4 ms·
Easy: a lot of states teach abstinence-only sex education, and there's a prevailing set of social norms (often imposed by "pro lifer Christians") that makes fra
by candu 9y ago
Easy: a lot of states teach abstinence-only sex education, and there's a prevailing set of social norms (often imposed by "pro lifer Christians") that makes frank discussions of birth control, sex, reproductive biology, etc. all but impossible. It sounds crazy - and, IMHO, it is - but large parts of the US operate as de facto theocracies, especially where it comes to education.
Under those circumstances, it's not surprising that teenagers have sex, don't know how to do so safely, and end up pregnant without meaning to. That is: a teenager absolutely can choose to have sex without choosing to get pregnant, simply because the society around them has conspired to make sure they don't understand how one leads to the other.
- nostromo123 9y agoIf you don't understand that sex can lead to getting pregnant, I think you're not old enough to be left outside unaccompanied.
- omegaworks 9y agoThat's exactly the line of thinking that leads to societies where women must be accompanied by men in public. It's strategic: prevent women from accessing the tools and knowledge to keep themselves safe, then justify denying them rights "to keep them safe."
- shanusmagnus 9y agoYou had the kernel of a sensible point a while ago, but now you're just digging in. Acting as if most teenage pregnancies occur because the woman involved doesn't understand how babies are made is asinine unless you've unearthed some population I don't know about; and claiming that frictions standing in the way of perfectly convenient birth control absolves a person from all consequences is both asinine and actively insulting to the agency of human beings everywhere. Things could be better, of course, and that's worth talking about, but your argument has turned into a caricature.