| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| 95 percent of Americans had premarital sex; Reality check | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Dec 19 2006, 09:36 PM (318 Views) | |
| kenny | Dec 19 2006, 09:36 PM Post #1 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
NEW YORK (AP) -- More than nine out of 10 Americans, men and women alike, have had premarital sex, according to a new study. The high rates extend even to women born in the 1940s, challenging perceptions that people were more chaste in the past. "This is reality-check research," said the study's author, Lawrence Finer. "Premarital sex is normal behavior for the vast majority of Americans, and has been for decades." Finer is a research director at the Guttmacher Institute, a private New York-based think tank that studies sexual and reproductive issues and which disagrees with government-funded programs that rely primarily on abstinence-only teachings. The study, released Tuesday, appears in the new issue of Public Health Reports. The study, examining how sexual behavior before marriage has changed over time, was based on interviews conducted with more than 38,000 people -- about 33,000 of them women -- in 1982, 1988, 1995 and 2002 for the federal National Survey of Family Growth. According to Finer's analysis, 99 percent of the respondents had had sex by age 44, and 95 percent had done so before marriage. Even among a subgroup of those who abstained from sex until at least age 20, four-fifths had had premarital sex by age 44, the study found. Finer said the likelihood of Americans having sex before marriage has remained stable since the 1950s, though people now wait longer to get married and thus are sexually active as singles for extensive periods. The study found women virtually as likely as men to engage in premarital sex, even those born decades ago. Among women born between 1950 and 1978, at least 91 percent had had premarital sex by age 30, he said, while among those born in the 1940s, 88 percent had done so by age 44. "The data clearly show that the majority of older teens and adults have already had sex before marriage, which calls into question the federal government's funding of abstinence-only-until-marriage programs for 12- to 29-year-olds," Finer said. Under the Bush administration, such programs have received hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding. "It would be more effective," Finer said, "to provide young people with the skills and information they need to be safe once they become sexually active -- which nearly everyone eventually will." Wade Horn, assistant secretary for children and families at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, defended the abstinence-only approach for teenagers. "One of its values is to help young people delay the onset of sexual activity," he said. "The longer one delays, the fewer lifetime sex partners they have, and the less the risk of contracting sexually transmitted disease." He insisted there was no federal mission against premarital sex among adults. "Absolutely not," Horn said. "The Bush administration does not believe the government should be regulating or stigmatizing the behavior of adults." Horn said he found the high percentages of premarital sex cited in the study to be plausible, and expressed hope that society would not look askance at the small minority that chooses to remain abstinent before marriage. However, Janice Crouse of Concerned Women for America, a conservative group which strongly supports abstinence-only education, said she was skeptical of the findings. "Any time I see numbers that high, I'm a little suspicious," she said. "The numbers are too pat." http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/12/19/prema...x.ap/index.html |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Dec 19 2006, 09:40 PM Post #2 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
89 you are not normal. Neener Neener. ![]() Don't worry, it ain't so bad not being normal. Normal is overrated anyway. ![]() Besides, who cares what those other 88 keys do? |
![]() |
|
| jodi | Dec 19 2006, 10:02 PM Post #3 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
|
Jodimy artlog ~ todayatmydesk.weebly.com | |
![]() |
|
| pianojerome | Dec 19 2006, 11:12 PM Post #4 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
I think that's a key point. But, on the other hand, why are there so many more white keys than black keys? And, furthermore, why are the black keys all smaller and crammed further to the back? I think that's racist. We should at least have the dignity to call them 'Caucasion' keys and 'African-Piano' keys. |
| Sam | |
![]() |
|
| Improviso | Dec 20 2006, 04:37 AM Post #5 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Careful what you wish for. Before you know it, the ACLU will file a lawsuit demanding that the black keys be moved to the front of the keyboard. Tell me that won't screw up your playing bigtime.
|
|
Identifying narcissists isn't difficult. Just look for the person who is constantly fishing for compliments and admiration while breaking down over even the slightest bit of criticism. We have the freedom to choose our actions, but we do not get to choose our consequences. | |
![]() |
|
| Dewey | Dec 20 2006, 04:44 AM Post #6 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
An old friend of mine used to push the theory that we'd never get over racism, and that we'd never make any meaningful racial progress, until we were all thoroughly mixed race through intermarriage, what he called the ultimate "mongrelization" of America. In order to take one more step in this process, I suggest that there shouldn't be any more white or black keys or different lengths and heights. They should all be exactly the same length, height, and shade of medium grey, too. |
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Dec 20 2006, 05:18 AM Post #7 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
We may get over racism, but not groupism. Some group will take the sh!t. Making them bad makes you good. |
![]() |
|
| Riley | Dec 20 2006, 05:51 AM Post #8 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Meet Mr. 1%.
|
![]() |
|
| The 89th Key | Dec 20 2006, 07:40 AM Post #9 |
|
I am normal and abnormal in many ways, as is everyone on the board. ![]() I've seen figures go from 82% to 96% in the past, so this finding doesn't surprise me. There are a couple reasons why I'm still holding strong: A) I told myself when I was younger I would hold out, why change my mind? B) Religious grounds C) Less probability of unplanned pregnancy, STDs, etc D) Never been in love Regardless of all those reasons...I think it's more of a state of mind. If I was in love with someone and convinced I was going to marry them (or even engaged), I could see myself rounding third base and heading for home plate. There are bigger problems in the world, but I have no shame in the fact that I'm still waiting. Most people don't believe me in the rare times it's brought up. I guess it's because I'm so incredibly, ridiculously, really, really good looking. (Zoolander) |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Dec 20 2006, 08:12 AM Post #10 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
89 I respect you.![]() I'm just pointing out how crappy the word "normal" can be. . . . and you're not THAT good looking.
|
![]() |
|
| The 89th Key | Dec 20 2006, 08:18 AM Post #11 |
|
No worries, Kenny. I dont mind the word normal. We are all normal in many ways, and we all have our unique qualities as well. I enjoy fitting in sometimes and I take pride in things I do that stand out. Of course, I can understand why you especially think the word "normal" can be pretty carppy at times. But look on the bright side...at the current rate this fad (;)) is going, being gay will be the majority by the year 2040.
|
![]() |
|
| sue | Dec 20 2006, 08:21 AM Post #12 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
:lol: Put you in a jeep, with a kilt.....you just wouldn't be safe!
|
![]() |
|
| ***musical princess*** | Dec 20 2006, 08:24 AM Post #13 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Not from me, anyway. x |
| x Caroline x | |
![]() |
|
| DivaDeb | Dec 20 2006, 08:42 AM Post #14 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
I think there is a difference between "normal" and "usual" |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Dec 20 2006, 08:59 AM Post #15 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Exactly. I like to use usual. Normal carries judgement. Usual is just numbers. |
![]() |
|
| pianojerome | Dec 20 2006, 09:01 AM Post #16 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
and before long, 'usual' will carry the same connotations. |
| Sam | |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Dec 20 2006, 09:02 AM Post #17 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Good point. We humans just LOVE to be better than others. Equality is against human nature. |
![]() |
|
| pianojerome | Dec 20 2006, 09:13 AM Post #18 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Kenny, I think the problem is that not all men are created equal. It's not a matter of wanting or not wanting inequality -- We're quite simply different, and nothing is going to change that. So the moment our differences come into conflict, we have to make a decision, and because people are different, we are going to make different decisions. |
| Sam | |
![]() |
|
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |








Jodi


4:54 PM Jul 10