The top 10 things young women need to know that feminists won't tell them

[Neil Peart]

10. Flowers, candy, and opened doors are not weapons of oppression. Chivalrous gestures show that a guy respects you and may be interested in a relationship.

9. You are most fertile in your twenties. During your thirties, fertility declines. Many women have trouble getting pregnant after the age of 35.

8. Discrimination is not why women make less money than men. Women make different choices and have different priorities, which results in them earning less.

7. Condoms are not a get-out-of-STD-free device. They do little or nothing to prevent the spread of several serious STD's.

6. Children raised by their parents tend to have fewer emotional and behavioral problems than children who spend long hours in daycare.

5. Not everybody is doing it. Fewer of your peers than you think are engaging in casual sex. Those who do so often regret it.

4. There is no shame in aspiring to marry. Married people tend to be happier, healthier, and better off financially.

3. Divorce does not erase a marriage. It often creates a new set of problems for you and your children.

2. You should make goals in your personal life just like you do in your career.

1. Being a woman does not make you a victim. You have choices to make and live with. That is what being liberated and independent is about.

[AJFletch]

10. Flowers, candy, and opened doors are not weapons of oppression. Chivalrous gestures show that a guy respects you and may be interested in a relationship.

7. Condoms are not a get-out-of-STD-free device. They do little or nothing to prevent the spread of several serious STD's.

10: A relationship?? Lol. I've never opened a door for a girl with the thought, "Gee gosh golly, I'd really like to be in a relationship with her." Guys open doors either because it's an old lady or because the chick is hot and/or well-endowed.

7: Little or nothing? Clearly you know absolutely nothing about sexual health. Condoms are not full proof, but they greatly reduce the risk of STDs, and there is no way to deny that.

[Neil Peart]

7: Little or nothing? Clearly you know absolutely nothing about sexual health. Condoms are not full proof, but they greatly reduce the risk of STDs, and there is no way to deny that.Condoms do not reduce the likelihood of transmission of HPV, and are of limited use in preventing the transmission of genital ulcer diseases such as herpes and syphilis, since such infections can appear in skin not covered by a condom.

[Air Force Guy]

I love your expression "greatly reduce." 100% to 75% is pretty good if you're talking about buying a flat screen LCD TV. It's garbage if you're talking about 75% chance of infection. AJ, AIDS is an STD. The virus is small enough to pass thru some parts of a condom membrane. Will you trust your life to a millimeter thick piece of latex? No?

Why then is any other STD an acceptable risk? Herpes is for life brah! Staph is getting almost impossible to deal with.

[AJFletch]

Condoms do not reduce the likelihood of transmission of HPV, and are of limited use in preventing the transmission of genital ulcer diseases such as herpes and syphilis, since such infections can appear in skin not covered by a condom.

From the New England Journal of Medicine as quoted in the USA Today:

"Consistent condom use by their male partners appears to reduce the risk of human papillomavirus, or HPV, infection in newly sexually active women, a study reports today..."

"Women whose partners always used a condom were 70% less likely to acquire an HPV infection than women whose partners used condoms less than 5% of the time..."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2006-06-21-virus-protection_x.htm?csp=34

[buzzthepug!]

AJ Fletch has a point but the idea of the list is that condoms don't equal 100% safe sex. Jeez, they don't even protect against pregnancy 100% but the transmission of HIV/ADIS and the HEP's (B,C,D, etc...) is greatly reduced - still not enough for me, however.

#8 is a little patronizing. I have never felt discriminated against but men are usually paid more (traditionally and in the past) because they were the head of the household and had to support an entire family. That's a lot of responsibility.

Being female, I don't have different priorities than a man. I want to secure a decent retirement and reach "critical mass" as Bob Brinker likes to put it. Would I like to be rich? Sure. Is it the end all and be all? nah.

[AJFletch]

I love your expression "greatly reduce." 100% to 75% is pretty good if you're talking about buying a flat screen LCD TV. It's garbage if you're talking about 75% chance of infection. AJ, AIDS is an STD. The virus is small enough to pass thru some parts of a condom membrane. Will you trust your life to a millimeter thick piece of latex? No?

Why then is any other STD an acceptable risk? Herpes is for life brah! Staph is getting almost impossible to deal with.

First of all you are completely pulling those numbers out of the air.

Secondly, what's the answer then, just locking yourself in your room with a bottle of lotion and the complete series of Baywatch on DVD? You have to exercise common sense and discretion, but still live life.

[mkafrica]

Let's say condoms reduce the likelyhood of getting an STD. Let's say it's, oh, 75% reliable. That means that if I slept with 4 infected people, I would be pretty close to highly likely of getting it.

No thanks.

I'll wait until I'm married.

75% chance of not getting does not equal protection, IMO.

First of all you are completely pulling those numbers out of the air.

Secondly, what's the answer then, just locking yourself in your room with a bottle of lotion and the complete series of Baywatch on DVD? You have to exercise common sense and discretion, but still live life.

I'm perfectly content with monogamy. Then you don't even have to worry about it.

[AJFletch]

AJ Fletch has a point but the idea of the list is that condoms don't equal 100% safe sex. Jeez, they don't even protect against pregnancy 100%

Did I claim them to be? No, my exact words were: "Condoms are not full proof, but they greatly reduce the risk of STDs"

They may not be effective 100% of the time against pregnancy, but they ARE effective 99% of the time. A 1% risk is not something I'm going to lose sleep over, especially when there are other forms of birth control you can combine with it.

[Eagle1]

Fletch, you go ahead and talk about the greatness of sleeping around, just don't expect us to think it is ok and ignore the risks

70% is not good odds, not with the issues we are talking about

[PrezLeefun]

I think a better point to make here is that some of these things would do better to have statistics back them up as being true.

[Eagle1]

stats dont prove anything, they only fail to disprove

[PrezLeefun]

^^^ But they would be helpful and provide some cred.

[DesertFox]

AJ, what's "full proof" mean?

[DoctorDoom]

Since the topic has been diverted to condom "safety", one must ask this question: when you're relying on them to stop a chronic, and quite possibly fatal sexually transmitted disease, what odds are acceptable? 1 in 4? 1 in 6? 1 in 10? What probability is sufficiently low to justify promiscuity despite the risk of STD infection?

Many leading health experts have warned against depending on condoms for protection against AIDS and other STDs. Here's a sampling of their comments:

"You just can't tell people it's all right to do whatever you want as long as you wear a condom. It (AIDS) is just too dangerous a disease to say that."
-- Dr. Harold Jaffee, chief of epidemiology, National Centers for Disease Control

"Simply put, condoms fail. And condoms fail at a rate unacceptable for me as a physician to endorse them as a strategy to be promoted as meaningful AIDS protection."
-- Dr. Robert Renfield, chief of retro-viral research, Walter Reed Army Institute

"Relying on condoms for 'protection' can mean lifelong disease, suffering, and even death for you or for someone you love."
-- Dr. Andre Lafrance, Canadian physician and researcher

"Saying that the use of condoms is 'safe sex' is in fact playing Russian roulette. A lot of people will die in this dangerous game."
-- Dr. Teresa Crenshaw, member of the U.S. Presidential AIDS Commission and past president of the American Association of Sex EducatorsCondom Warnings -- Beware (http://www.prolife.com/CONDOMS.html)

[DoctorDoom]

AJ, what's "full proof" mean?Probably "foolproof".

[Taylor1]

I thought this was a "G" rated site, not complaining or anything..

[CONSERVATIVE HERO]

Fletch, you go ahead and talk about the greatness of sleeping around, just don't expect us to think it is ok and ignore the risks

70% is not good odds, not with the issues we are talking about
Meh, he's apparently just another dood who believes the pursuit of sexual gratification is the purpose of life. All of of us fogies who aren't 'getting our hump on' with divers skanks simply aren't "living life" apparently. :rolleyes:

Common sense dictates that sex outside of a monogamous, committed relationship is irresponsible and potentially lethal. The left has been using "safe sex" propaganda, presenting condoms in a "wear them and you need not have a worry in the world" fashion, as a vehicle to push promiscuity as a viable alternative to abstinence for years. What do we have to show for it?
Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) remain a major public health challenge in the United States. ...CDC (http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats/trends2006.htm) estimates that approximately 19 million new infections occur each year (and almost half of them are among youth aged 15 to 24)That's what.

Here's some more common sense for you. People who are engaging in sex will ultimately have the urge to engage in that sex without the condoms. This isn't a problem however when people are simply not having sex (abstinence) or practicing monogamy with a spouse.

Abstinence from vaginal, anal, and oral intercourse is the only 100% effective way to prevent HIV, other STDs, and pregnancy. The correct and consistent use of a male latex condom can reduce the risk of STD transmission, including HIV infection. However, no protective method is 100% effective, and condom use cannot guarantee absolute protection against any STD or pregnancy.What always gets me about people like AJFletch is their inability to grasp that somebody has to be that 1% who does get burned, dying their horrible, sore and tumor ridden, "improbable" AIDS death, and that they'd probably love nothing more than to get their hands on folks like him who lead others to the same fate by nonchalantly saying a "1% risk is not something... to lose sleep over."

[mkafrica]

I thought this was a "G" rated site, not complaining or anything..

Since this is something they probably instruct in kindergarten now, this entire thread is completely G rated... :biggrin:

[Taylor1]

Not to sure they instruct this in kindergarten. At least, not in christian schools.

[mkafrica]

My apologies. I neglected to use my /sarcasm comment... ;)

[DesertFox]

The main thing a young woman needs to know that feminists won't tell her is that women were made for men, and vice versa.

Probably "foolproof." I know that, Doc, and you know that. But I don't think Mr Smartypants AJ knows it.

[DoctorDoom]

A question for the "safe enough" crowd: what odds are acceptable? 1 in 4? 1 in 6? 1 in 10? At what point does promiscuity become safe enough? At what probability level would you decide that it's worth risking your health or life for a few moments of physical pleasure? As you're sick with or dying of an STD, would you look back and decide that the screw was worth the consequence?

[ThomasMore]

I think our friend Fletch was a hit-and-run artist...

No cojones to defend his, er, position.

In the unlikely chance that he does return, perhaps he would like to take this thread (http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/showthread.php?t=56095) into account.

[Wolfcounsel]

If you use a condom, you get only a little bit killed, not a whole lot.

[TeenageRepublican]

Taylor- This forum is rated R for language, sexual content, and violence throughout-all involving posts.