• chickenf622@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      161
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      19 days ago

      Love the implication that sex ed would’ve been any better in the US. Hell it would be worse if it was one of those abstinence only courses I had to go through.

      • LaunchesKayaks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        45
        ·
        19 days ago

        I didn’t have sex ed. The teacher had the kids vote on what they wanted. Sex ed or kickball. They all had shocked Pikachu faces when 4 students (ranging from 13-15years old) ended up pregnant within a year.

      • TriflingToad@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        19 days ago

        We literally had no sex ed other than pointing at a model. Nothing about how to do it or do it safely. Nothing about how to recognize if you’re being forced to and don’t realize it. Just pure memorization of the inner parts that people forgot about instantly. We had to watch a baby be born in a video but that was literally it.

        This was last year. By the best bio teacher in the school.

        • Monument@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          32
          ·
          edit-2
          19 days ago

          This is a column where letters from readers are responded to by the author (and sometimes guest help). Ms. Stoya is the column’s author, and she writes responses to the letters that get sent in.

          Might still be creative writing, but not by Ms. Stoya.

          • Yeah, I realized my mistake a minute after commenting and edited to point out the misunderstanding. These user submitted articles have always seemed fake to me. Particularly those from John Baron

            • Monument@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              19 days ago

              Huh. It even looks like you realized it before I commented, but my client didn’t show your edit!

              • Between the time required for different instances to push and pull the update, and the minute required to write it, there was definitely room for a misunderstanding to brew. Browser lemmy also only publishes changes to the page when you upvote/downvote something. (But voting can also clear any comments you’re writing on that page, so be careful)

        • Walican132@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          19 days ago

          There’s more to the story, I saw the full article somewhere else. Dude can’t finish without a condom now because of nerves. It seems pretty believable.

          • Read the article and I wish them well, if it isn’t a cheeky bit of chicanery. Poking holes in the condom would also work, in addition to the soul searching and ED medication they suggested

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        19 days ago

        I’ve heard stories if having sex using a woman’s urethra and not understanding things. Ive also heard stories about Mormons who don’t know how sex works at all and not understanding how they weren’t having children even after they were hokding hands and stuff.

        Basically, this could be fake but I’ve heard much worse from more reliable sources.

        • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          19 days ago

          Urethral penetration is a fetish and requires stretching. You can’t just push a penis inside of one. Not even by accident.

        • sheepishly@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          19 days ago

          I was literally going to mention the urethra story. I am now very concerned that you mentioned “stories”, plural.

      • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        19 days ago

        it used to be a priests job to tell a couple getting married about this.

        we take education for granted, especially when there’s misinformation around

        • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          19 days ago

          Because getting sex ed from a man who isn’t supposed to know anything at all about a woman’s sexual preferences and responses is totally the way to ensure a long and happy and productive marriage.

          • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            19 days ago

            Not the first time I’ve heard someone talk like sex ed is supposed to include a section on technique. Like your high school gym teacher is going to start talking about “first start with gentle caresses around the area to get her in the mood.” No, school sex ed is meant to be about the realities of human reproduction, how pregnancy works, how STDs work and how to control these things.

            Seems it’s supposed to be anyone’s job except a woman’s to teach a man what she likes.

            • emeralddawn45@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              18 days ago

              I mean in canada we definitely touched on foreplay and erogenous zones. Not like specific in depth instructions, but talk about how a woman should be ‘warmed up’ and the physical reaction when she starts getting wet and horny. That seems like a pretty basic thing to start with, whether youre learning about or having sex. From what ive heard about the states though im not surprised it isnt.

              • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                18 days ago

                Yeah the United States is such a prudish country you’d never get away with gym teachers explaining how to have good sex on the clock. We can barely manage banana condoming.

        • betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          19 days ago

          Only because it was also a priest’s job to tell single people that thinking about sex before marriage was going to condemn them to an eternity in hell.

    • samus12345@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      42
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      19 days ago

      They neglected to tell them that the “horrible diseases” are only a danger if you sleep around with different people.

      • Maalus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        18 days ago

        You or your partner. Sadly it’s way too common to catch it even when having one partner and being faithful.

      • Eiri@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        18 days ago

        Absolutely not. You and your partner could be completely faithful and still catch something. Your partner could have gotten something from their ex and not noticed before passing it on to you. Not all STDs are obvious.

    • wise_pancake@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      19 days ago

      I don’t think any advice was warranted.

      Also I would love to know at what point the doctor figured out the issue.