Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here, answering the question: Is there some reason your kid can’t walk into CVS and buy his own?

Yes. He's 14. GF is 15.

OMG.

Stop clutching your pearls. I was having sex at 14/15 (after a year of dating) and I found a way to buy condoms or my BF did.

The “pearl clutching” catchphrase is so lame
You were also a slut.

DP
Wait what?!? Sex at 14/15 after a year of dating makes one a slut? Has there been a definition change that I was unaware of?

That does sound risqué of a 14 yo. I would think slut and most would even though you pretend you wouldn’t.

The word slut has meaning - it’s not just sexual behaviors you don’t approve of. It means a woman who has many sexual partners. Not someone who loses their virginity at age 15.

She said 14/15. Slut can mean the way pp used it. Presumable if one is having sex at that age, they will have many partners.

Presumably? Calling a girl who loses it at 14 a slut because you assume they will go on to have many casual partners? Delightful.
And what exactly is wrong with many casual sex partners, may I ask?

Only a slut would ask what is wrong with many casual partners.

You’re right. Married to the only man I ever had sex with. First time at 24. You got me!

I’ve got a bridge to sell you. Where can we meet?

Of course you would say that. There couldn’t POSSIBLY be someone out there with an experience that doesn’t line up with your world view.

If you think crying “liar” when someone is sharing their personal experience is an effective way to have a conversation (especially when there is zero reason for that person to lie), I’m not sure there’s much more productive conversation to be had here.

If you think that I or anyone else would take advice from someone who thinks 14 years old having sex is just fine, you need to get examined.

If you could point out exactly here I said “a 14 year old having sex is just fine”, I’d be much obliged.

Jk. You can’t. Never said it. But don’t let that stop your amazing hyperbole and ability to glean exactly what you want (and not what was said) from the information given.

You failed lessons in inferential reading, didn’t you? You only understand literal meaning and not what’s implied or doesn’t need to be stated to be understood.
When someone says their fridge is running, you think it has feet and moving quickly.

Your inference is incorrect. You are making things up to bolster your argument. If I thought sex at 14 was ok, I would have said it. Unless you can point out exactly what I said that led you to infer that. I’d be open to discussing that.

NP. I read up the thread and agree that your comments imply that you have no issue with 14 years old having sex and you condoned promiscuous behavior.

There are many comments that say they do not think kids should have early sex but if they do, they should have access to condoms. Only you think that's contradictory or condoning.

There are many comments saying it’s okay and one lady said her husband has sex at 13 and he is a productive citizen.

Does that post say that it’s ok to have sex at 13? Or just that he turned out ok despite it?

Are you stupid?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here, answering the question: Is there some reason your kid can’t walk into CVS and buy his own?

Yes. He's 14. GF is 15.

OMG.

Stop clutching your pearls. I was having sex at 14/15 (after a year of dating) and I found a way to buy condoms or my BF did.

The “pearl clutching” catchphrase is so lame
You were also a slut.

DP
Wait what?!? Sex at 14/15 after a year of dating makes one a slut? Has there been a definition change that I was unaware of?

That does sound risqué of a 14 yo. I would think slut and most would even though you pretend you wouldn’t.

The word slut has meaning - it’s not just sexual behaviors you don’t approve of. It means a woman who has many sexual partners. Not someone who loses their virginity at age 15.

She said 14/15. Slut can mean the way pp used it. Presumable if one is having sex at that age, they will have many partners.

Presumably? Calling a girl who loses it at 14 a slut because you assume they will go on to have many casual partners? Delightful.
And what exactly is wrong with many casual sex partners, may I ask?

Only a slut would ask what is wrong with many casual partners.

You’re right. Married to the only man I ever had sex with. First time at 24. You got me!

I’ve got a bridge to sell you. Where can we meet?

Of course you would say that. There couldn’t POSSIBLY be someone out there with an experience that doesn’t line up with your world view.

If you think crying “liar” when someone is sharing their personal experience is an effective way to have a conversation (especially when there is zero reason for that person to lie), I’m not sure there’s much more productive conversation to be had here.

If you think that I or anyone else would take advice from someone who thinks 14 years old having sex is just fine, you need to get examined.

If you could point out exactly here I said “a 14 year old having sex is just fine”, I’d be much obliged.

Jk. You can’t. Never said it. But don’t let that stop your amazing hyperbole and ability to glean exactly what you want (and not what was said) from the information given.

You failed lessons in inferential reading, didn’t you? You only understand literal meaning and not what’s implied or doesn’t need to be stated to be understood.
When someone says their fridge is running, you think it has feet and moving quickly.

Your inference is incorrect. You are making things up to bolster your argument. If I thought sex at 14 was ok, I would have said it. Unless you can point out exactly what I said that led you to infer that. I’d be open to discussing that.

NP. I read up the thread and agree that your comments imply that you have no issue with 14 years old having sex and you condoned promiscuous behavior.

There are many comments that say they do not think kids should have early sex but if they do, they should have access to condoms. Only you think that's contradictory or condoning.

There are many comments saying it’s okay and one lady said her husband has sex at 13 and he is a productive citizen.

Do you really think teens who lose their virginity won’t be productive citizens. Jesus you moms are so freaking weird. I remember in the late 80’s hearing about circle jerks, spin the bottle and 7 minutes in heaven. This was happening in 7/8th grade. Most kids were losing or aiming to lose their virginity by early high school. And I definitely don’t remember any parents overly involved in forcing their kids to not socialize and stay virgins.

And look at every single teen movie. Sex and more sex.

You holier than thou parents thinking you can force your teen with their own mind and lots of peer pressure to be virgins until 20 is laughable.

And where are the stats and articles that teen sex is ruining them? Cute the sources.

Because honestly, we didn’t have a ton of depression, anxiety, and other mental health issues like this current generation has. Helicoptering, tracking, forcing a ton of school/activities, college resume building, giving them 24/7 internet access, encouraging them to stay home on weekends, not foster autonomy and shaming our kids for mistakes is so much worse. Drop out college rates are sky high. Suicide rates sky high.

The snowplowing and over involvement is disgusting and demeaning.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here, answering the question: Is there some reason your kid can’t walk into CVS and buy his own?

Yes. He's 14. GF is 15.

OMG.

Stop clutching your pearls. I was having sex at 14/15 (after a year of dating) and I found a way to buy condoms or my BF did.

The “pearl clutching” catchphrase is so lame
You were also a slut.

DP
Wait what?!? Sex at 14/15 after a year of dating makes one a slut? Has there been a definition change that I was unaware of?

That does sound risqué of a 14 yo. I would think slut and most would even though you pretend you wouldn’t.

The word slut has meaning - it’s not just sexual behaviors you don’t approve of. It means a woman who has many sexual partners. Not someone who loses their virginity at age 15.

She said 14/15. Slut can mean the way pp used it. Presumable if one is having sex at that age, they will have many partners.

Presumably? Calling a girl who loses it at 14 a slut because you assume they will go on to have many casual partners? Delightful.
And what exactly is wrong with many casual sex partners, may I ask?

Only a slut would ask what is wrong with many casual partners.

You’re right. Married to the only man I ever had sex with. First time at 24. You got me!

I’ve got a bridge to sell you. Where can we meet?

Of course you would say that. There couldn’t POSSIBLY be someone out there with an experience that doesn’t line up with your world view.

If you think crying “liar” when someone is sharing their personal experience is an effective way to have a conversation (especially when there is zero reason for that person to lie), I’m not sure there’s much more productive conversation to be had here.

If you think that I or anyone else would take advice from someone who thinks 14 years old having sex is just fine, you need to get examined.

If you could point out exactly here I said “a 14 year old having sex is just fine”, I’d be much obliged.

Jk. You can’t. Never said it. But don’t let that stop your amazing hyperbole and ability to glean exactly what you want (and not what was said) from the information given.

You failed lessons in inferential reading, didn’t you? You only understand literal meaning and not what’s implied or doesn’t need to be stated to be understood.
When someone says their fridge is running, you think it has feet and moving quickly.

Your inference is incorrect. You are making things up to bolster your argument. If I thought sex at 14 was ok, I would have said it. Unless you can point out exactly what I said that led you to infer that. I’d be open to discussing that.

NP. I read up the thread and agree that your comments imply that you have no issue with 14 years old having sex and you condoned promiscuous behavior.

There are many comments that say they do not think kids should have early sex but if they do, they should have access to condoms. Only you think that's contradictory or condoning.

There are many comments saying it’s okay and one lady said her husband has sex at 13 and he is a productive citizen.

Does that post say that it’s ok to have sex at 13? Or just that he turned out ok despite it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here, answering the question: Is there some reason your kid can’t walk into CVS and buy his own?

Yes. He's 14. GF is 15.

OMG.

Stop clutching your pearls. I was having sex at 14/15 (after a year of dating) and I found a way to buy condoms or my BF did.

The “pearl clutching” catchphrase is so lame
You were also a slut.

DP
Wait what?!? Sex at 14/15 after a year of dating makes one a slut? Has there been a definition change that I was unaware of?

That does sound risqué of a 14 yo. I would think slut and most would even though you pretend you wouldn’t.

The word slut has meaning - it’s not just sexual behaviors you don’t approve of. It means a woman who has many sexual partners. Not someone who loses their virginity at age 15.

She said 14/15. Slut can mean the way pp used it. Presumable if one is having sex at that age, they will have many partners.

Presumably? Calling a girl who loses it at 14 a slut because you assume they will go on to have many casual partners? Delightful.
And what exactly is wrong with many casual sex partners, may I ask?

Only a slut would ask what is wrong with many casual partners.

You’re right. Married to the only man I ever had sex with. First time at 24. You got me!

I’ve got a bridge to sell you. Where can we meet?

Of course you would say that. There couldn’t POSSIBLY be someone out there with an experience that doesn’t line up with your world view.

If you think crying “liar” when someone is sharing their personal experience is an effective way to have a conversation (especially when there is zero reason for that person to lie), I’m not sure there’s much more productive conversation to be had here.

If you think that I or anyone else would take advice from someone who thinks 14 years old having sex is just fine, you need to get examined.

If you could point out exactly here I said “a 14 year old having sex is just fine”, I’d be much obliged.

Jk. You can’t. Never said it. But don’t let that stop your amazing hyperbole and ability to glean exactly what you want (and not what was said) from the information given.

You failed lessons in inferential reading, didn’t you? You only understand literal meaning and not what’s implied or doesn’t need to be stated to be understood.
When someone says their fridge is running, you think it has feet and moving quickly.

Your inference is incorrect. You are making things up to bolster your argument. If I thought sex at 14 was ok, I would have said it. Unless you can point out exactly what I said that led you to infer that. I’d be open to discussing that.

NP. I read up the thread and agree that your comments imply that you have no issue with 14 years old having sex and you condoned promiscuous behavior.

There are many comments that say they do not think kids should have early sex but if they do, they should have access to condoms. Only you think that's contradictory or condoning.

There are many comments saying it’s okay and one lady said her husband has sex at 13 and he is a productive citizen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok so the Narcan is a great analogy and the "I am not supplying my kids with condom" moms are clearly also the "I'd not supplying my kids with Narcan" moms.

They think by not offering anything and being stern with their own personal values that their kids won't do drugs or have sex. And they think if you put some condoms and/or narcan in your house it will be immediately be a drug-infested brothel. And that is just how their parenting is going to be and they think it's correct. So be it. Kudos to you all.

I absolutely 100% expect my kids not to do drugs. If my kids need narcan then the failure on my part happened years BEFORE that point was reached, not the point at which I didn’t supply narcan. I would never send my teen to a party with narcan to “save others” - if I thought that would be a concern, my teen would NOT BE GOING to that party.

I am fully aware that at some point my teens will have sex, but I expect them to 1) buy and use protection like the mature-enough-to-have-sex people they think they are, and 2) put enough effort into sneaking around that I don’t have to know about their sex lives.

THANK YOU! I really don't know why this thought process is so radical to some people.

I repeat: If you have to buy protection for people who want to engage in sex, maybe they're not old or mature enough to do so??? And somehow I'm the crazy person for finding it to be absurd that I as a parent should supply my minor children with condoms so they can have sex and I can deal with the consequences if even despite my giving them condoms, a pregnancy or STD happens anyway???

Do you think that not buying condoms is going to prevent them from having sex? Like a kid who wants to have sex is going to say “well I guess I won’t do it now because I couldn’t find any condoms in the house.”

Honestly… in many cases, yes. In many cases teens really want to have sex BUT they also have internalized that they absolutely shouldn’t unless they use protection. With two people involved, you have double the chances of one of them calling it off unless a condom is available.

You are in fact, absolutely incorrect!!!

Results: Most teens (69%) had recently engaged in unprotected sex and 41% were willing to in the future.

I am confident that my teens fall in that 30% bucket of “exceptional” kids who have healthy self esteem, a modicum of impulse control, and are not complete morons.

I suspect the other posters on this thread who agree with me (despite the nutjob crying troll every other post, there really are many of us!) are also raising “exceptional” kids. In fact, our kids are probably hanging out together doing age-appropriate things while your kids are screwing in your bed or off reviving their ODing friends down at the gas station.

Age appropriate things for teens is getting thru the bases.

Not in most circles. All these kids want to do in their limited leisure time nowadays is play video games, sleep, drink alcohol and abuse their adhd medication. You're from a different era.

As a high school teacher, they vape/cart more than alcohol and they absolutely get try the bases and talk about it all the time, even in front of adults. The ones that don’t are so stressed about school/grades and completely unsocial. That is other issue.

I wasn't paying close attention to when this post was original but thanks to Jeff and his daily blog I now realize the frisky teens are 18 and 19 and don't require us to worry about them anymore, more or less. Maybe the OP will return to update us on their latest escapades and how it worked out with her supplying or not supplying them with condoms.

You need to make sure you understand the laws of consent in your state. For example in Virginia, your teenage son is committing statutory rape if he has sex with a girl less than 13, if he is 17 or less and has sex with a girl more than 3 years his junior p, or if he is 18 or more and has sex with a girl that is under 18. I am in law enforcement and people do get charged under these laws when angry parents, school counselors, doctors etc get involved.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok so the Narcan is a great analogy and the "I am not supplying my kids with condom" moms are clearly also the "I'd not supplying my kids with Narcan" moms.

They think by not offering anything and being stern with their own personal values that their kids won't do drugs or have sex. And they think if you put some condoms and/or narcan in your house it will be immediately be a drug-infested brothel. And that is just how their parenting is going to be and they think it's correct. So be it. Kudos to you all.

I absolutely 100% expect my kids not to do drugs. If my kids need narcan then the failure on my part happened years BEFORE that point was reached, not the point at which I didn’t supply narcan. I would never send my teen to a party with narcan to “save others” - if I thought that would be a concern, my teen would NOT BE GOING to that party.

I am fully aware that at some point my teens will have sex, but I expect them to 1) buy and use protection like the mature-enough-to-have-sex people they think they are, and 2) put enough effort into sneaking around that I don’t have to know about their sex lives.

THANK YOU! I really don't know why this thought process is so radical to some people.

I repeat: If you have to buy protection for people who want to engage in sex, maybe they're not old or mature enough to do so??? And somehow I'm the crazy person for finding it to be absurd that I as a parent should supply my minor children with condoms so they can have sex and I can deal with the consequences if even despite my giving them condoms, a pregnancy or STD happens anyway???

Do you think that not buying condoms is going to prevent them from having sex? Like a kid who wants to have sex is going to say “well I guess I won’t do it now because I couldn’t find any condoms in the house.”

Honestly… in many cases, yes. In many cases teens really want to have sex BUT they also have internalized that they absolutely shouldn’t unless they use protection. With two people involved, you have double the chances of one of them calling it off unless a condom is available.

You are in fact, absolutely incorrect!!!

Results: Most teens (69%) had recently engaged in unprotected sex and 41% were willing to in the future.

I am confident that my teens fall in that 30% bucket of “exceptional” kids who have healthy self esteem, a modicum of impulse control, and are not complete morons.

I suspect the other posters on this thread who agree with me (despite the nutjob crying troll every other post, there really are many of us!) are also raising “exceptional” kids. In fact, our kids are probably hanging out together doing age-appropriate things while your kids are screwing in your bed or off reviving their ODing friends down at the gas station.

Age appropriate things for teens is getting thru the bases.

Wut?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok so the Narcan is a great analogy and the "I am not supplying my kids with condom" moms are clearly also the "I'd not supplying my kids with Narcan" moms.

They think by not offering anything and being stern with their own personal values that their kids won't do drugs or have sex. And they think if you put some condoms and/or narcan in your house it will be immediately be a drug-infested brothel. And that is just how their parenting is going to be and they think it's correct. So be it. Kudos to you all.

I absolutely 100% expect my kids not to do drugs. If my kids need narcan then the failure on my part happened years BEFORE that point was reached, not the point at which I didn’t supply narcan. I would never send my teen to a party with narcan to “save others” - if I thought that would be a concern, my teen would NOT BE GOING to that party.

I am fully aware that at some point my teens will have sex, but I expect them to 1) buy and use protection like the mature-enough-to-have-sex people they think they are, and 2) put enough effort into sneaking around that I don’t have to know about their sex lives.

THANK YOU! I really don't know why this thought process is so radical to some people.

I repeat: If you have to buy protection for people who want to engage in sex, maybe they're not old or mature enough to do so??? And somehow I'm the crazy person for finding it to be absurd that I as a parent should supply my minor children with condoms so they can have sex and I can deal with the consequences if even despite my giving them condoms, a pregnancy or STD happens anyway???

Do you think that not buying condoms is going to prevent them from having sex? Like a kid who wants to have sex is going to say “well I guess I won’t do it now because I couldn’t find any condoms in the house.”

Honestly… in many cases, yes. In many cases teens really want to have sex BUT they also have internalized that they absolutely shouldn’t unless they use protection. With two people involved, you have double the chances of one of them calling it off unless a condom is available.

You are in fact, absolutely incorrect!!!

Results: Most teens (69%) had recently engaged in unprotected sex and 41% were willing to in the future.

I am confident that my teens fall in that 30% bucket of “exceptional” kids who have healthy self esteem, a modicum of impulse control, and are not complete morons.

I suspect the other posters on this thread who agree with me (despite the nutjob crying troll every other post, there really are many of us!) are also raising “exceptional” kids. In fact, our kids are probably hanging out together doing age-appropriate things while your kids are screwing in your bed or off reviving their ODing friends down at the gas station.

Age appropriate things for teens is getting thru the bases.

Not in most circles. All these kids want to do in their limited leisure time nowadays is play video games, sleep, drink alcohol and abuse their adhd medication. You're from a different era.

You obviously made that up. If you were real, you would have added vaping.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here, answering the question: Is there some reason your kid can’t walk into CVS and buy his own?

Yes. He's 14. GF is 15.

OMG.

Stop clutching your pearls. I was having sex at 14/15 (after a year of dating) and I found a way to buy condoms or my BF did.

The “pearl clutching” catchphrase is so lame
You were also a slut.

DP
Wait what?!? Sex at 14/15 after a year of dating makes one a slut? Has there been a definition change that I was unaware of?

That does sound risqué of a 14 yo. I would think slut and most would even though you pretend you wouldn’t.

The word slut has meaning - it’s not just sexual behaviors you don’t approve of. It means a woman who has many sexual partners. Not someone who loses their virginity at age 15.

She said 14/15. Slut can mean the way pp used it. Presumable if one is having sex at that age, they will have many partners.

Presumably? Calling a girl who loses it at 14 a slut because you assume they will go on to have many casual partners? Delightful.
And what exactly is wrong with many casual sex partners, may I ask?

Only a slut would ask what is wrong with many casual partners.

You’re right. Married to the only man I ever had sex with. First time at 24. You got me!

I’ve got a bridge to sell you. Where can we meet?

Of course you would say that. There couldn’t POSSIBLY be someone out there with an experience that doesn’t line up with your world view.

If you think crying “liar” when someone is sharing their personal experience is an effective way to have a conversation (especially when there is zero reason for that person to lie), I’m not sure there’s much more productive conversation to be had here.

If you think that I or anyone else would take advice from someone who thinks 14 years old having sex is just fine, you need to get examined.

If you could point out exactly here I said “a 14 year old having sex is just fine”, I’d be much obliged.

Jk. You can’t. Never said it. But don’t let that stop your amazing hyperbole and ability to glean exactly what you want (and not what was said) from the information given.

You failed lessons in inferential reading, didn’t you? You only understand literal meaning and not what’s implied or doesn’t need to be stated to be understood.
When someone says their fridge is running, you think it has feet and moving quickly.

Your inference is incorrect. You are making things up to bolster your argument. If I thought sex at 14 was ok, I would have said it. Unless you can point out exactly what I said that led you to infer that. I’d be open to discussing that.

NP. I read up the thread and agree that your comments imply that you have no issue with 14 years old having sex and you condoned promiscuous behavior.

Can you be specific? What part of which comment?

🦗 🦗

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok so the Narcan is a great analogy and the "I am not supplying my kids with condom" moms are clearly also the "I'd not supplying my kids with Narcan" moms.

They think by not offering anything and being stern with their own personal values that their kids won't do drugs or have sex. And they think if you put some condoms and/or narcan in your house it will be immediately be a drug-infested brothel. And that is just how their parenting is going to be and they think it's correct. So be it. Kudos to you all.

I absolutely 100% expect my kids not to do drugs. If my kids need narcan then the failure on my part happened years BEFORE that point was reached, not the point at which I didn’t supply narcan. I would never send my teen to a party with narcan to “save others” - if I thought that would be a concern, my teen would NOT BE GOING to that party.

I am fully aware that at some point my teens will have sex, but I expect them to 1) buy and use protection like the mature-enough-to-have-sex people they think they are, and 2) put enough effort into sneaking around that I don’t have to know about their sex lives.

THANK YOU! I really don't know why this thought process is so radical to some people.

I repeat: If you have to buy protection for people who want to engage in sex, maybe they're not old or mature enough to do so??? And somehow I'm the crazy person for finding it to be absurd that I as a parent should supply my minor children with condoms so they can have sex and I can deal with the consequences if even despite my giving them condoms, a pregnancy or STD happens anyway???

Do you think that not buying condoms is going to prevent them from having sex? Like a kid who wants to have sex is going to say “well I guess I won’t do it now because I couldn’t find any condoms in the house.”

Honestly… in many cases, yes. In many cases teens really want to have sex BUT they also have internalized that they absolutely shouldn’t unless they use protection. With two people involved, you have double the chances of one of them calling it off unless a condom is available.

You are in fact, absolutely incorrect!!!

Results: Most teens (69%) had recently engaged in unprotected sex and 41% were willing to in the future.

I am confident that my teens fall in that 30% bucket of “exceptional” kids who have healthy self esteem, a modicum of impulse control, and are not complete morons.

I suspect the other posters on this thread who agree with me (despite the nutjob crying troll every other post, there really are many of us!) are also raising “exceptional” kids. In fact, our kids are probably hanging out together doing age-appropriate things while your kids are screwing in your bed or off reviving their ODing friends down at the gas station.

Age appropriate things for teens is getting thru the bases.

Not in most circles. All these kids want to do in their limited leisure time nowadays is play video games, sleep, drink alcohol and abuse their adhd medication. You're from a different era.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here, answering the question: Is there some reason your kid can’t walk into CVS and buy his own?

Yes. He's 14. GF is 15.

OMG.

Stop clutching your pearls. I was having sex at 14/15 (after a year of dating) and I found a way to buy condoms or my BF did.

The “pearl clutching” catchphrase is so lame
You were also a slut.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here, answering the question: Is there some reason your kid can’t walk into CVS and buy his own?

Yes. He's 14. GF is 15.

OMG.

Stop clutching your pearls. I was having sex at 14/15 (after a year of dating) and I found a way to buy condoms or my BF did.

The “pearl clutching” catchphrase is so lame
You were also a slut.

DP
Wait what?!? Sex at 14/15 after a year of dating makes one a slut? Has there been a definition change that I was unaware of?

Having sex at the age of 14 whether one is dating a year or not is concerning.
17 is average for first timers, 14 is simply way too young.

17 is the AVERAGE. That means many do it younger and many older. 14 may be on the younger side but it’s not scandalous.

14 is scandalous, and correlates to other issues in teens; mental health troubles, trauma, etc.

+1. Astounding someone doesn’t see that.

+2

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok so the Narcan is a great analogy and the "I am not supplying my kids with condom" moms are clearly also the "I'd not supplying my kids with Narcan" moms.

They think by not offering anything and being stern with their own personal values that their kids won't do drugs or have sex. And they think if you put some condoms and/or narcan in your house it will be immediately be a drug-infested brothel. And that is just how their parenting is going to be and they think it's correct. So be it. Kudos to you all.

I absolutely 100% expect my kids not to do drugs. If my kids need narcan then the failure on my part happened years BEFORE that point was reached, not the point at which I didn’t supply narcan. I would never send my teen to a party with narcan to “save others” - if I thought that would be a concern, my teen would NOT BE GOING to that party.

I am fully aware that at some point my teens will have sex, but I expect them to 1) buy and use protection like the mature-enough-to-have-sex people they think they are, and 2) put enough effort into sneaking around that I don’t have to know about their sex lives.

THANK YOU! I really don't know why this thought process is so radical to some people.

I repeat: If you have to buy protection for people who want to engage in sex, maybe they're not old or mature enough to do so??? And somehow I'm the crazy person for finding it to be absurd that I as a parent should supply my minor children with condoms so they can have sex and I can deal with the consequences if even despite my giving them condoms, a pregnancy or STD happens anyway???

Do you think that not buying condoms is going to prevent them from having sex? Like a kid who wants to have sex is going to say “well I guess I won’t do it now because I couldn’t find any condoms in the house.”

Honestly… in many cases, yes. In many cases teens really want to have sex BUT they also have internalized that they absolutely shouldn’t unless they use protection. With two people involved, you have double the chances of one of them calling it off unless a condom is available.

You are in fact, absolutely incorrect!!!

Results: Most teens (69%) had recently engaged in unprotected sex and 41% were willing to in the future.

I am confident that my teens fall in that 30% bucket of “exceptional” kids who have healthy self esteem, a modicum of impulse control, and are not complete morons.

I suspect the other posters on this thread who agree with me (despite the nutjob crying troll every other post, there really are many of us!) are also raising “exceptional” kids. In fact, our kids are probably hanging out together doing age-appropriate things while your kids are screwing in your bed or off reviving their ODing friends down at the gas station.

Age appropriate things for teens is getting thru the bases.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here, answering the question: Is there some reason your kid can’t walk into CVS and buy his own?

Yes. He's 14. GF is 15.

OMG.

Stop clutching your pearls. I was having sex at 14/15 (after a year of dating) and I found a way to buy condoms or my BF did.

The “pearl clutching” catchphrase is so lame
You were also a slut.

DP
Wait what?!? Sex at 14/15 after a year of dating makes one a slut? Has there been a definition change that I was unaware of?

That does sound risqué of a 14 yo. I would think slut and most would even though you pretend you wouldn’t.

The word slut has meaning - it’s not just sexual behaviors you don’t approve of. It means a woman who has many sexual partners. Not someone who loses their virginity at age 15.

She said 14/15. Slut can mean the way pp used it. Presumable if one is having sex at that age, they will have many partners.

Presumably? Calling a girl who loses it at 14 a slut because you assume they will go on to have many casual partners? Delightful.
And what exactly is wrong with many casual sex partners, may I ask?

Only a slut would ask what is wrong with many casual partners.

You’re right. Married to the only man I ever had sex with. First time at 24. You got me!

I’ve got a bridge to sell you. Where can we meet?

Of course you would say that. There couldn’t POSSIBLY be someone out there with an experience that doesn’t line up with your world view.

If you think crying “liar” when someone is sharing their personal experience is an effective way to have a conversation (especially when there is zero reason for that person to lie), I’m not sure there’s much more productive conversation to be had here.

If you think that I or anyone else would take advice from someone who thinks 14 years old having sex is just fine, you need to get examined.

If you could point out exactly here I said “a 14 year old having sex is just fine”, I’d be much obliged.

Jk. You can’t. Never said it. But don’t let that stop your amazing hyperbole and ability to glean exactly what you want (and not what was said) from the information given.

You failed lessons in inferential reading, didn’t you? You only understand literal meaning and not what’s implied or doesn’t need to be stated to be understood.
When someone says their fridge is running, you think it has feet and moving quickly.

Your inference is incorrect. You are making things up to bolster your argument. If I thought sex at 14 was ok, I would have said it. Unless you can point out exactly what I said that led you to infer that. I’d be open to discussing that.

NP. I read up the thread and agree that your comments imply that you have no issue with 14 years old having sex and you condoned promiscuous behavior.

There are many comments that say they do not think kids should have early sex but if they do, they should have access to condoms. Only you think that's contradictory or condoning.