Wouldn’t you have enjoyed high school more if you could have brought a boyfriend home and had a healthy, protected round of raunchy sex with him to wear off the tension of a hard day of lectures and gym?
Planned Parenthood speaker and UMass Assistant Professor of sociology Amy Schalet thinks so. According to this article:
[Shalert says] “In the Netherlands if a girl is in a relationship, she’s not a slut for wanting sex, for making decisions about sex part of your life that you are allowed to own and make choices about. Teen pregnancy rates are about four times as high here. Birth rates about eight times as high.”
Schalet added that it was unfortunate that American teenage girls feel that “in their parents’ eyes they would be a disappointment if they were to engage in sex.” Her book about the subject, Not Under My Roof: Teens, and the Culture of Sex, argues that if parents allow their daughters to have sex at home, then the parents will retain more supervision. She writes,
Obviously sleepovers aren’t a direct route to family happiness. But even the most traditional parents can appreciate the virtue of having their children be comfortable bringing a girlfriend or boyfriend home, rather than have them sneak around. Unlike the American teenagers I interviewed, who said they felt they had to split their burgeoning sexual selves from their family roles, the Dutch teens had a chance to integrate different parts of themselves into their family life.
So much for “family planning.” Shalert admits that Dutch teens have a lot of pregnancies and give birth to a lot of babies. Maybe she knows some slick way to get teenagers to use contraceptives effectively in the USA, but it sure as hell hasn’t worked in The Netherlands. I never heard of any workable method of preventing pregnancies among teen sex machines except one –sterilization – and that will not stop the spread of STD.
As a teen, I would have loved easy, abundant, wild and crazy sex after school. But then I would have had to tolerate some horrible related stresses that make adult life difficult, stresses that often destroy academic ambitions. I would not have loved that.
Before he died my youngest brother reminded me that he used to get most of his crazy sex from teenage girls whose fathers had kicked them out of the house for their slutty ways. He surely didn’t intend for his daughter to become easy prey for a younger man like himself, so he stayed in his end of the house when her boy friends came a-calling. I suppose my brother and niece came to an understanding, particularly since no other woman lived with them to nix the idea. The daughter seems to have grown to adulthood happy, professionally competent, well-adjusted, and childless, graduating summa cum laude from her university studies. Something tells me that would not have worked in most households – most girls don’t have the astronomic intelligence of my niece, and many dads don’t have the fatherly decency of my brother.
A good reason underlies the likely conflict of teens bringing partners home for sex. Many fathers feel competitive against daughters’ boyfriends. According to Wikipedia:
The global prevalence of child sexual abuse has been estimated at 19.7% for females and 7.9% for males, according to a 2009 study published in Clinical Psychology Review that examined 65 studies from 22 countries. Using the available data, the highest prevalence rate of child sexual abuse geographically was found in Africa (34.4%), primarily because of high rates in South Africa; Europe showed the lowest prevalence rate (9.2%); America and Asia had prevalence rates between 10.1% and 23.9%. In the past, other research has concluded similarly that in North America, for example, approximately 15% to 25% of women and 5% to 15% of men were sexually abused when they were children
If upwards of 25% of women and 15% of women suffered sexual in the USA as children, the numbers indicate that 30% or more of US families have some kind of sexual abuse of children going on. I don’t imagine the abusers would take kindly to sex competition from the local school or bebop joint. I imagine that the new teen sex partnering would lead to disclosure of some of the abuse. That could cause monumental family problems.
And all this leads the honest investigator to question why, if society would approve of a family’s child having sex at home with an outside child, society would NOT approve the family child having sex at home with another family member. That seems just a little illogical. Why should society accept one form of illicit sex but not another? Pandora’s Box seems about to explode at the seams with this issue.
Okay, let’s pop that box open with this question: why should anyone at all not have the right to invite sex partners into the home, even married couples? It’s no secret the many married couples have ever less sex together, and many cheat because of the craving for new conquests and more exciting experiences. That leads to no end of quarrels, fault-finding, and behavior that motivates the spouse at home to ask “what do you hide that I should know about?” With all that mess in so many homes, shouldn’t family members get it on with whomever they find willing?
No? Okay. Then we just cannot expect any marriage partner to tolerate the spouse bringing new sex partners into the marriage, why shouldn’t family members get their sex right in the neighborhood? Why not establish a “Pleasure Palace” in every community where parents, children, and others can visit for no-strings sex and other services like shooting pool or hoops, drinking a beer, or hanging with homies, merely as a pleasure pursuit, whenever they like? Why shouldn’t family members do a tour of duty there if they wish, delivering the service for the fun of it, or perhaps for a little spending money or “allowance.”
If all in the family can unwind and release sexual tensions at the Pleasure Palace, why not have a round-robin exchange of sexual favors at home between parents, kids, siblings, cousins, and the like?
All of that seems like a logical extension of the teen sex philosophy of Amy Shalert. I’m just dying to get answers to the above questions from her. I want to know where she sets moral, ethical, or pragmatic boundaries and why. She might not have admitted it, but it seems obvious that she really wants to open that Pandora’s Box of Free Love left over from the yearnings of her Hippie days.
She was a Hippie, right?