state, and not forgetting the pc brigade who have got their way.
An added reason for high teenage pregnancy here is 'partly' because it's 'in your face everywhere!' and, of course, there's the easy route to never working, benefits, no father figure needed and naturally, free housing!
The more you let them know, the more they'll want to have it - whether it be sex or the easy free-this, free-that life!
Proven!! Simples!
How many parents can honestly say that they sit down at the family table and discuss sex with their children?
It is not commonplace in this country.
dandarez said:
Now why would that be?
BECAUSE in Holland the 'family' is seen as 'extremely' important, unlike here.
The 'family' used to be important here, kids in my days developed at our own pace (and remember we had the free love and sex of the 60s!) and the pregancy levels were just as high but 'we married!' Now we have the liberalisers, the nanny state, and not forgetting the pc brigade who have got their way.
An added reason for high teenage pregnancy here is 'partly' because it's 'in your face everywhere!' and, of course, there's the easy route to never working, benefits, no father figure needed and naturally, free housing!
The more you let them know, the more they'll want to have it - whether it be sex or the easy free-this, free-that life!
Proven!! Simples!
BECAUSE in Holland the 'family' is seen as 'extremely' important, unlike here.
The 'family' used to be important here, kids in my days developed at our own pace (and remember we had the free love and sex of the 60s!) and the pregancy levels were just as high but 'we married!' Now we have the liberalisers, the nanny state, and not forgetting the pc brigade who have got their way.
An added reason for high teenage pregnancy here is 'partly' because it's 'in your face everywhere!' and, of course, there's the easy route to never working, benefits, no father figure needed and naturally, free housing!
The more you let them know, the more they'll want to have it - whether it be sex or the easy free-this, free-that life!
Proven!! Simples!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff