May 20, 2009

Sex Education - To Tell or Not to Tell

A letter to the ST Forum:

ST May 20, 2009
Useful programme except for condom excerpt

I RECENTLY came to know that upper secondary and junior college students go through an educational programme on Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs) and acquired immune deficiency syndrome (Aids), called Breaking Down Barriers, by the Health Promotion Board (HPB).

Besides providing accurate facts about STIs, the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and Aids, the programme also imparts useful skills to students, such as decision-making and the right places to obtain reliable information, as well as assertiveness and strategies on how not to succumb to persuasion.

I was truly heartened to learn that the students were taught that the best way to avoid STIs and Aids is to avoid casual sex, sex with multiple partners and unprotected sex, and to stay faithful to a partner within the context of marriage.

However, the students were subsequently taught how to use a condom.

While I understand HPB's good intention to curb the rising incidence of STIs among the young, I wish to express my concerns as a parent that students are being taught how to use condoms in school.

- It gives a mixed and confusing message. Is it not better to encourage students to avoid pre-marital sex altogether, since the programme also teaches that the use of condom is not 100 per cent safe?

- Students are not likely to heed or remember to practise safe sex just because they have attended a lesson on condom use.

- Even if they do use a condom, they are not likely - in the heat of the moment - to remember or follow the steps to use a condom correctly.

I truly appreciate the HPB's efforts for creating such a programme and hope that it will review and consider whether it is really necessary or useful to teach students how to use a condom.

This confuses, contradicts and compromises the good advice to avoid pre-marital sex as the only foolproof protection against STIs and Aids.

Steven Tan
Sigh .....

Steven assumes that if you tell students not to have sex, then they will all just obediently decide not to have sex. Of course this is nonsense. Yes, some students will abstain. But some other students are going to have sex, even if you give them all the advice in the world about the merits of abstinence.

So the question is - for all thise students who are going to be sexually active, should we or should we not provide them with the necessary information to save them from diseases like AIDS etc? To me, the answer is clear.

However, Steven would probably say, "If you don't tell them about condoms, then it is more likely that they will abstain. If you do tell them about condoms, then it is more likely that they WILL get curious and decide to have sex."

This kind of argument is highly unpersuasive to me. Its basic assumptions are that:

(1) young people who have sex, have sex because they have been unnecessarily exposed to the idea of having sex (eg through TV or the Internet or educational talks on condom usage); and

(2) we should therefore avoid, as far as possible, talking to young people about sex.

In my opinion, this is pretty much nonsense. Young people do not have sex just because they watch TV or attend a talk on condom usage. The real reason why young people have sex is that they have sexual desires. (Oh, by the way, the same applies to the rest of the animal kingdom).

Whether TV or the Internet or sex education programmes exist or not, young people are going to have sexual desires and therefore young people will have sex. And that's the plain and simple story of the human race. So once again, the question is - in the era of AIDS, should we educate young people about condoms or not? To me, the answer is a no-brainer.

As a side note, you can easily see why Aware's sex education programme attracted flak from certain quarters. Stephen isn't alone in his thinking - strangely enough, there are many other people who also believe that if you just don't talk to students about condoms, then they won't have sex. And the natural extension of their "logic" is that if you don't talk to people about homosexuality, then they just won't be gay.

In my opinion, that kind of reasoning is so very mistaken. I just wonder what will happen next. Hang on - Steven's letter refers to a sex education programmme organised for junior college students. Doesn't Stephen know that straight after JC, all the boys go off to the army? Then they get sent to Thailand or Taiwan for training. And on their R&R weekends, the Singapore Armed Forces will be handing out free condoms to them (right after the SAF doctor does the usual demonstration with the yellow banana).

I am glad that the SAF does that. But is Steven going to file a complaint here as well?


Anonymous said...

STIs? Shouldn't it be STDs? Is he thinking of the stock market or a Subaru WRX?

Anonymous said...

I do think that the increased exposure (from TV and peers, and perhaps even such talks) does increase the likelihood of a young person having sex. It's true that the root cause is probably still sexual desire, but surely there's a reason why premarital sex seems to be getting more and more common?

That said, I think I'd rather have more youngsters having safe sex, as opposed to a (arguably) smaller number of them spreading diseases to each other and creating unwanted children, assuming the difference in numbers is not too huge.

It seems to me that premarital sex is quite common even without such sex education programmes, so the focus of such programmes should probably be on damage control rather than moral education.

Gilbert Koh aka Mr Wang said...

Africa, with the world's highest HIV population by far, is a place where most people have:

- no sex education
- no condoms
- limited access to media (simply because they don't have computers; and the entire village has only one TV).

Does that tell you anything?

Indiana said...

I wish I could find the link, but a study by the University of Chicago into religious absitinence programs, particular the one's where students promised to remain virgins was shown that after 5 years, those involved had a higher incidence of both sexual contact and STD's than the national averages. The reason given for the later was lack of STD Prevention education given to those students because those "in-charge" simply believed the promise of abstinence would be enough.

Student's need the facts. Parent's might wish that their kids were getting the "facts" from themselves but that is not happening, so instead students turn to their friends and the internet and only end up confused and then in trouble.

Young people have sex, want to have sex and feel drawn to sexual experimentation, pretending it is otherwise is naive and only hurts the society and the children. I think, they should be given all the facts, straight, gay, STD's, prevention...and this includes absitenece so that they can make decisions for themselves with the right information. Since they are going to make the decisions anyway lets at least give them the knowledge to make their decisions in the wisest ways possible.

Tai Yew Mun said...

his argument against teaching safe sex:
- Students are not likely to heed or remember to practise safe sex just because they have attended a lesson on condom use.

- Even if they do use a condom, they are not likely - in the heat of the moment - to remember or follow the steps to use a condom correctly.

So teaching safe sex, the student may not remember/follow, but teaching abstinence will confirm remember and follow?

Anonymous said...

The whole morality issue arises because of the TY programmes and easy Internet access that our young people are able to get into. What they see, they will think it's the 'in-thing,' 'it's cool,' 'it's modern,'and if everyone is doing it, then it can't be that wrong morally.
Hence, there's a need for parental guidance and an educational programme to teach these impressionable young ones what's right and responsible thing to do. They have natural desires which we must help them control, like we have natural desire to spit when we have to. But if you teach a proramme with "damaged-control" in mind, means you have surrendered the idea of convincing these young kids to help themselves.
Teaching the use of condom should not be part of this programme as of now, unless it is brought up during Q&A. That would be a lesson that should be taught at another curriculum. Teaching army boys is the right time for this lesson as they have come of age. They can carry a rifle to fight for our country, they should know how to prevent unwanted pregnancies.
As for Africa, people are largely uneducated, hence, they still go by animal instinct in what they do. You see, you comapring two extremes here. One with no modern amenities and the other with evrything there is in this modern world. Both are at a disadvantage, without proper guidance....eddie

Gilbert Koh aka Mr Wang said...

Really. What is your view then about university students - should they have sex education or not.

Note that university students are older or equal in age to the NSFs. Eg male Singaporeans typically complete their full-time NS before commencing their university studies.

Gilbert Koh aka Mr Wang said...

"But if you teach a proramme with "damaged-control" in mind ...." If on the other hand, you do not seek to control damage, then damage is exactly what you will get. Young people will get unwanted pregnancies, STDs, AIDS etc.

James said...

Saying that africans go by animal instinct is not very correct.. Sorry but it shows the ignorance of you on the african people. The reason why many africans (not all) have aids and is discouraged from usage of condoms is the legacy by the catholic and anglican church's preaching of abstinence and "natural sex"

Anonymous said...

"As for Africa, people are largely uneducated, hence, they still go by animal instinct in what they do."

That is by far the rudest and most offensive comment in this thread so far - saying that fellow human beings are more animal than you are. What makes you think you are any better than them? On what grounds? Why do you have to assume that rather than seeing the plain difference that we have condoms and they don't, because they are poor? You smell of plain arrogance and ignorance.


Anonymous said...

Well.. let us just sweep it under the carpet and pretend that they do not have sex at all. See no evil, Talk no evil, Hear no evil..

Anonymous said...

You think it's easy? - sex education, sand, jobs, housing, fresh water, schools, the aged, defence, transport, free speech, inflation, recession, . . . . endless. pai than!

Anonymous said...

"Ignorance is strength"...

Anonymous said...

masturbation is probably the next best thing to avoiding premarital sex. Just make sure that you wash your hands :)

Ser Ming said...

When you buy a box of condom, it comes with an instruction manual.

And if you pay enough attention, it seems like a certain 2-hour-for-rental hotel franchise is all over the island and it never fails to have a Cheers or 7-11 (which sells condoms!) next to it.

I thought it's during my time that parents are more shy to talk about sex education. It really surprises me that at this time it still is?

P/S: We were told to put oil into the condom and tie it to our rifle muzzle to prevent rust during our overseas exercise! No docs showing the banana demo though, I think it will be hilarious if it had!

Anonymous said...


Glass Castle said...

I want to know who all these people are who find condoms so sexually titillating that they wouldn't have had sex but for knowing about condoms. Personally, I can't imagine condoms being at all enticing, and I rather imagine I am in a majority here.

I'd like to echo Lys - it is incredibly racist to say that people in Africa are "animals". Just because you're totally ignorant about societies in Africa doesn't mean nothing of value or meaning is going on there. I'd also like to point you to the detailed case study Human Rights Watch did in Uganda, which showed how programmes preventing HIV transmission were doing quite well until people who insisted on abstinence-only education, and tried to prevent the dissemination of information about condoms, got involved:


angry doc said...

I wonder if people question their own rationale for not wanting their children to have sex.

Is it the worry that they may catch STI (yes, STD is 'out of vogue' these days)? Of unwanted pregnancy? If so then condoms at least provide a good measure of protection compared to unprotected sex.

Or do they just not want their children to have sex no matter what, never mind the consequences?

Anonymous said...

my sex education comes from being a self-trained CSI..
1. remember where my bros kept his tape.
2. remember where exact the tape stopped, so that i can rewind to exactly the same scene.
3. remember everyone's habits i.e what time coming home.
4. explore all possible hiding place.

not only i self-taught, i am train to have an eye for detail.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous May 20, 2009 2:32 PM said...

"You think it's easy? - sex education, sand, jobs, housing, fresh water, schools, the aged, defence, transport, free speech, inflation, recession, . . . . endless. pai than!"

One more - the Mas Selamats.

Anonymous said...

Parents who are blindly led by the fundies in protesting against the CSI should seriously sit down and discuss on how as parents you are able to bring balanced message to your children!
It is really difficult even to bring out the word condom as many parents themselves have hangup about sex! Many are ashamed to reveal that they themselves must have sex to bear the children! **blush blush** to let my children know that daddy and mummy have fucked and are still fucking now!

Anonymous said...

Just some thoughts about the supposed increase in teenage pre-marital sex.

When my grandparents were young, the typical marriage age was early to mid-teens (for the Chinese in Singapore). A healthy couple would be expected to deliver the next generation within the 1st year of marriage. This healthy couple were teenagers. Therefore, one can surmise that the sex drive was and is present in teens, even during our grandparents era. It is just that they were married earlier, and thus their sex was not considered "pre-marital".

When my parents were young, the typical age for marriage was late-teens to early-20's. There were neighbourly gossips of teenage girls married-off quickly to legitimise the fruits of pre-marital sex.

When I was a teenager (1980's), there were girls who would exchange about their sexual experiences while in the school toilets and thereby giving rise to school-wide gossips. Given that the social climate then was mainly of "ostrich-head-in-sand" mode, few authority figures would track the incidences of teenage sex and even fewer of these girls would admit openly to having premarital sex to these authority figures.

1. From anecdote experience, teenage sex is a reality since my grandparents time. No amount of ignorance or censorship will prevent it from happening.
2. How much does the delay in average marriage age contribute to the increase in teenage premarital sex?
3. How much of the increase can be attributed to under-reporting in earlier generations?

Anonymous said...

i second Mr Wang's opinion in the article, exposure creates awareness but not necessarily means promotion. better teaching them safe sex than none at all. to that anon which incurred the wrath of a few using the african example, do you know that singapore's legal age for sexual intercourse is 16? does this mean that everyone upon the age of 16 has sex? does creating awareness of safe sex means it promotes sex? no. it doesnt surrender the idea that the children help themselves. (and seriously, when i look at 16 year olds on the street, i hardly think that they call themselves children anymore). it recognises that at this age, they are able to make their own sexual decisions, when to start having sex, whether or not to practice abstinance, whether or not to have pre-marital sex.

"Hence, there's a need for parental guidance and an educational programme to teach these impressionable young ones what's right and responsible thing to do." seriously. how many parents talk to their children about sex. and you have a pre-conceived notion that children at upper sec and junior college are so "impressionable". OH PLEASE. yes, i dont deny that there are a minority that are really innocent and dont really know what goes on in the bedroom (really, i've met them before), but at this age, a majority of these students would have already known what goes on in the bedroom. indeed, the responsible thing to do, next to abstinance is to USE A CONDOM.

Chee Wai Lee said...

Great article, Mr. Wang.

My own sexual awakening was one of self-discovery and unnecessary guilt. Starting with unfamiliar but good feelings with the anatomy, followed by visual stimulus from half-naked women in lingerie advertisements, I came close to a sense of panic at first. My parents, while liberal, were unable to help me fully understand. They caught on to the cues rather late and because they found themselves unable to tell me "it's ok and natural and here's why ..." when they caught me with my newspaper cutting collection of "pornography", it just left me hanging with a feeling of shame for many years. I had to go through many cycles of trial and error with my feelings ... conflict between desire and guilt whenever I satisfied those desires (in private). Hell, I only discovered the word "masturbation" in the classroom at secondary school because of a prank a classmate played on my English teacher and finally found a word to describe what I had been doing for years. Heh, I don't even remember when I first discovered the concept of a condom. Fortunately (unfortunately?), I am not very comely and having been raised in an all-boys environment until JC, never had to go through the actual necessity of using a condom until much later in my adult life.

All-in-all, inspite of all the bungling in the dark regarding sexuality, I think I turned out reasonably ok (so far, fingers-crossed). Could have been spared a lot of grief in my early years had I been taught all that I know now (mostly having been "self-taught"). Imho, Singapore (and myself included) really has a long way to before we learn to be more confident about our sexuality and talking about it openly and casually.

SG parenthood is hopeless said...

once again, another "concerned" parent pushed his kids to the limelight. To all these parents, the best way is to tell them to lock their kids in an ivory tower (oh maybe they already had) painted a utopia pictures to the kids and hopefully release them when the kids are over 21.

faced it, it is the new world, with internet media and TV, the kids are going to learn more and faster than the previous generations. the old methods of dont ask dont tell, and sweeping everything under the carpet are no longer valid.

the kids ARE going to have sex, most definitely even having pre-martial sex, and some even have muiltple partners, regardless of the teaching of condom.

perplexed said...

"it recognises that at this age, they are able to make their own sexual decisions, when to start having sex, whether or not to practice abstinance, whether or not to have pre-marital sex. "

i totally agree with you. now, what do we want sex education in schools to achieve?

is it that teenage sex is wrong? or that teenage sex is not advisable but if you want to do it, then better be prepared for the consequences? i think it's the latter.

i think education in higher secondary and junior colleges should preach what is morally 'best' (as defined by our societal norms) and not what is morally 'wrong'. at their age we should gradually give them the liberty to make independent decisions. the process of struggling with choices, understanding the pros and cons of their chosen actions and their eventual consequences, prepares them for the future. same goes for sex. yes, some will still fall into the trap, but that's an individual folly and he has to serve the consequences now. is it too harsh a consequence for him to bear that we have to protect him from it? well, i think it's a harsh consequence to bear, but i think for the mainstream (let's forget about the 1% who might still be extremely innocent at that time, because education, as much as you want it to be is never a one-size fit all program), it's about time that they take on the responsibility of choosing their own way of living.

with the advent of new media it will prove increasingly difficult for us to withhold information from children. even if we take away demonstration of condom usage from the programme, i doubt that it will be long before they find out what a condom actually is. you even hear about karma sutra from seconday school students! given that we're talking about JC students, i think we're looking at a very trivial part of the whole issue here, because come on, throw them a condom and i'm sure they can tell you what's that 'thing' for?

hence, isn't it unnecessary to withold such information from them?

instead, we should show them the whole picture behind teenage sex. Yes, you get sexual pleasure, but are you going to do about the baby if the girl gets pregnant? what happens to the aborted foetus if you go for abortion? how are you going to support the family? what are the different ways to prevent pregnancy? that none of these methods are 100% fool proof. we suggest to them the possible harms, but continue to give them the leeway to make decisions.

Anonymous said...

slightly off topic. but i think early marriage should be encouraged.

early marriage = early child birth = women can return to workforce earlier.

instead of the current social trend of

late marriages = late child birth = women leaving the workforce at their peak of career.

Anonymous said...

And the natural extension of their "logic" is that if you don't talk to people about homosexuality, then they just won't be gay.

The AWARE saga was about rejecting AWARE's protrayal of homosexuality and anal sex as being normal. It was a rejection of their value system, not about "talking to people about homosexuality will make them gay."

It is different from Stephen's argument, which even I, as a "fundamentalist" christian, find lacks logic.

By all means teach abstainence, but be realistic enough to know that the vast majority will not, AND be practical enough to teach them to protect themselves. That is only being responsible.

Anonymous said...

Are we now smart like the Chinese netizens & not fall prey to others' designs and only ruin ourselves? Read . . .

Taiwan Is An Internal Chinese Issue, Butt Off!
written by Chinese Diaspora , May 21, 2009

During the 1989 Tiananmen uprising, the Western media (VoA, RFA etc) in concert with the CIA, went into a seemingly drug-induced frenzy passionately/provocatively fanning the naive but idealistic Chinese University students into attempting to overthrow the CCP, sensing that their time had finally arrived for their envisioned ‘end of history’ in favour of the Western, Anglo-Saxon-Protestant Civilisation. I was similarly outraged & joined the chorus in wanting the demise of CCP. Fastforward to 2009, I, among so many of our then idealistic peers, now realised that we could not have been more wrong & how way off the mark we truly had misjudged that historic moment. Many had since been so vehemently converted that we have become fierce critics of the West.

By the time the West conspired to dish out the same rotten but time-honoured dirty tectic in trying to humiliate/smear/subvert China in the face of the world during the Olympics Torch Run & subsequently the carefully orchestrated /instigated Tibetan riotings, they had simply carried their lucks a bridge too far. They must have been totally taken by surprise by, the emergence from seemingly nowhere, of even their local-born Chinese, who were not by any trace tainted by any shred of CCP propaganda or the so-called patriotic education agenda, roaring utter contempt & opposition in support of the Chinese govt. The wiseman says, people simply cannot be fooled twice in a roll, stupid! People have eyes & ears, so to speak, & we can see that the CCP is not that evil afterall~in fact, they have done a truly great job as far as China is concerned for the last 2 decades.

Now, it seems like the Chinese people have finally wrested back the initiatives on cross-straits relation not allowing the US & other opportunistic predators room to exploit any lingering differences between the Mainland & Taiwan. No wonder their attentions have now turned to exploiting the discords over Tibet, Xinjiang, the South Seas (Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia etc), East sea, Central Asia & South Asia. Mind your steps for we are carefully watching!

Anonymous said...

Mr Wang

At upper sec, sex is ILLEGAL. The message should reflect that. NO SEX.
AT JC ... there are no JC boys who does not know about condoms!
For sake of argument, say there exist a innocent JC boy clueless about sex and condom. The chances of him scoring in JC would be ... I say close to zero. No need for sex education then.

Btw, must u link sex education to homosexuality?
Seriously, all mainstream religions are against homosexual ACTS.
Really. Gays may be born that way.
But if they wish to be good, e.g., MUSLIMS, well they just have to abstain.
The point of contention is not about turning non-gays into gays.
The point is that ,for example, good MUSLIMS do not perform homosexual ACTS.
So do not teach MUSLIMS that homosexual ACTS is natural.
Actually, encouraging the Buddhists\Taoists to have homosexual activities does sound interesting ... not a bad idea to have less of them non-believers ...

Anonymous said...

I haven't replied to the criticism on my comments about "Africans" cos' I need to ponder over what I have said. I wish to apologise if I had sounded arrogant. But I won't apologise for being ignorant. I do not know everything, that's the reason I enjoyed reading Mr Wang's blog as the comments/articles can be educational, informative and intellectual, except that time when he was so one-sided about his comments on the AWARE saga.
I believe that we all have basic animal instincts. If you don't think so, then I must be the only one who feel it. We, I mean, I controll my basic animal instincts so as not infringed my self-centredness on society and incured its wrath.
The teaching of the methods of pregnancy prevention should be taught at another lesson. It should be taught after the objective of the first lesson has been accomplished..eddie

Anonymous said...

Don't understand why some people get offended with the animal comment.

When we say homosexuality is nature 'cos animals do it, the implication is we are animals.

When eddie mentioned animal instinct, the whole world throw egg at him?

What the fuck? Double standards?

Gilbert Koh aka Mr Wang said...

Yes, double standards - one for Africans, and one for Singaporeans.

That's what has upset some people here.

Gilbert Koh aka Mr Wang said...

"Btw, must u link sex education to homosexuality?" Btw, must you link sex education to religion?

Will.I.AM said...

@ Anon 9:53PM

"The point is that, good muslims do not perform homosexual acts."

You are commiting logical fallacy of begging the question. (Not surprising, since so many Christians have resorted to circular reasoning to the prove that their religion is the "one true religion".) So muslims who happen to be born gay are all bad and condemned muslim at birth?

Anyway, let's change Muslims to Christians since they are derived from the same Jewish-Abrahamic religious concept of God (except that in one you have a talking donkey and in the other you have a flying horse)

Also, your ignorance is bared for all the see with your last statement of "encouraging" taoist/buddhist to have homosexual activities. I know a lot about gays, and I know that gays perform anal sex, but that doesn't mean I will suddenly "decide" that I will be a gay. So how does educating people that gays/lesbians exists make them gays/lesbians.

Heck, since you know so much about homosexual activities, by your logic you will become a gay. Why aren't you one?

Dumb sh*t.

Anonymous said...

Humans are creatures strange

Feeding on historical chains

Applying rules and laws

Elders made many years yore

Maybe we forgot

Abstinence was for

When marriage was 12, or 14 years old in all

That polygamy was rampant

And external services readily accepted and rendered

Even when marriage age was 24

Now we marry at 30

We must not think dirty

Another pure years of 15

Mother hand and daughters 5 will preen

Sexual health is inconsequentials

Because heaven is the differential

All hail values

and morals (in)valid

For we are humans

And only elders know the needs

Anonymous said...

I would just like to ask parents out there these Qs:

How did you come to know of sex?
What was/were the reason(s) that led to your first sexual experience? Did you practise safe sex?

I find it hard to believe that parents think their children, esp late teens and up, do not have ability to think. There are many reasons, sexual desire being one of them, that led to teenagers having sex. It can't be due to only ONE reason alone; the existence of condoms!

Maybe parents forgot how they were when they were young.
Maybe they were that "stupid" (pardon me, can't find another PC word at the moment) and fear that history repeats itself.
Or they are just adopting a bury-your-ostrich-head attitude and avoid any awkwardness?

IMHO, the 2nd group are the ones with hangups. All the more, they should realise the importance of passing the correct info and values to their young.

The third group is the reason why you have pregnant teenage girls who didn't even know they how they came to be. Because of these parent's SELFISHNESS, they put the young at risk. UNFORGIVABLE.

Anonymous said...

mr wang, i would like to tell you that even we dont tell teenagers about sex or anything that concern to sex. they wont have sex, but you must understand that when boy reach the age of puberty, they will get fantasies, and even wondering why is their penis is erect after have wet dream or even just erect like that when they wake up early in the morning.

when they have this kind of problems, they will start to wonder why, how, where, when and more. they will start to look at girls, but some of the boys will control their desire, but some will not control their desire, without anyone telling them about sex, prevent std, unwanted pregnancies and more, they will be lost and might be having sex with girls with desperate and desire. even you dont tell them about sex, they will have frens who will accidentally surf the net about porn. by not telling them what is sex education, they might just rape girls, friends, relatives, or even their sisters. the rape cases in getting higher in the past few years, there is even a gang bangs of 5 boys raping a 60 year old aunty. why?
because of they are curious about sex, they have the desire to have sex..

honestly, i watched porn when i was 8 years old, i accidentally found a porn cd in my brother's room, i watched and i get the feeling of what is the girl feeling in the porn. my parents didnt tell my brothers about sex, but how they know about sex!?

when i was 13 years old, i was molested by my cousin brother who is just older than me 2 years old, he wanted me to hold his penis, he kiss me, and touch my breast, i didnt shout out, why?! due to the curiosity of what is sex.! i started to masturbate when i was 9 years old, but how i know things like that by no one telling me about it. because of curiosity of sex.
i lost my virginity when i was 15, due to curiosity too, but luckily, i wasn't pregnant, i was so afraid of getting pregnant, but i have no idea of what is condom. nobody tell me about it. i thought that i will get pregnant by just having sex.but i didnt know there is method of not getting pregnant is by ejeculate the sperm outside. due to lack of sex education

i have friends that she is a girl but she hate boys and she would prefer girls more than boys, she have no idea why, until she enter the age of 13, she enter a convent's school , she notice that she is different than others girls who like to make up, dress up and more, she hate to make up or dress up like a girl, she would prefer to wear jeans and t-shirt and have short hair. nobody told her about lesbian, at the age of 14, she had girlfriend by having sex with the girl, how she know that she is a lesbian without anyone telling her about this topic. she found out herself, since young, she hate boys, but she prefer girls, why is science, they said why there is lesbian and gay or homosexual, is because when they were not born, they got influence or pressure from the outer straight to their brain. this is according to what the scienctist said.

Anonymous said...


even if you watched i not stupid 2, there is this one scene that the little brother asked his family, teacher, where do babies come from?
because he misunderstood of girls will get pregnant by kissing and holding hands and sleeping together(without sex), he misunderstood that by eating pineapple, you will get accidental abortion.

he asked his brother, why is the uncle keep banging the aunty. because it was a porn movie that his elder brother and his friends are watching. in this one scence he brought the little girl to the clinic due to her stomachache because of too much of pineapple, but he tot that the baby is coming out. and the doctor thought that he bullied the girl. by the age of 10 years old.

even until now the year of 2009, my friends are still so shy when they asked me about sex, how, when, where, and more on the age of 21-24. and even i talked about labouring a baby in the labour room and having stiches on the vagina part, they will just asked me to keep my voice down, because of too embarresed for them while everyone can hear my talk about the particular topic. they have such limited knowledge about sex, std, and more at the age of 21-24.

there is lots of cases of STD, HIV, AIDS and more.patients doesn't know about this disease, they will end up having soreness, puss, fever, infection, bleeding on the private part and get admitted in the hospital, and only get to know what is STD. due to the lack of knowledge about sex education. you can prevent it if you know it. the incidence rate will be lower if they get educated with sex, prevention, disease, and more.

last but not least, i encourage that sex education is important to teenagers or kids, at least they understand and they will prevent from lots of problems. true, they will have sex if they know about what is sex or condom, but they might use condom to prevent it, everybody dont want to die and be responsible at the age of 13-19.
if 5 out of 10 is using it, it will actually better than 10 out of 10 doesn't know how to use it or what is the purpose of it.

this is only my personal comment,it had nothing to do with anyone or organizations or article. i am currently doing a research of sex education for teenagers, because what i had seen and experiences in my past 21 years is malaysian government doesn't apply sex education on primary school or even secondary school, and due to that, the rape cases, unwanted pregnancies, lesbian, gay, homosexual, STD, is actually increasing in my country.

thank you.