Overall, countries and nations with lower STD/STI rates are often those where it's citizens have a well-developed sense of social responsibility.
Every part of life has risks, sex included. But there is a difference is risking ourselves and our immediate familes and relationships, and doing something which years down the line, puts people at risk who we may never even meet.
Do you consider the impact on the world that your personal sexual choices may have, or not? How much DOES it impact you? Are you aware of the residual effects that NOT practicing safer sex can have down the road, outside your own life?
[This message has been edited by Miz Scarlet (edited 09 July 2000).]
I definately take in to consideration what effect I could be having on others by my own sexual actions. When ever a new partner and I are getting ready for sex, I make sure we both go in to get tested at least twice, and when we do finally have sex, a condom is used. I don't think that other peoples actions should be able to kill me. But they can, so I'm forced to take these precautions that I feel I shouldn't have to take. If everyone was careful, and everyone got tested, we would slowly be able to start diminishing these diseases. It's completely unfair to have to do these things, but we have to if we want to live.
Posts: 87 | From: San Jose, CA | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
Just today, a European report listed that it's STD rates in youth have TRIPLED over the last nine years, and the study that revealed that mentioned that 70% of the reported cases were due to NO condom use.
In other words, people's "personal choices" and becomeing serious public problems.
perhaps it is not wise to mix up "personal choice" with "personal responsiblity." yes, choices like choosing to not use protection or engaging in other risky sexual behaviours are selfish, but they are personal choices. however, they are extremely irresponsible decisions that will lead to consequences like STDs, death, etc.
personally, i prefer to think that i alone am responsible for my actions and i alone have to deal with their ramifications. when it comes to partners, i still believe that what they do has little bearing on me. i should be the one to be proactive and askthem to use a condom, or go get tested or whatever have you.
i will admit i have little sense of social responsibility -- i am selfish in the way that i look out for #1. but i acknowledge that for whatever choices i make, i have to deal with their consequences.
------------------ This space reserved for the free exchange of thoughts and ideas.
Posts: 12677 | From: Los Angeles, CA ... somewhere off the 10 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
I have to debate you on that point. Denmark has very high rates of both these diseases and yet has one of the strongest ethics of both social and personal responsibility anywhere in the world. I think it is because condom use has been so low until recently and because not much attention was drawn to these diseases. And this takes place in an environment where sex is not so scarce as in the US. I did not even think about asking a guy to use a condom from the time i was 14 until i was in my late 20's because i was on the P-pill and all we heard about was Hiv/Aids which is not a big problem.
[This message has been edited by loveable me (edited 04-09-2001).]
I think 'debate' because she was contradicting you in saying: ---- Denmark has very high rates of both these diseases *and yet* has one of the strongest ethics of both social and personal responsibility anywhere in the world. ---- What confused me was, if Denmark has 'high rates' of HIV/AIDS because people there don't use condoms because 'all you hear about is HIV/AIDS which isn't much of a problem'... Well, is HIV/AIDS much of a problem, or isn't it? Was it not a problem a few years ago and now it is because it wasn't publicized enough? I'm confused.
Posts: 257 | From: Sarasota, FL | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
MizS - Do you have a citacion for the inverse correlation between STD prevalence and social responsibility? What was being used as a measure of a population's sense of social responsibility? Who conducted the research?
Sorry, but talking about a correlation between something as hard to measure as "population's sense of social responsibility" on as large a scale as "countries/nations" and as charged/personal an issue as STDs... it just sets off my psychologists' study-reading warning bells. It also seems like it'd be darn hard to find good controls when comparing nations, and there's a lot to control for here: cultural taboos, sex education/safer sex availability, financial means, what groups of people are having sex with who at what age and how often... And then other vectors of transmission, too. I've heard (though not confirmed) that a LOT of the AIDS problem in parts of Africa is not sexually transmitted, but is still transmitted by blood transfusions and cultural rituals involving contact with blood.
Anyway, I'd be really interested in reading the study you're talking about, if you know what it is.
[This message has been edited by Eclipse (edited 04-09-2001).]
Sorry. I guess i don't fully understand all the abbreviatons. In Denmark, we have very low rates of Hiv/Aids, but very high rates of klamydia (i don't know how to spell it in english) and hpv (?). We heard a lot about aids, but nothing about the last two...until recently.
Posts: 28 | From: København, Denamrk | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
Copyright 1998, 2014 Heather Corinna/Scarleteen
Scarleteen.com: Providing comprehensive sex education online to teens and young adults worldwide since 1998
Information on this site is provided for educational purposes. It is not meant to and cannot substitute for advice or care provided by an in-person medical professional. The information contained herein is not meant to be used to diagnose or treat a health problem or disease, or for prescribing any medication. You should always consult your own healthcare provider if you have a health problem or medical condition.