• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Public University’s Sex Week Includes ‘Negotiating Successful Threesomes’ Event

No, they just go in the shadows instead. There is a reason that prostitution and Strip club business rises with a GOP convention.

Nevertheless I made my point.
 
Frankly, it kind of is. :shrug:

Sex is not some harmless pastime. It can be freaking deadly if you don't know your partner or where they've been. Even if it's not "deadly" per se, it can, and very often does, carry life long consequences with it.

No one wants to hear that kind of thing, because it's a "downer." However, statistically, and practically, speaking, it is very, very true.

There are tens of millions of people living in this country right now who can attest to that fact.

But the fact is college students have lots of sex. And when I was in school, we didn't have Sex Week to encourage promiscuity - just 18-23 year old hormones, keg parties, formals with more than a bottle of champagne per person, and co-ed dorms, with no curfew from mom and dad.

At least Sex Week (at least locally) does have a serious purpose, which is to inform students of the risks, and how to mitigate them.
 
But the fact is college students have lots of sex. And when I was in school, we didn't have Sex Week to encourage promiscuity - just 18-23 year old hormones, keg parties, formals with more than a bottle of champagne per person, and co-ed dorms, with no curfew from mom and dad.

At least Sex Week (at least locally) does have a serious purpose, which is to inform students of the risks, and how to mitigate them.

Color me skeptical.

First off, the sexual habits of the current generation arguably are a bit more dangerous than those of past generations in certain regards.

Secondly, if the point was to teach "safe sex," there are much better ways to do that. This comes off as being nothing less than a "sex positive" glorification of all of the questionable and promiscuous behaviors which tend to get young people in trouble in the first place.

I can guarantee you, for instance, that no young man is going to walk into a seminar about "How to get laid while still being a gentleman" with either "safe sex," or even "being a gentleman," anywhere in his mind.
 
Last edited:
Color me skeptical.

First off, the sexual habits of the current generation arguably are a bit more dangerous than those of past generations in certain regards.

Secondly, if the point was to teach "safe sex," there are much better ways to do that. This comes off as being nothing less than a "sex positive" glorification of all of the questionable and promiscuous behaviors which tend to get young people in trouble in the first place.

You're basing that on an article that essentially addresses two or three seminars of a WEEK of activities. In my area there little or no 'glofication' of anything. I'm POSITIVE they learned that STDs increase exponentially with the number of partners, the pill doesn't protect against STDs, condoms fail and when they do they also do not protect against STDs, etc.

The message was more like, "If you decide to have oral sex, this is a list of risks associated with that, and here is how you can protect yourself." And that might have been part of a seminar about how to give oral sex because that's how they got people in the door.

Look I get your point, but I know a woman who was involved in the local Sex Week, and the organizers and many of the participants had a very serious goal, which was to actually educate students. And they've found the traditional methods of getting information out didn't work, and college students remained ignorant. Sex Week was an attempt by serious people to try a different approach. Had nothing to do actually with encouraging "promiscuity" beyond the simple non-judgmental recognition that 21 year old single people DO HAVE SEX, and WHEN THEY DO, they need to do certain things to prevent pregnancy, STDs, etc.

I can guarantee you, for instance, that no young man is going to walk into a seminar about "How to get laid while still being a gentleman" with either "safe sex," or even "being a gentleman," anywhere in his mind.

Maybe not, but if the organizers are doing their job, he'll hear how to have safe sex during the seminar! And they'll be happy they got a method to get otherwise jaded young men in the door and who might have learned something they can use later, WHEN they have sex, not whether...
 
You're basing that on an article that essentially addresses two or three seminars of a WEEK of activities. In my area there little or no 'glofication' of anything. I'm POSITIVE they learned that STDs increase exponentially with the number of partners, the pill doesn't protect against STDs, condoms fail and when they do they also do not protect against STDs, etc.

The message was more like, "If you decide to have oral sex, this is a list of risks associated with that, and here is how you can protect yourself." And that might have been part of a seminar about how to give oral sex because that's how they got people in the door.

Look I get your point, but I know a woman who was involved in the local Sex Week, and the organizers and many of the participants had a very serious goal, which was to actually educate students. And they've found the traditional methods of getting information out didn't work, and college students remained ignorant. Sex Week was an attempt by serious people to try a different approach. Had nothing to do actually with encouraging "promiscuity" beyond the simple non-judgmental recognition that 21 year old single people DO HAVE SEX, and WHEN THEY DO, they need to do certain things to prevent pregnancy, STDs, etc.

Maybe not, but if the organizers are doing their job, he'll hear how to have safe sex during the seminar! And they'll be happy they got a method to get otherwise jaded young men in the door and who might have learned something they can use later, WHEN they have sex, not whether...

You might very well be right, for all I know. While the article does mention some things about the event which would seem to go against what you describe (threeway, oral sex, and bar pickup instructional classes, for instance), this could ultimately turn out to be an attempt to basically trick students into learning something by promising one thing, and delivering another.

I still maintain that the marketing of the event is somewhat questionable, in any event, however. :lol:
 
There are 110 million people with STDs living in the United States today. That is a full third of our population.

As if that weren't enough, there are roughly 20 million new infections each and every year, most of them affecting young adults in their late teens or early to mid twenties.

CDC - Incidence, Prevalence, and Cost of Sexually Transmitted Infections in the United States

Tell me. How many people die, or are even injured, crossing the street each year? :lol:

Virtually all the people trying to put condoms on while crossing the street. It's a daunting statistic. All those wasted condoms...
 
Not enough to keep pace with sexual activity, apparently, considering the fact that overall rates are trending upwards again, especially for young adults.

And that's why it's wrong to teach college kids about condoms :screwy
 
And that's why it's wrong to teach college kids about condoms :screwy

Then they should teach their students about condoms, and leave lessons like "how to get laid," "how to negotiate a threesome," and how to give "O-face oral sex" off the lesson plan.
 
Secondly, if the point was to teach "safe sex," there are much better ways to do that. This comes off as being nothing less than a "sex positive" glorification of all of the questionable and promiscuous behaviors which tend to get young people in trouble in the first place.

Yeah, they should be taught that sex is a bad, negative thing

That always works well

“Whether it’s how to use lube and condoms to enhance the safety and pleasure of a blow job or how to have … a ‘Safe Sex Elevator Speech’ so you can have a safe and healthy threesome, all of my classes, no matter how outrageous, provocative, or explicit the titles may be teach adults better communication and intimacy skills, offer accurate sexual health information, and do so in a non-fear based and ‘edutaining’ environment,” he said.
 
Yeah, they should be taught that sex is a bad, negative thing

That always works well

Well, let's look at the record then, shall we?

Were STDs and unwanted pregnancies more of a problem before the sexual revolution, or after?

The fact of the matter is that sex is not a game, no matter how much certain people may happen to wish that it was.

I'm sorry, but "Be wild crazy and sexually freeeee!!!!" followed shortly thereafter by "but make sure you use these horribly inconvenient and expensive things that, quite honestly, kind of make sex suck" really isn't a terribly effective message either, especially when it comes to dealing with reckless demographics who are likely to be blitzed out of their minds when the time comes for sex anyway.

People tend to take the first part, and forget all about the latter.
 
Last edited:
Well, let's look at the record then, shall we?

Were STDs and unwanted pregnancies more of a problem before the sexual revolution, or after?

The sexual revolution is over and there are more STD's. We should have kept it going.

As far as unwanted pregnancies, they are less of a problem now because abortion provides a solution to those who don't want to give birth


I'm sorry, but "Be wild crazy and sexually freeeee!!!!" followed shortly thereafter by "but make sure you use these horribly inconvenient and expensive things that, quite honestly, kind of make sex suck" really isn't a terribly effective message either, especially when it comes to dealing with reckless demographics who are likely to be blitzed out of their minds when the time comes for sex anyway.

People tend to take the first part, and forget all about the latter.

Condoms are expensive?
 
The sexual revolution is over and there are more STD's. We should have kept it going.

Ummm... No. They are actually down quite a bit from the height of the insanity in the 1970s and early 1980s.

That whole "AIDs" thing had a lot to do with that. ;)

They are trending back upwards again, precisely because much of the fear spawned by that epidemic has died down, and the current generation and the culture which shaped it is more tolerant and encouraging of promiscuous behavior as such.

As far as unwanted pregnancies, they are less of a problem now because abortion provides a solution to those who don't want to give birth

cm4e6.jpg

This is much better, clearly. :roll:

Condoms are expensive?

When you're drunk, horny, and just want to f*ck?

Uhhh... Yeah. :lol:
 
I'm sorry I take big issue with this, that's some real high horse nonsense.

If both parties are consenting then what right do you have to say what you're saying.

You can't stop it, it's reality and will continue to be so, so the best thing to do is encourage safe sex and leave it at that.

Unless you're planning on restricting peoples movements you're not gonna have a good chance at discouraging casual sex.

That's precisely what he wants to do. In the name of Christian morality.
 
Ummm... No. They are actually down quite a bit from the height of the insanity in the 1970s and early 1980s.

That whole "AIDs" thing had a lot to do with that. ;)

They are trending back upwards again,

Because the revolution is over

BTW, your side lost that one

Also, that guy in the pic looks a lot more like you than me.

Just sayin'
 
The sexual revolution is over and there are more STD's. We should have kept it going.
what?I'm afraid I am having a hard time following your post's.... unless you just like to troll around.

far as unwanted pregnancies, they are less of a problem now because abortion provides a solution to those who don't want to give birth
Abortion is a unfortunate last resort that results in killing an unborn human and can damage a woman's body and emotions.... not a solution.

Condoms are expensive?
Well... isn't that relative?
 
Because the revolution is over

BTW, your side lost that one

And now a full third of our population suffers from sexually transmitted infections, a large percentage of which are incurable, and many others are life threatening. Our government also has to throw money away hand over fist to support single mothers and their children, and many of the institutions which form the foundation of our society are falling apart.

Hurray for progress??? :lol:

The fact of the matter is that Western World in general is on the fast lane to the trash heap of history. There's honestly little left to do at this point besides grab a bucket of popcorn and "watch the world burn."
 
Last edited:
And now a full third of our population suffers from sexually transmitted infections,

So you say

a large percentage of which are incurable, and many others are life threatening,

Actually, the type of STD's that have increased (herpes, chlamydia) tend to be less harmful than the types of STD's that have decreased (syphillis, gonorheaa)

our government has to throw money away hand over fist to support single mothers and their children, and many of the institutions which form the foundation of our society are falling apart.
Hurray for progress??? :lol:

The Western World in general is on the fast lane to the trash heap of history. There's really little left to do at this point besides grab a bucket of popcorn and "watch the world burn."
I suggest you flee and avoid the crash
 
Actually, the type of STD's that have increased (herpes, chlamydia) tend to be less harmful than the types of STD's that have decreased (syphillis, gonorheaa)

No, they are not. Chlamydia is just as harmful as Gonorrhea, if not more so, especially in women. Herpes is a lot more harmful than either, and incurable to boot.

BTW, Syphilis is on the rise again, as is HIV.

A number of "superstrains" of Gonorrhea which are resistant to antibiotics have emerged in recent years as well.

I suggest you flee and avoid the crash

If only, if only...
 
No, they are not. Chlamydia is just as harmful as Gonorrhea, if not more so, especially in women. Herpes is a lot more harmful than either, and incurable to boot.

Nonsense.

BTW, Syphilis is on the rise again, as is HIV.

But lower than they were

A number of "superstrains" of Gonorrhea which are resistant to antibiotics have emerged in recent years as well.

Like I said, gonorrhea is more harmful

If only, if only...

Well, at least we found something we both can agree on.
 
And now a full third of our population suffers from sexually transmitted infections, a large percentage of which are incurable, and many others are life threatening."

Be responsible. Wrap that little thing.


Our government also has to throw money away hand over fist to support single mothers and their children, and many of the institutions which form the foundation of our society are falling apart.

The Sky is Falling!!!! Someone else got laid!

The fact of the matter is that Western World in general is on the fast lane to the trash heap of history.

That isn't a fact. That is your ill-informed opinion.


There's honestly little left to do at this point besides grab a bucket of popcorn and "watch the world burn."

Chicken Little would be so proud.
 
Back
Top Bottom