Sex Makes People Stupid

As if any MORE evidence were needed to show that sex can impair someone's judgment --- here comes Tiger Woods buried under a mountain of evidence that he has been unfaithful to his wife (with at least 14 mistresses.) Major endorsement contracts, perhaps even his future in the sport he dominates, suddenly teetering like a house of cards.

My first reaction was overwhelming sadness because another hero and role model has imploded. I felt the same way when I heard about Kobe Bryant in 1994. Both of them had reached the absolute pinnacle of their fields, only to be brought low by their lack of self-control.

What I keep turning over in my mind however, is NOT that Tiger Woods had a bevvy of ladies that he was juggling... not that he risked EVERYTHING for sexual excitement... not that the man with legendary control over every aspect of his game could be so wildly out of control in another area of his life... but, frankly, that his WIFE thought he could be faithful.

Follow me here: Tiger Woods was well-known as a Las Vegas partyer while he was single, frequently seen with a diverse assortment of beautiful women on his arm. In our culture, when you're a handsome bachelor it's a given that you'll have a string of partners. But, prior to getting married, his bride-to-be, Elin Nordegren, made it clear she expected this behavior to stop. Then she married him without any demonstration or proof that his was something he was capable of doing!

This is a very typical female line of thought. I have this conversation over and over with women who have been cheated on:

Me: So he cheated on his last girlfriend with you?
Her: Well, yeah, but their relationship wasn't going anywhere.
Me: Had he told her that?
Her: I don't know. He said they fought all the time.
Me: Uh huh. Did he cheat on the girlfriend he had before her?
Her: Well, she wasn't really his girlfriend. She was just some girl he hung out with.
Me: Someone he was just using for sex?
Her: Ummmm, yeah.
Me: So, he cheated on at least the two previous girls he was with, but you thought he wouldn't cheat on you?
Her: Ummmm, yeah.
Me: Based on what evidence?
Her: He said he would never cheat on me!

I'm not kidding.

For the record: the BEST predictor of future behavior is PAST behavior. Impulse control is a skill that takes practice. You don't magically become capable of resisting temptation because you put on a wedding band (for cryin' out loud! it's not a force field!) This is so elementary: If your partner never has to prove to you that he/she can resist temptation, by resisting YOU, then you have no reason to believe they're capable of resisting anyone else!

Duh. I have so much expertise in this, I could write a book about it!

Wait a minute! I did! Sex Makes People Stupid: How To Avoid Ending Up With a Weenie

Hook-up Weekly "Tip"

(Caution: The transcript of these text "tips" from The HookUp might be offensive. It comes from TeenSource, a gov't funded weekly text message sent to teens who subscribe.)

The CA Family Health Council has developed a new "service" to provide "sex info and life advice" to teens who subscribe to The HookUp. Teens will be referred to TeenSource.org with questions. This website is linked to and funded by many organizations with a vested interest in promoting teen sex, but they claim their objective is to help teens make "responsible choices."

What kind of "responsible choices" would teens be encouraged to make if they subscribed?

My first text message from The HookUp read:

Hookup Weekly TIP: meds cure Chalmydia, Gonorrhea + Syph. Herpes + HIV stay w/u 4ever. Txt CLINIC + ur zipcode 4 clinics

My second text message from The HookUp read:
Hookup Weekly TIP: u cant get pregnant from anal sex but its much riskier 4HIV+STDS Txt CLINIC + ur zipcode 4 clinics

Based on just these two texts alone, is the the "responsible choice" for a teen to

a) Get tested (for which clinics receive millions in government funding),
and then once you have a clean test result
b) Have anal sex responsibly to avoid getting pregnant?

Putting the idea of "safe" anal sex in a 13-15 year old's head doesn't seem responsible to ME at all. However, if your goal is to break down the natural barriers young people have to risky sexual activity, getting a text message from THE GOVERNMENT telling you its ok would certainly be a good start.

Expect the Law of Unintended Consequences to catch up with this really fast. For instance, expect teen pregnancies to increase. Telling teens "you can't get pregnant from anal sex," is biologically true, but in Real Life, not so much. Have sperm will travel. Ask anyone who got pregnant without "going all the way."

And secondarily, does it seem like a good idea to promote anal sex anyway? We are already at epidemic levels for sexually transmitted infections NOW, so encouraging more of the behavior which transmits bacteria and viruses directly into the bloodstream seems pretty irresponsible.

But even more than that --- as with other risky behaviors, eventually, the "thrill" wears off, leaving the bored teen trying to come up with another way to achieve the same rush. They're watching pornography and imitating what they see, so the most common choices are: move on to another partner of the same sex, introduce an additional sexual partner, have sex with the other gender, add drugs to alter/intensify the experience. You may think I'm using "scare tactics." I'm just repeating to you what teens (as young as 14) in my local public schools have told me.

The decision-makers who influence your kids believe the most responsible thing they can do is emphasize "get tested - use protection." They are willing to accept some infections, some pregnancies and some emotional problems as "collateral damage" for these policies.

If the state can lower pre-high school graduation pregnancies from 1 in 6 to 1 in 7 girls, or decrease the number of newly reported infections from 25% from 20%, they can (and will) proclaim their strategy is "effective."

But while our elected officials fiddle around with a few percentage points, I think most parents would prefer their son or daughter escaped ALL the potential consequences. That will only happen when adults believe there are benefits to sexual self-control and young people are convinced they can do it.

Smuggling in the truth

Recently, a question was raised about a phrase I used on a previous blog: "I'm looking for ways to smuggle the truth in underground.” Was I referring to subverting the authority of public school administrators? Or perhaps getting specifically prohibited material into the hands of students?

Words have power, I always say... and then I assume everyone knows what I mean. (OK, so I have some blonde moments.)

The truth I want to "smuggle in" to those school districts where I am banned:

1. That condoms/pills/shots do NOT provide the same level of protection as not having sex at all.
   
2. That, despite how hard it is to do, there are benefits to controlling your sexual urges.
3. Teen sex can produce long term relational consequences which adolescents can't grasp, foresee or predict.
   
4. Sometimes people who say they want to keep teens "safe" from sexual consequences are motivated by financial gain.
   

That's it. I'm not trying to keep accurate information about birth control or condoms from teens. I do want them to have access to everything they need to make good decisions. Unfortunately, after talking to tens of thousands of teens, I know for a fact, that they are under the impression "using protection" is just as safe as not having sex. But their idea of "using protection" has a wide range of not very safe actions.

A few common myths teens (and some adults) believe about "safe sex":

• Condoms aren't necessary if you're only having oral sex. Totally false. Most STDs can happily thrive in your mouth and throat.

• You're "safe" if you both get tested before you have sex. The fact is, there are no tests for some STDs. (Not to mention, even if someone says "I go to the clinic every three months so I'm clean," that doesn't mean they didn't get infected last night!)

• Teen pregnancy is the problem which requires the most attention. While it's true, almost a million teen girls become pregnant every year, its been estimated that 9 million 15-24 year olds become infected annually. (And don't forget, pregnancy only lasts a few months, but Herpes is forever.) The estimated direct cost of treating STDs in $14 billion per year --- that doesn't include indirect costs like lost wages and productivity, the cost of treating infants who have been infected, etc.

• If you're on the Pill, you don't have to worry about using condoms. Its a well-documented pattern that older teens and teens with the greatest number of partners are less likely to use condoms than younger less experienced teens. College students are less likely to use condoms than 9th graders, even though the "pool" of potentially infected partners is much higher among college students.
  

• You would be able to tell if you or your partner is infected. After being shown pictures of the "worst-case-scenario" diseased genitals, everyone thinks, "Well, I'd sure notice is someone's penis looked like a pickle." But the universally accepted data is 80% of the time STDs have no symptoms. No symptoms, very mild or hard to identify symptoms, sores in locations you can't see and (for some STDs) no test. [Just fyi, I've had both doctors and clinicians tell me they don't test for Herpes unless there is an active sore to culture. Their reasoning was, "Sure there's blood test to see if someone is a carrier, but you can't DO anything about it if they are, and it takes up too much chair time to deal with the emotional response to 'you have Herpes.']
  

• You can trust the people who give you free birth control and condoms. Are you kidding!? Comprehensive Sex Ed. programs are developed and presented (most of the time) by people who's INCOME is tied to sexual treatment services. Your local sexual health clinics receive federal and state funding to provide pregnancy-related and STD screening services. But (unlike Positively Waiting) they also receive funding from the feds, states and school districts to develop and present their sex ed. program. (Am I the only one who sees this as a conflict of interest?)
  

Even after a 3-to-6 week Comprehensive Sex Ed. program these myths still persist. First, because the medical data is very complicated. Second, because adolescent brains simply aren't capable of taking in data, weighing it against time/nature/experience and being able to predict the outcome of their behavior. But third, because the information gets watered-down to "Be safe. Use a condom."

In a teen mind, the message sound just like: "Be safe, don't smoke." Teens know no one dies immediately from smoking a cigarette, or a joint. You have to do it a lot so the problem builds up over time. Do you know how that message translates to sex? "You shouldn't have sex with a lot of people when you're young." Teens rarely grasp that you can get pregnant or be infected for a lifetime after only one act of sex.

Even after hearing both Positively Waiting and clinical program, some teens still respond, "Thanks for telling me all this stuff. I'm definitely going to slow down." (Yikes!)

How much more will that misconception persist if no one is there acting as their "visual aids"?

Here's the "truth" we're trying to smuggle in a nutshell: See these two people? One practiced "safe sex" by the book and got infected anyway. The other one only worried about being pregnant when she didn't want to be and ended up throwing away the chance to get pregnant when she wanted to.

We just want to be sure teens process the WHOLE TRUTH about how sex can impact their lives. We want them to know they can eliminate risk by the choices they make, and we want them to know (despite what others might say) it is possible to control your sexual passion, because WE did it.

The truth is we were banned by people who have never seen our presentations. Not one single teen (even those who who were sexually active and blew us off) has ever said they think we shouldn't be allowed to tell our story. Everyone who seen it agrees: our story makes a difference. They don't understand why adults are preventing us from showing by our own lives how to be successful at sexual self-control.

And, in all truthfulness, neither do I.

Contrasts

A young black male asked me with total seriousness, "Is it true the government invented AIDS to kill us?"

I was at one of the local juvenile probation camps. This teenage boy had just listened attentively to my talk about sexual self-control. After hearing me be real about my own poor decisions as a teenager, I guess he decided I would also be truthful about this.

The first time I was asked, I remember I thought they were just trying to shock me. They ask some pretty silly things sometimes. One "tip" they tell me related by older black men is that you can tell if a girl has an STD by putting ear wax on your finger and inserting it in her vagina... if she "jumps" then she's probably got something.

I'm not kidding.

But I get that question about the government injecting AIDS into the the black community fairly often. They don't seem satisfied when I tell them it isn't true.

I can't help but contrast that with the phone calls made to Planned Parenthood where a "plant" made uncontested racist statements and wanted assurances that his "donation" would specifically fund abortions of black babies. The response of the Planned Parenthood administrator was absolutely that he could target his money to be used that way and she was "excited" to receive the contribution. You can hear the recording of the conversation on YouTube. http://youtube.com/watch?v=Eygv8qEkiFE

While the government did not inject AIDS into the African-American community, they do give millions of dollars to Planned Parenthood so they can run abortion clinics in minority neighborhoods. In this upside-down world, access to abortions is a "right" that before Roe v. Wade was only offered to rich white folks.

Planned Parenthood is considered an ally of minorities. The federal funding of abstinence education is considered an attack on minorities.

Follow the the thinking here: An organization receiving federal funding, which provides government-funded birth control and should it fail, government-funded abortion services... with clinics primarily located in the black and Hispanic communities... whose basic mission is to limit the number of babies born is considered a "friend" of those communities.

An organization teaching young people of all races that they can control their sexual passions, and which has NO financial gain other than a society of better citizens and stronger families... is considered their adversary.

Does anyone else see a problem with this?

Day of Silence, Day of Truth

Friday, April 25th is the "Day of Silence" sponsored by the Gal Lesbian Straight Education Network (GLSEN). Students, some with tape over their mouth, will hand out cards when called on which state their support for homosexual students who have been bullied into silence.

Monday, April 28th is the "Day of Truth" sponsored by some pro-family groups as a counter-balance. Students will also hand out cards (but not during class) which promote respectful dialogue about homosexuality.

Is it just me, or does this seem like a crazy environment for CHILDREN to learn? I saw one "testimony" about a substitute teacher who couldn't be silent so he opted for a t-shirt that promoted homosexuality and "educated his EIGHTH GRADERS."

I know some eighth graders. They are 12 and 13... they are worried about pimples, braces, teasing, new body odors and algebra. Do we really need to add the politics of sex to their day?

I have very strong beliefs (as I bet you do) about homosexuality and its impact on people and society. Debating those issues gets adults wound up and heated. What does it do to children who are accustomed to being directed and guided by adults? How does a 13-year-old reconcile a favorite teacher's beliefs when they conflict with what mom or dad says? Is it fair to ask the child to "take sides"... and then expect them to just go about their day?

Isn't forcing children to take sides in such a contentious forum a form of bullying too?

I'm going to default to what I have said in the past and will argue in the future. There are NO benefits to adolescent sexual activity. NONE. Sexual behavior in teens is linked to:

• emotional problems like depression and suicidal thoughts
• risky behavior like smoking, drinking and drug abuse
• higher drop-out rates
• difficulty bonding in future relationships
• non-martial pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections

I don't see any benefit to children to bring the politics of sex into their classroom. It's disruptive to the children and the learning process. Desensitizing their natural modesty and directing their thoughts to the gamut of sexual behaviors for a day (and in some schools for a week) certainly undermines any efforts to help them learn sexual self-control.

They banned sodas and sugary snacks to keep kids from being tempted to eat poorly, but you should see what your child's school can put up to "promote" tolerance of homosexuality.