In general, I want to retire the "my parents did that, and I came out ok" argument. Whenever anyone says that about any issue, I always want to reply, "No, you did not come out ok. You are a neurotic, controlling bitch." or "...you are a spineless lap dog" or whatever.
The argument rests entirely on people's unwillingness to publically acknowledge how fucked up their friends are.
I really think that the difference is that in the US, general public opinion is so set on this that even people who think it's OK for kids to have sex don't want to get caught openly admitting it. (I suppose "condoning" is something like "publicly declaring that something's OK".)
Kids already start having sex at 18 in college, and that really bothered people when it happened. Knocking the age down to 16 doesn't seem like such a big step.
One of the squicky things is that you normally don't get involved in the sex lives of other adults, whereas if a kid under your supervision is having sex, in some way you ARE involved. But it should be handleable the way roommate situations are handled.
One thing I told my son was that if he got a girl pregnant before he was 30 I'd kill him, married or not. It worked.
The behavior described in 131 is absolutely nothing like the behavior of the high school kids I knew when I was in high school, which was much more in line with LB's point of view.
Pregnancy--again, I think most kids know they're supposed to be safe, but they aren't because it's more fun not to be safe.
Do you have a convincing different explanation for the great difference in teen pregancy rates in Europe and the US? (Well, they've also got better sex ed, but it's better for the same reasons, that it doesn't pretend that the audience isn't having sex.)
I don't buy the guilt thing or the fear thing, if the rule is, "I'm pretending it's not happening."
You can't explicitly set a rule that says "You can have sex, so long as I don't know about it," it would be absurd. The rule, from the kid's point of view, is "Sex is forbidden". Now maybe you're sensitive enough with the non-verbal communication to get across that it's not a real rule without saying it, but I doubt it. Which means that whatever your real attitude, your kid, if she's got any regard for what you think of her, is ashamed, and afraid of getting caught.
The rape thing--boy, maybe. I guess I just don't have a sense of how likely that is, and (as I've been assuming a male kid) how likely it is that my kid would do something like that.
Picture a female kid, and think whether you're happier with her negotiating her sexual boundaries in a cornfield, or in her bedroom with you in call.
I think libertine parents may raise more conservative children
There may be some truth in that. My parents weren't libertine, as such.
They took a pretty strong line on responsibility -- if I fucked up, especially if I'd been warned it was a possibility, then I damn well had to fix it. No-one was going to bail me out. If I behaved like an arsehole, I'd be told in no uncertain terms that i was behaving like an arsehole. So, while I could do pretty much do whatever I wanted* I also knew that I had to deal with the end result.
The result of that was that I was probably the most responsible and sensible person I knew growing up. That's not to say I didn't do stupid stuff, but, relatively speaking, I didn't do that much stupid stuff.
* within reason and I was expected to show consideration for others. I could stay out late, for example, but I had to make sure they knew I was staying out late, etc.
140: But what's the alternative? I'm not sure I'm comfortable with looking to the Planning Commission for the best parental practices. Don't most people end up repeating the parenting model established by their parents, or varying in specific ways from it?
I think comparing US and European rates of teen pregnancy isn't really helpful, given that we have such a huge underclass that exists in basically a different world from the one in which this discussion is taking place.
I have no hard feelings about my parents, but in certain respects I tried to do things differently.
The more I think about it, the more I think that the local communities limit parents' options. It would be hard to be a European-style parent in and American small town. And even if I'd wanted to, I couldn't have imitated my parents' small-town style in the city.
That's weird. I actually do have a really cool Auntie Carol. Though I was thinking the cool angle was advice/adult cover for escapades, without the parental squick. Not Ogged's bad teen movie scenario.
(Another aspect of libertinism turning me conservative: I was offered marijuana constantly growing up by my family, and never took it till I was 17 and had hellish psychosomatic menstrual cramps brought on by the sight of my near-death, post brain surgery Aunt Shirley. It was great for the menstrual cramps. To this day, I have never tried another illegal drug, despite my father telling me about (but not doing around me) nitrous, ecstasy, etc.)
150: Well, okay. But I do find the argument that a kid who has to listen to her parents say "I expect you to be using condoms, and I think you should probably go to the gyno and talk about the pill," in the context of the fact that they admittedly know she's sexually active, is more likely to stay safe than one who's getting busy in the back seat of a minivan, very persuasive. The 'Europe' thing was just because SCMT wasn't admitting my logic.
I think that's true. The UK has a massive rate of teen pregnancy and I'm sure that's connected to the same sort of 'huge underclass' and the particular values that operate there.
I'm not claiming that one way or the other is the way to avoid teen pregnancy or making a strongly consequentialist argument for one or the other.
It just seems like the right thing to do with people who are, depending on viewpoint, either adults or on the cusp of adulthood is to treat them as adults.
150: There are so many other issues, but it doesn't seem implausible that the attitude to teen sex is one contributing factor, and the culture of the 'underclass' isn't wholly separate from that of middle class, so one can try to influence USian attitudes in general.
You can't explicitly set a rule that says "You can have sex, so long as I don't know about it," it would be absurd.
No it isn't. It is exactly what the situation calls for. It starts with the conversation about safe sex and the groundrules (like be kind and keep your grades up and get home by curfew so I don't have to worry that you are dead in a car crash.) and then everyone does their part.
The kid keeps the groundrules and does NOT sleep over at his girlfriend's house when the parents said not to. The parents do not ask what the kids did between the movie and curfew and everyone gets some of what they want and no one is squicked out. It totally works.
Endemic Scottish violence has a whole complex array of root causes
I suspect the genes. And I say this as someone who has a fair amount of ancestry from the area. Are the Cornish this way too? As I recall the Swifts (at least the ones I count as ancestors) are from that area.
Well, snarkily, getting pregnant lets you get your own council house which, in turn, enables you to have people sleep over as much as you like.*
* That's the view promulgated by the right-wing tabloid press. Unfortunately, once you take away the hysterical moral condemnation and the snobbery, it has a grain of truth in it.
156: What? If you're willing to admit that the comparisons aren't easy, I assume it's because we all suspect that the numbers look very different for people raised outside the underclass. And my suspicion is that the general rule in the outside-the-underclass set is closer to the one I was previously defending. Which makes me suspect that if we had actual numbers, the obviousness of your cause-effect claim would be less obvious.
But teo has convinced me. I still can't figure out why.
Yeah, the genes for engineering and science genius, extreme violence, alcholism and haggis-consumption are closely grouped together on the same chromosome.
[This is where I'd add a smiley emoticon if they weren't banned ...]
But as someone said above, the squickiness comes from being involved in someone else's sex life. People all around us are having sex all the time, and in most cases, I really prefer not to think about it. That is extra true for close relatives.
169: Seriously, I'd bet that there's an awful lot of middle-class teen pregnancy that gets aborted; fewer children than in the underclass, but a lot of unsafe sex.
165: Are you really saying that the parents should tell the kid, explicitly "You may have sex so long as we don't know about it"? Because I think that's awfully silly, if you're saying it, and I doubt you're saying it. I think you're suggesting that the parents should forbid sex, at least implicitly, and then wink at likely violations of the rule. Which could work out fine for everyone, but could also turn into guilt and fear for the teens who are violating the rule, and don't know that it's not serious. Because it's not like there aren't enough messages out there telling you you're a bad person for having sex.
OK, I'm slightly on board, but I feel the need for guidance. How far is this approach to be taken? I don't think I'd really care if my son or daughter were pretty wild for a while sexually--if you can do it, why not?--but, while I'm OK with the idea of my hypothetical son or daughter having a multi-some, I'm still finding it really, really hard to imagine OK'ing him or her taking multiple partners into her room under my watchful eye.
'You may have sex (without hassle from us) as long as you demonstrate that you are mature enough to keep to the (reasonable) rules that we set and show some consideration for everyone involved." That primarily means the kid's partner, but it also means the parents, who shouldn't have to know when their kid is having sex.
Sex isn't explicitly forbidden, because it doesn't have to be when everyone does their part.
Am I wrong that the girl's parents were cool with what's happening, but not the boy's? In that case, whatever offense is to the boy's parents.
And I think that that's why these things are so touchy, because two sets of parents are involved -- and their reputations, and their kids' reputations, and the siblings' reputations. And apparently the two sets disagree.
'You may have sex (without hassle from us) as long as you demonstrate that you are mature enough to keep to the (reasonable) rules that we set and show some consideration for everyone involved." That primarily means the kid's partner, but it also means the parents, who shouldn't have to know when their kid is having sex.
"But Mom, the police keep on hassling us when we park anyplace, and I'm afraid to hide under the bleachers -- those guys from the lacrosse team hang out there and beat people up, and I keep getting ticks. Please, can we stay in my room if we're quiet?"
Once you've given explicit permission, I just don't see the benefit from requiring sneaking around that offsets the practical problems. (City girl here. Not a lot of safe places to screw other than in someone's bedroom.)
That's why I don't think that an unspoken agreement is possible in this case. But I also think that an open, European-style arrangement would be better. It really just amount to granting one step toward adulthood while the kid still is at home.
174: Oh, I think you're fine with setting some standard of prudery -- if threesomes, or significant promiscuity (new partner every night) freak you out, you can say 'not in my house'. I'm not trying to be perfectly consistent here.
OK, how about this compromise: buy the kid one of those fuckmobile vans. Explain that it's in case he wants to go hunting or fishing, or engage in other healthful though potentially fatal activities such as rock-climbing or surfing.
178 - the son is being openly disrespectful of his parents, who told him no sleepovers, in either direction. I hope he isn't also offending the girl's parents, but that isn't really the point.
179 - you don't have to give explicit permission. You shouldn't have to grant or withhold permission either way, because you aren't explicitly involved in their sex life.
"Can we stay in my room if we are quiet?" Well, your father and I will be going to the gym this evening, and we'll be back around 8:30. And if your grades stay high, I'll make a lot of noise when I get in from work in the afternoons. Of course it is a pretense, but the pretense itself has value.
But suppose the parents' problem with the sleepover was simply that it was a sleepover? Just a "don't stay out all night" kind of thing. Rather than a "no members of the sex you're interested in alone in your room with you" kind of thing.
Weren't any of you guys good kids who came to unspoken agreements with your parents?
I was a good kid who didn't have sex in high school (not for lack of effort). Now I'm a bitter 21-year-old virgin. My feelings on this issue are rather strong.
the son is being openly disrespectful of his parents,
True. I'm arguing that his parents are setting foolish rules, not that it's polite of him to disobey them.
You shouldn't have to grant or withhold permission either way, because you aren't explicitly involved in their sex life.
This is, I think, a dodge. As a teen, I had very strong opinions about what was permitted and what was forbidden, even in contexts where my parents had not explicitly stated the rules. (I wasn't always right, but I had strong beliefs.)(And if you're assuming that parents have the right to set rules for their teens, which I'm assuming you do -- we're just arguing about which they should be -- there is no third category other than forbidden and permitted. If it's not forbidden, it's permitted.) And a category of 'permitted, but must be kept secret' would have made no sense to me then, and makes no sense to me now. I would have either believed that I was violating a prohibition (guilt, fear) or not have understood the need for secrecy.
Of course it is a pretense, but the pretense itself has value.
190 - Not public opinion. The parents want what everyone wants, which is not to know when other people are fucking. They might also like to cling to the idea that their kids, who are about to leave anyway, are still children. (Which they may simultaneously know is wrong.) It isn't only that they are trying to be Puritans in front of the neighbors.
I think I get what Megan is saying, because I had a similar thing with my parents. And #140 notwithstanding, I think we all build off the model of our own childhoods. I wonder if it isn't simply that, given a model that seemed to work, some of us wouldn't rather follow that model just because we understand it better. (There's some story tied, I think, to Achebe about a Nigerian farmer who's son is going off to the city for work. When asked whether he'd rather have his son stay, he says that yes, it would be his preference, though his son's opportunities are probably better in the city. But he knows farming and he could help his kid, and he doesn't know the city.)
Megan, the roommate situation covers that. You learn not to bother your mind about what's happening in the next room. I think that the problem is that up till then you HAVE been intimately involved with your kids' lives, but you just have to learn to stop.
I don't think that the pretense that the kids are still children is something valuable to be preserved.
Tacit agreements are OK until they break down, but this one has broken down. Should the parents fight it? That's the question.
And it's not irrelevant that two sets of parents are involved, because that means that two sets of standards are involved. And that will be true of every couple relationship that the kid is ever in.
191 - really? There was no other category of "Not yet forbidden and something I would really like to do"? 'Cause the penalties are less for that one.
And there was too. There was "tacitly permitted, as long as I don't force the issue".
The value is no one gets squicked out. You don't have to battle over rules when the real context is whether kids get to fuck. Family members can treat each other gently.
Maybe not so much value in clinging to the notion that your high schoolers are kids, but that doesn't mean people don't want to do it.
I agree with virtually everything ttaM has written in this thread, especially about the ridiculousness of teenagers being treated like children. But then, I moved into my boyfriend's house at 16 (I was kind of like David in the David and Darlene relationship on Roseanne) and into my own apartment at 17.
There's a lot of depends, like do the parents have enough power to win, but my call is that if that kid isn't mature enough to be in a respectful relationship with his (reasonable) parents, then he isn't mature enough to be sexually active. It comes back to basic consideration for me.
Also, family members have sex is ickier than adult roommates have sex. It calls for stronger measures.
And, SCMT, is probably right. It worked for me, so everyone should do that.
196: You know, I think almost any set of rules can work fine if everyone involved is sensitive and loving and highly skilled and unambiguous non-verbal communication, and it sounds like that's how your family worked.
For the rest of us, I think there's a virtue in sacrificing a little emotional comfort for openness and unambiguity.
I'm kind of an anomaly in all of this in that I slept over at my boyfriend's house in high school a number of times (my parents didn't know) but we didn't have sex. (I actually bought into that "good Catholic schoolgirl saving myself until marriage" thing. And then I moved to New Orleans.)
I'm actually glad I waited until college to have sex but a lot of the reason why has to do with the fact that I was so much more relaxed and comfortable about the whole thing without having to worry about curfews or my parents. So my reasons are ones that would have been mitigated had I grown up in a more permissive household.
194 - That was the kindest justification I came up with when I struggled with my Asian-Am ex's parents hating me for not being the same Asian-Am. It helped me hold my tongue.
Megan's family actually sounds a lot like mine, and I think if either my sister or I had had sex in high school it would have turned out okay. My parents' official policy was "no sex in high school; after that we don't care" but I think they probably would have been okay with a tacit understanding that while there would be no sex under their roof they couldn't control what we did anywhere else. It never came up, though.
My bitterness is not directed at them, but at the whole structure of American attitudes toward sex.
121: Well, sort of. Except that teenage sex isn't a purely personal decision, as much as I might think it should be. What the other kid's parents think matters; what their friends think matters; what happens at school if they get knocked up matters. The culture is that, as Ogged said, letting your kid's boy/girlfriend sleep over in their bed is considered extremely permissive.
145: Picture a female kid, and think whether you're happier with her negotiating her sexual boundaries in a cornfield, or in her bedroom with you in call.
In all honesty? I'd like to think that a daughter of mine is going to be comfortable saying "fuck no" wherever. I would certainly raise her to be able to do so, specifically because you can't be by her side forever. And I'm really not sure that she'd be more comfortable saying no with me in call; is a kid in a gray area situation really going to yell for mom? Or is she more likely to want to keep quiet and not argue than she would be if someone weren't there to overhear?
185: "Can we stay in my room if we are quiet?" Well, your father and I will be going to the gym this evening, and we'll be back around 8:30. And if your grades stay high, I'll make a lot of noise when I get in from work in the afternoons. Of course it is a pretense, but the pretense itself has value. This is, I think, exactly the right approach. We're talking about this as if the only opportunity teenagers ever have to have sex is at night--which is nonsense. I mostly had sex on days when I stayed home from school and invited my boyfriend over, or when my parents were out, and so forth.
I'm not going to say "yeah, go ahead and have sex." I'm going to say, *if* you have sex, be careful. And if the kid *is* having sex, and I've figured it out, and then the issue of, um, can we be alone in the house sometimes? comes up, then fine.
But yeah: for whatever reason, I'm more comfortable with the "Mom and Dad are going out tonight, we should be home around midnight" thing than the "yes, of course your girlfriend can spend the night in your bed" approach. Until, like I said, the kid has been out of the house for a little while and we've established a new sort of relationship where he now lives somewhere else, and comes home to visit.
Yeah, exactly. And the belief that it's discourteous to one's parents to not hide all evidence of sexual activity from them is both a symptom and a cause of the perpetuation of those attitudes.
In all honesty? I'd like to think that a daughter of mine is going to be comfortable saying "fuck no" wherever. I would certainly raise her to be able to do so, specifically because you can't be by her side forever. And I'm really not sure that she'd be more comfortable saying no with me in call; is a kid in a gray area situation really going to yell for mom? Or is she more likely to want to keep quiet and not argue than she would be if someone weren't there to overhear?
??????? The issue about worrying about being overheard only comes into play if she's worrying about getting caught. If she's not doing anything wrong, why would she worry about calling for help?
Seriously, in a certain amount of college awkward messing around, my confidence and comfort level was like night and day depending on whether I was in my own house, with thirty housemates nearby who were on my side of any disagreement, or on someone else's turf. (I sound like I've been terribly scarred by sexual violence, the way I keep bringing up rape. In fact, no. But I have been in situations where I was nervous, and I was a hell of a lot more nervous when I was depending on pure moral character and my ability to throw a punch, then when I had backup.)
191: What Megan's calling a "pretense" has value precisely *because* sex is (1) private; (2) not your parent's business; (3) an adult activity, and therefore you shouldn't be asking permission. I don't agree that as a teen everything is either permitted or forbidden; I honestly think that there are a lot of things that fall into the "I've done my best to raise you to make decent decisions, and it's time you started deciding things on your own" realm. But one of the realities of making decisions is having to also negotiate other people's boundaries, one of which is that asking parents to give you permission to having your girl/boyfriend sleep over is, in this society, really a bit over the top.
I'm thinking this is one of those things that's going to seem like a bigger deal before it comes up than after. Having sex is going to be the kid's call as a practical matter, so it seems to make more sense to save whatever green stamps you have for "be careful" rather than wasting them on "don't" when that isn't going to work anyway. And even now, with a 10-year-old, I'm becoming a fan of "I'm not wild about that idea (and here's why), but I'm not going to forbid it if you decide that's what you want to do."
OTOH, my kid's room is small and right next to ours, so I doubt he's going to be getting any girls in there when we're around anyway.
The issue about worrying about being overheard only comes into play if she's worrying about getting caught. If she's not doing anything wrong, why would she worry about calling for help?
Because having your mom walk in on you and your boyfriend negotiating sex is embarrassing?
I'm not presuming forcible rape, mind. I'm presuming, as you said, "negotiating boundaries." I wouldn't want my mother to overhear me arguing with Mr. B. about sex now, let alone when I was 17.
211: That seems right, but it's not clear from the Slate piece how permission became an issue. There's some screwed-up stuff about that situation--among other things, I would certainly tell my kid that he shouldn't be having anyone spend the night if the other parents weren't OK with it--but it's not clear that the thing started with "Mommy, is it OK if I fuck my girlfriend?"
BTW, Emily Yoffe is a huge improvement on Margo Howard, yes?
I'd like to think that a daughter of mine is going to be comfortable saying "fuck no" wherever.
Building on 210, I'm sure things are somewhat better now in the age of cellphones but all of the "fuck no" training in the world isn't going to help a girl who has been driven to the middle of nowhere thinking she was in for a makeout session and then told she isn't going home until she does X.
I don't agree that as a teen everything is either permitted or forbidden; I honestly think that there are a lot of things that fall into the "I've done my best to raise you to make decent decisions, and it's time you started deciding things on your own" realm.
See, that's 'permitted'. Sometime around when I was 12 or so, my parents started giving me an allowance, because they'd done their best to raise me to make decent decisions, and it was time I started deciding how to spend money on my own. I was permitted to spend money without consulting them.
If you can successfully work out a clearly-understood-by-all shame-free agreement in which the kid is allowed to do what he wants with respect to sex once he reaches what you think of as an appropriate age so long as he doesn't unnecessarily make you aware of any sexual conduct, I suppose it's all right, but I think it's an awfully tricky standard to set for families that aren't very, very, fluent non-verbal communicators.
Don't worry, Teo. Things get a lot cooler in college.
Oh wait.
(I'm sooooo sorry. I just couldn't resist. I ban myself.)
Ha. I was going to make that joke if someone else didn't. And as someone who didn't do it until college, I feel his pain. Although his pain might be worse as I didn't really try in high school.
I'm not presuming forcible rape, mind. I'm presuming, as you said, "negotiating boundaries."
"Donald, I said get your hand off my ass. Look, if I have to say it again I'm calling my dad in here." has a lot more force, even if the second sentence doesn't have to be said explicitly, than "I said I didn't want to have sex. Come on. Drive me home, please? It's cold out here, and I can't walk in these shoes."*
_____________________
*You knew it was going to be about the shoes, right?
212 is probably right. I think 209 is a bit of an oversimplification--is anyone here saying kids should "hide all evidence" of sexual activity? Aren't the prudes among us just saying that the goal is to retain a reasonable sense of discretion which might involve not coming out and announcing, "mom, dad, I'm fucking that person I went out with last week."
I seriously don't think that one's ability to have mature negotiations with one's parents has any bearing on one's readiness to have sex. They're different sets of relationships. Clementine was consistently quite sulky at the dinner table; I was living there, and was responsible for making gracious conversation with her parents and relieving the silence. She was also having sex with her boyfriend and no ill came of it.
And "this society" isn't uniform. It doesn't say where these parents live, but I know of children who've actually been pressured by their parents into having sex. There are some decadent coastal enclaves in this country.
, I suppose it's all right, but I think it's an awfully tricky standard to set for families that aren't very, very, fluent non-verbal communicators.
LB's innate WASPiness comes to the fore. Yes, if you're married to John Kerry, you should probably make everything explicit. By the end of the speech, the kid will be too bored to have sex anyway.
Teo, are you bitter that you haven't olost virgin status, that you aren't having sex now, or that you could have had sex, and thus fun, in the past, but surrendered the chance?
What Megan's calling a "pretense" has value precisely *because* sex is (1) private; (2) not your parent's business; (3) an adult activity, and therefore you shouldn't be asking permission.
Apparently there are places (the fabled continent of Yoorp) where these questions can be handled while the kid is living under the parents' roof. #3 sounds a bit Kafkaesque -- I'm refusing you permission because if you were an adult you wouldn't have to ask, but you're asking, so you're not an adult, so you aren't mature enough, so I'm saying no.
B. seems to accept my theory that public opinion (here as compared to Yoorp) is a major factor here.
I don't understand the enthusiasm for pretense and tacit arrangements and plausible parental deniability here. Especially in a specific case where these have broken down and an explicit response has to be made.
Yes, if you're married to John Kerry, you should probably make everything explicit. By the end of the speech, the kid will be too bored to have sex anyway.
I'm married to an earthy man of the people. I am John Kerry.
On the alcohol thing. Actually I knew parents who did provide their kids with kegs. This is exactly how all of the post-highschool graduation parties worked. They also took away all of our keys. The one in Greenwich was really weird, because there was a tent with a catered buffet and a security gaurd/valet who took our keys. These were all giant slumber parties. One of them didn't let us in the house (less pleasant); the other was in such a large house that 60 kids didn't feel like a noticeable inconvenience.
My highschool had a formal policy against sex. At other schools, the kids probably managed to have sex in their dorm rooms. Everything at my school happened in the woods, the attic of teh theater and the music practice rooms. People were always making out in the music rooms; it really sucked if you actually needed to practice the piano at night.
There was a big discussion about whether condoms should be available on campus from the infirmary. I think that eventually a efw years after I left they did let them on campus. Before that day students bought them for their friends.
I remember having one conversation with my Dad about sex. (I haven't talked to my Mom about anything important since I was 7.) It was very abstract and theoretical; I think that we were discussing my school's policy. He thought that giving away free condoms would infantilize us--though I don't think he put it quite like that. Basically, he said that he didn't want to know about my sex life. He told me a story about a friend of his who had a very conservative, German father. She wanted to shock him a bit. So one year, when he asked her what she wanted for her birthday, she said, "a diaphragm." And he said, "Ah my dear, when you are old enough to need one, you will be old enough to get one for yourself." Is her father's position in line with B's?
A guy who is going to pull the "fuck me or I won't drive you home" thing is not going to wait until she agrees to make out with him in the car to be an asshole, I don't think.
A guy who is going to pull the "fuck me or I won't drive you home" thing is not going to wait until she agrees to make out with him in the car to be an asshole, I don't think.
This is where my confusion comes in. I don't know of anyone pulling that move off in my high school, but if, as the kids (here, teo) say it happens, I'm willing to believe it.
A guy who is going to pull the "fuck me or I won't drive you home" thing is not going to wait until she agrees to make out with him in the car to be an asshole.
The successful ones will. Some abusive guys are under control and capable of being very charming.
232's German father is probably somewhat in line with me. My mom told me I could ask her to make an appointment for me if I wanted birth control. I thought that was a bit intrusive, and went to Planned Parenthood all by my little lonesome. If my kid asked, I'd raise an eyebrow and say, "okay, then call the doctor and make an appointment."
Re. parents who host keg parties: yeah, that happened a lot at my high school too. I thought it was inappropriate then, too.
Well, back in my day, I've had a guy I was making out with tell me, after I told him I wasn't going to have sex with him, that I should be more careful because even though he was reasonable, I couldn't expect that everyone would be in the same situation. That would have read as an implicit threat if I hadn't been on the couch in the basement of my house, with help readily available. It's distinctly uncomfortable being told that you've just 'asked for it.'
And I recall it (241) being even more prevalent among sketchy college guys who fuck high school girls. There were a lot of these guys around when I was in high school.
238/9/41: Of course; I'm well aware that a lot of high school boys are jerks. But I just don't buy that giving a girl permission to have her boyfriend the jerk fuck her in her bedroom is going to *discourage* him from being a jerk; if anything, a jerky guy is going to interpret that as an indication that her parents aren't protective enough. At least, inasmuch as I assume that the kind of jerkiness that thinks it's okay to extort sex from girls usually goes hand-in-hand with the kind of jerkiness that thinks that girls are supposed to say no.
248: It's not about the guy's perception of her sluttiness, it's about her (and his) perception of her ability to enforce her wishes. It's much easier to say "No" when you want to if you aren't worrying about 'what happens if he won't listen?'.
I don't regret not having sex in high school (I'd say "for lack of trying", but I don't know that if I'd tried I would have) but I do regret not being more social than I was.
My high school discussed giving students access to condoms, but I don't know what they decided. There was support available for teen parents.
248 - My policy of discreetly getting busy when the parents are tactfully away doesn't solve the problem of high pressure boy behavior. (Or high pressure girl behavior, for that matter.)
Uh, there's a problem with high school girls pressuring guys into sex against their wishes? Really?
Ah, the memories. I had a male friend in high school who told a few of us that a woman had "raped" him. He was being hyperbolic, but not entirely. This was about fifteen years ago, and we still bring it up to make fun of him.
But was it an older woman, or a peer? If I were to count all the times in history a high school girl had forced sex with a male peer, would I even get into double digits?
And he didn't automatically want sex with her, just because he was a boy? And he wasn't happy with the situation because she pressured him into sex he didn't want? Thank god you're still making fun of him for that.
Look, re. the "girls are safer with someone within earshot" thing, yes; that's a reasonable reason, I suppose, to prefer a daughter to have sex in your home than in, say, a car. But something about that argument just really bothers me. At some point she's going to leave home and still be having sex and you won't be around to rescue her from pressurey guys. Is there going to be a rule that she can *only* have sex at home?
I know that date rape can happen to anyone, etc. etc. But I somehow can't help feeling that there's something wrong with assuming that a young woman who is having sex needs to have her parents around just in case.
She doesn't need to, but it couldn't hurt, and the only objection I'm hearing is that it would make the parents uncomfortable. Which, as I said above, doesn't seem like a very important issue here.
My poor daughter had to endure a WASP dad and European classmates: 'why can't I sleep over, everyone else is?' 'The answer is no, and we'll discuss it no further.'
This wouldn't work so well in NYC, I wouldn't think, but the Bay Area is a fine place for sneaking around. I certainly got to know Tilden Park quite well as a high schooler, and to this day I can navigate most of the more remote backroads of Sonoma County.
I don't think that's my only object, the discomfort. My objection to the sleepover thing isn't discomfort, exactly, either. I think it's just more that it violates a boundary that I think is healthy to maintain between parents and kids re. sexual activity.
Re. the potential rape scenario, yes: it's definitely something to think about (although LB's "asking for it" story took place in her parents' house, and presumably she didn't have permission to have her boyfriends spend the night). I, personally, prefer a sense of privacy around sex (no, really, I do) and the idea of having sex as a teenager with my folks in the house knowing that I was having sex would not have made me feel safer. It would have made me feel oddly violated. And while yes, rape can happen to anyone, it's nothing to do with what the girl does or doesn't do, etc., I also can't help feeling that a girl who feels confident in her own judgment and knows her parents have her back is less likely to find herself in situations where she's uncomfortable, and if she does, I hope that she'll be able to handle them, precisely because she *isn't* going to be under her parents' protection for the rest of her sexually active life.
I can see LB's point of view, but I'm really bothered by what I can't help seeing as a logical extension that sexually active young women should always be having sex somewhere where other people can hear them.
I, personally, prefer a sense of privacy around sex (no, really, I do) and the idea of having sex as a teenager with my folks in the house knowing that I was having sex would not have made me feel safer. It would have made me feel oddly violated.
Surely you can concede that these are not universal preferences.
But there's no need to acknowledge your daughter will be having sex just because you let them sleep over. Teen couples do sleep over without having sex, cf Becks. You can allow sleepovers and still keep your polite fictions, at least in Europe.
Whatever, there are too many unknown variables here. Different families are going to properly impose different rules. There's a pretty good chance any and all of the rules will work out fine. If your parents turn you into a neurotic mess, that's fine, too: you'll fit in with the rest of American society.
Tim is of course right. Sorry to be so annoying about this; I just get irritated at the bizarre restrictions American society puts on teenage sexuality.
271: I think that the House LB was referring to was her MIT Co-op house. I think she was saying that she felt safer on her own turf, in part, because it was her own turf, and in part because she knew that she had hosuemates who could kick the guy's ass if she needed them to.
This doesn't address what seems to me to be B's chief complaint: women shouldn't have to think that they will have reason to fear for their safety when they're having sex. They shouldn't need to be able to scream out for help, but I'm not sure that she's right. My own thoughts aren't well enough formed to argue.
Carmelo: they're letting him get all the points precisely because he's not LeBron or Wade, so no one's feathers are ruffled. He is a great scorer though, and always has been.
Also: I'd ask the mineshaft for dating advice, if you weren't a bunch of stupid foreigners. It should be a pretty useful kind of peergroup for the rest of ypou.
274: Sure. But I can only extrapolate for my own kid(s) based on my own experience (and of course my knowledge of them). At this point, it's all hypothetical. What I've said in the thread is what I honestly think at the moment, but I might well change my mind when PK is ten twelve years older.
280: I suppose I should also admit that part of my "what? Teenage girls don't need mommy around to save them" attitude is also based on my own highschool/college sex experiences, in which I was *always* playing the lead. The couple of guys who tried to push me didn't get very far. I know there are jerky boys out there, but there are also a lot a lot a lot of guys who are on the shy side and when I imagine PK or a theoretical daughter dating or having sex, I imagine it involving a guy who thinks of girls as autonomous people.
Carmelo: they're letting him get all the points precisely because he's not LeBron or Wade, so no one's feathers are ruffled. He is a great scorer though, and always has been.
Intriguing. I must admit that had not occurred to me. It's so hard to figure out how close or far he is from the LeBron/Wade (should really be LeBron----Wade, but I bow to consensus) level. Sometimes he just appears to be unstoppable; I keep forgetting how tall he is.
Ask out the religious ones. Seriously. The ones who've been trying (or pretending to try) to "save it for marriage" can be quite aggressive if you get them alone.
A fuller response to 295/296 is that I'm actually painfully shy in real life, so just talking to the interesting women is a step I take less than I probably should. I'm better about it than I used to be, but still not great. And even when I do pursue something, it never goes anywhere, which just contributes to the reluctance to bother. I'm sure it'll work out eventually, though.
My high-school life dodged this dilemma in a variety of ways, one of which was not having a private bedroom, so even if I had been having sex with my girlfriend, it would have been somewhere else than my house no matter what. A sleepover probably would have been fine with my parents because it would have been entirely obvious to everyone in the house what was or wasn't going on.
I'm a bit surprised how much this thread presumes that kids have a private space in their parents' house. I don't think it's as universal as is being presumed.
And even when I do pursue something, it never goes anywhere, which just contributes to the reluctance to bother. I'm sure it'll work out eventually, though.
Teo, at one time or another, we've all been you. (At least the guys.) It really does work out. It's hard to believe that there's not someone at school with you who has a massive crush on you right now. (Sleep with her.)
Wait, Teo, are you still in school? Dude, "talk to" in school is entirely different from "talk to" in, say, a bar. If there's a woman you're interested in in school, there's a very good chance you're going to see her more than once, so you can totally play it cool. If you share a class, sit near her and just make a witty remark about something that happens in class one day. If she laughs, and you do it again another day and she laughs, you can ask her out, and it'll make her happy. If you don't share a class, just say "hello." After a few "hello"s, you can chat, and it won't feel like chatting up a total stranger. You don't have to have "interesting" things to say.
How many seasons are we going to get out of Ron Artest? When the Maloofs fired Adelman, did they fire one of the few coaches Artest respected? Isn't Musselman supposed to be all hard-ass? How is that gonna work with Artest?
Where is this breaking down? You make your witty remarks, you get the little laughs, and then do you ask them out? Having asked them out, do you try to kiss them on the date?
Where is this breaking down? You make your witty remarks, you get the little laughs, and then do you ask them out? Having asked them out, do you try to kiss them on the date?
OK, don't listen to ogged, Teo. Unless you have the black BMW and the huge gold watch.
Isn't Musselman supposed to be all hard-ass? How is that gonna work with Artest?
Megan, it doesn't matter in the least who is coaching, because Ron Artest is fucking nuts. You should be hoping that he doesn't kill the ball boy one day because he got a bounce pass instead of a chest pass. I can't tell you how much time you'll get out of Artest, but I can tell you that he absolutely will undermine the team just when it seems y'all have a chance to do something good.
I don't quite understand what the problem was for Musselman and the Warriors. (Aside from it being the Warriors.) They actually played better (relative to other years since 1994) that year.
When the Maloofs fired Adelman, did they fire one of the few coaches Artest respected?
I still think firing Adelman was an enormous mistake. I don't know why he gets no respect, but he's probably in my top ten of current-ish NBA coaches. And I really don't get hiring Musselman, for roughly the resons you cite (though he, too, is a good coach).
I can't tell you how much time you'll get out of Artest, but I can tell you that he absolutely will undermine the team just when it seems y'all have a chance to do something good.
Don't listen to him, Megan. Artest has some emotional problems, but he might be the best value in basketball. And he's a good guy. We're not talking about Eddie Griffin, here. Artest watches his porn while parked.
I've just got all sorts of problems with the whole dating thing.
No you don't. You're 21, so unless your uncle Keith diddled you when you were a kid, you're just like the rest of us. The easiest way to find out if a woman wants you to kiss her is to ask. "Would it be ok if I kiss you?" Please try this the next time you're on a date.
Also, I really liked what one of Dan Savage's readers wrote in:
"You can't say the right thing to the wrong person or the wrong thing to the right person."
You will never be eloquent enough to persuade someone to have a crush on you, but thankfully, if she already has a crush on you, she'll think whatever you stammer out is adorable
Hey, he liked it. And it's not as if his parents didn't condone the whole thing. I sure miss those snacks his mom used to drop off on the bedside table.
339: Yeah, we had a whole thread about that. It just never seems so unambiguous at the moment. I shall note my suggestion from then, which I feel still holds.
I've pretty sure I've never been on a date until after I've started dating the person. Before that, it's just casual hanging out with ambiguous subtext.
353 - Yeah, until I started begging for dates on the internets I had never been on a date until after I started dating the person. I recently went on my first ever second date. That didn't go anywhere either.
354 - But a new school year is about to start, right? We didn't date either in undergrad, but I think I would have loved being asked out on a real date. So old school!
Seriously, I can't think of anyone that might be interested. And trust me, I've given this much thought.
Hmm. I'm really the last person who should be giving advice on this issue, but since ogged's unexpectedly trying to turn you into a fey poet, I'll just note that you don't need a woman to "like" like you, just to like you. That is, there are women out there in roughly your situation, and their circumstances are complicated by the extra layer of fucked-upness that seems to come with being a woman dealing with sex matters. So, essentially, they want to have sex with someone they can trust not to be a dick about it. And sometimes, that's really all they are looking for. Find those women; be that guy. You do, of course, have a moral obligation to share details here.
How the hell do you people keep up this pace? Trying to type up a complete sentence that is on topic and makes sense but isn't 20 comments behind the wave is like trying to get above 20th on a round of WEBoggle.
Thanks for the candid discussion of your (not inflexible) views, though. My daughter is 11 and I've been freaking out as we get closer to her debut in junior high school. I asked a friend whose daughter just married what advice he had for me and he said "none". "You must know something helpful to tell me?" Two words that I'm repeating to myself like a mantra: "be cool". Stop fretting it and typing out policies to deal with every possible situation because the stress, it's contagious; but a relaxed and confident attitude rubs off just as well.
That relatively temporary state of teenage rebellion aside, emulation is the more likely future for any of our kids. A proverb: "train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it."
355: when I say "ambiguous", I really mean that. It's hard to tell flirty from friendly (checklist of signals aside, the little doubting voice in the head is very persuasive), and the whole "unwanted advances" thing is something I don't want to touch with a 39 1/2 foot pole.
Tim's advice isn't functionally different from mine, he just wants you to be a soulless mercenary about it, while I'm all about the pretense of human interaction. Keep making those remarks in class; I'm positive that you're wrong that no one's interested; Josh is totally right about this.
Cheating is Drama, which is even worse than wrong.
But being respectfully asked, when you know whatever answer you give is completely fine, if someone can kiss you is nice and flattering. If you want him to kiss you, it is also romantic and exciting and thrilling. Asking straight out is good technique.
If you're too shy to ask straight out, try getting some engraved invitations printed up that say something like "The Honor of a Kiss is Requested". Then you can just fill in her name and hand it to her. Totally classy.
Teofile doesn't have to wade through this experience with his brain, and probably shouldn't.
I didn't think I had any advice, but since I'm going to be behind the curve on yet another comment, why not just keep typing. Just add one good thing at a time to your interactions. I'm still learning how to smile at attractive people, I more naturally cower and grimace. My prior exercise in interactions with pretty women was looking them in the eye - it's finally getting natural. The next one will be telling them how nice they look in a way that makes them feel good.
And I was you dude, with my cherry intact til my mid 20's.
Tim's advice isn't functionally different from mine, he just wants you to be a soulless mercenary about it, while I'm all about the pretense of human interaction.
My position is that, whether he knows it or not, a guy in teo's circumstance (a bit worried about jumping the first hurdle) is a soulless mercenary. As are similarly situated women.
The engraved invitations don't seem so strange if you already presented her with your card before calling upon her to request the honor of her presence for the evening.
369: See, now you're moving from "I don't think anyone's interested in me" to "there might be someone, but I wouldn't do anything about it", which is a different thing entirely.
Either way: this is something that cannot be taught except by experience. You will, at some point, have it made crystal-clear to you that there is someone interested in you, and then you will commence with the forehead-smacking.
Easier said than done. I'm not entirely sure how I would identify them. Any tips?
Well, the shy ones, for example. They're struggling with the same problem as you are; on top of which, they've got a little voice in their head telling them that they can't be proactive about it, because that would somehow invalidate the whole thing. Also, the ones who are outgoing, but slightly reticent when discussions turn to sex. But I think most women (people) feel this way at one point or another in college, just not throughout college.
367 - Tips on recognizing women with a crush on you:
She is willing to be alone with you.
She wants to tell you her news.
She asks you questions that anyone around could answer.
She keeps her shoulders/chest squared to you, no matter where you are in the room. (This works.)
She arranges to walk next to you in a crowd.
She doesn't get off the phone.
She touches your arm (actually, by this point she would probably sleep with you, but just ask for a kiss. Maybe that is just me.)
She listens to you talk at length about dorky things.
Her girlfriends giggle when you show up.
387: Okay, I'll take your word for it. My point, though, is that even if there is someone out there who likes me, that's unlikely to help me on a practical level.
137: ?
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:26 PM
re 124:
In general, I want to retire the "my parents did that, and I came out ok" argument. Whenever anyone says that about any issue, I always want to reply, "No, you did not come out ok. You are a neurotic, controlling bitch." or "...you are a spineless lap dog" or whatever.
The argument rests entirely on people's unwillingness to publically acknowledge how fucked up their friends are.
Posted by rob helpy-chalk | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:27 PM
Amen to 140.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:27 PM
I don't remember my parents' policy, aside from "be safe."
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:27 PM
I really think that the difference is that in the US, general public opinion is so set on this that even people who think it's OK for kids to have sex don't want to get caught openly admitting it. (I suppose "condoning" is something like "publicly declaring that something's OK".)
Kids already start having sex at 18 in college, and that really bothered people when it happened. Knocking the age down to 16 doesn't seem like such a big step.
One of the squicky things is that you normally don't get involved in the sex lives of other adults, whereas if a kid under your supervision is having sex, in some way you ARE involved. But it should be handleable the way roommate situations are handled.
One thing I told my son was that if he got a girl pregnant before he was 30 I'd kill him, married or not. It worked.
Posted by John Emerson | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:28 PM
The behavior described in 131 is absolutely nothing like the behavior of the high school kids I knew when I was in high school, which was much more in line with LB's point of view.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:28 PM
Pregnancy--again, I think most kids know they're supposed to be safe, but they aren't because it's more fun not to be safe.
Do you have a convincing different explanation for the great difference in teen pregancy rates in Europe and the US? (Well, they've also got better sex ed, but it's better for the same reasons, that it doesn't pretend that the audience isn't having sex.)
I don't buy the guilt thing or the fear thing, if the rule is, "I'm pretending it's not happening."
You can't explicitly set a rule that says "You can have sex, so long as I don't know about it," it would be absurd. The rule, from the kid's point of view, is "Sex is forbidden". Now maybe you're sensitive enough with the non-verbal communication to get across that it's not a real rule without saying it, but I doubt it. Which means that whatever your real attitude, your kid, if she's got any regard for what you think of her, is ashamed, and afraid of getting caught.
The rape thing--boy, maybe. I guess I just don't have a sense of how likely that is, and (as I've been assuming a male kid) how likely it is that my kid would do something like that.
Picture a female kid, and think whether you're happier with her negotiating her sexual boundaries in a cornfield, or in her bedroom with you in call.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:28 PM
This somehow reminds me of step/hen me/gs. Remember this?
Posted by mcmc | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:29 PM
140: The great thing about that argument is that it's been applied to all sides in this thread.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:29 PM
I think libertine parents may raise more conservative children
There may be some truth in that. My parents weren't libertine, as such.
They took a pretty strong line on responsibility -- if I fucked up, especially if I'd been warned it was a possibility, then I damn well had to fix it. No-one was going to bail me out. If I behaved like an arsehole, I'd be told in no uncertain terms that i was behaving like an arsehole. So, while I could do pretty much do whatever I wanted* I also knew that I had to deal with the end result.
The result of that was that I was probably the most responsible and sensible person I knew growing up. That's not to say I didn't do stupid stuff, but, relatively speaking, I didn't do that much stupid stuff.
* within reason and I was expected to show consideration for others. I could stay out late, for example, but I had to make sure they knew I was staying out late, etc.
Posted by nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:30 PM
140: But what's the alternative? I'm not sure I'm comfortable with looking to the Planning Commission for the best parental practices. Don't most people end up repeating the parenting model established by their parents, or varying in specific ways from it?
Baa!!!
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:30 PM
I think comparing US and European rates of teen pregnancy isn't really helpful, given that we have such a huge underclass that exists in basically a different world from the one in which this discussion is taking place.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:30 PM
You can't explicitly set a rule that says "You can have sex, so long as I don't know about it," it would be absurd.
But, for example, that's often the default rule about a lot of things, including sex and alcohol, for example.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:32 PM
148 pwned by 140.
Posted by nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:33 PM
I have no hard feelings about my parents, but in certain respects I tried to do things differently.
The more I think about it, the more I think that the local communities limit parents' options. It would be hard to be a European-style parent in and American small town. And even if I'd wanted to, I couldn't have imitated my parents' small-town style in the city.
Posted by John Emerson | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:33 PM
That's weird. I actually do have a really cool Auntie Carol. Though I was thinking the cool angle was advice/adult cover for escapades, without the parental squick. Not Ogged's bad teen movie scenario.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:35 PM
(Another aspect of libertinism turning me conservative: I was offered marijuana constantly growing up by my family, and never took it till I was 17 and had hellish psychosomatic menstrual cramps brought on by the sight of my near-death, post brain surgery Aunt Shirley. It was great for the menstrual cramps. To this day, I have never tried another illegal drug, despite my father telling me about (but not doing around me) nitrous, ecstasy, etc.)
Posted by Tia | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:35 PM
150: Well, okay. But I do find the argument that a kid who has to listen to her parents say "I expect you to be using condoms, and I think you should probably go to the gyno and talk about the pill," in the context of the fact that they admittedly know she's sexually active, is more likely to stay safe than one who's getting busy in the back seat of a minivan, very persuasive. The 'Europe' thing was just because SCMT wasn't admitting my logic.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:35 PM
re: 150
I think that's true. The UK has a massive rate of teen pregnancy and I'm sure that's connected to the same sort of 'huge underclass' and the particular values that operate there.
I'm not claiming that one way or the other is the way to avoid teen pregnancy or making a strongly consequentialist argument for one or the other.
It just seems like the right thing to do with people who are, depending on viewpoint, either adults or on the cusp of adulthood is to treat them as adults.
Posted by nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:36 PM
151: And it leads to stupid drinking behavior, and stupid sex behavior.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:36 PM
I'm starting to think I'm wrong. And, gawd help me, #144 is somehow doing the convincing.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:37 PM
Do they allow sleepovers in the underclass?
Posted by neil | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:37 PM
159: Luckily, you don't have kids yet, so you have plenty of time to revert.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:37 PM
I actually do have a really cool Auntie Carol
Set me up! It's pre-approved!
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:38 PM
In the underclass, sleepovers are mandatory.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:38 PM
150: There are so many other issues, but it doesn't seem implausible that the attitude to teen sex is one contributing factor, and the culture of the 'underclass' isn't wholly separate from that of middle class, so one can try to influence USian attitudes in general.
Posted by David Weman | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:39 PM
You can't explicitly set a rule that says "You can have sex, so long as I don't know about it," it would be absurd.
No it isn't. It is exactly what the situation calls for. It starts with the conversation about safe sex and the groundrules (like be kind and keep your grades up and get home by curfew so I don't have to worry that you are dead in a car crash.) and then everyone does their part.
The kid keeps the groundrules and does NOT sleep over at his girlfriend's house when the parents said not to. The parents do not ask what the kids did between the movie and curfew and everyone gets some of what they want and no one is squicked out. It totally works.
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:39 PM
Endemic Scottish violence has a whole complex array of root causes
I suspect the genes. And I say this as someone who has a fair amount of ancestry from the area. Are the Cornish this way too? As I recall the Swifts (at least the ones I count as ancestors) are from that area.
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:39 PM
162: That whole 'resetting the TiVo' thing didn't work out? Dude. You have my sympathies.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:39 PM
re: 160
Well, snarkily, getting pregnant lets you get your own council house which, in turn, enables you to have people sleep over as much as you like.*
* That's the view promulgated by the right-wing tabloid press. Unfortunately, once you take away the hysterical moral condemnation and the snobbery, it has a grain of truth in it.
Posted by nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:39 PM
156: What? If you're willing to admit that the comparisons aren't easy, I assume it's because we all suspect that the numbers look very different for people raised outside the underclass. And my suspicion is that the general rule in the outside-the-underclass set is closer to the one I was previously defending. Which makes me suspect that if we had actual numbers, the obviousness of your cause-effect claim would be less obvious.
But teo has convinced me. I still can't figure out why.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:41 PM
re: 166
Yeah, the genes for engineering and science genius, extreme violence, alcholism and haggis-consumption are closely grouped together on the same chromosome.
[This is where I'd add a smiley emoticon if they weren't banned ...]
Posted by nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:42 PM
Curses! Pwned again! I missed Becks' 100.
But as someone said above, the squickiness comes from being involved in someone else's sex life. People all around us are having sex all the time, and in most cases, I really prefer not to think about it. That is extra true for close relatives.
Posted by mcmc | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:45 PM
I was going to mention, kids have to grow up with their parents having sex in the house and that's not squicky at all. is it?
Posted by neil | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:46 PM
169: Seriously, I'd bet that there's an awful lot of middle-class teen pregnancy that gets aborted; fewer children than in the underclass, but a lot of unsafe sex.
165: Are you really saying that the parents should tell the kid, explicitly "You may have sex so long as we don't know about it"? Because I think that's awfully silly, if you're saying it, and I doubt you're saying it. I think you're suggesting that the parents should forbid sex, at least implicitly, and then wink at likely violations of the rule. Which could work out fine for everyone, but could also turn into guilt and fear for the teens who are violating the rule, and don't know that it's not serious. Because it's not like there aren't enough messages out there telling you you're a bad person for having sex.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:47 PM
OK, I'm slightly on board, but I feel the need for guidance. How far is this approach to be taken? I don't think I'd really care if my son or daughter were pretty wild for a while sexually--if you can do it, why not?--but, while I'm OK with the idea of my hypothetical son or daughter having a multi-some, I'm still finding it really, really hard to imagine OK'ing him or her taking multiple partners into her room under my watchful eye.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:52 PM
'You may have sex (without hassle from us) as long as you demonstrate that you are mature enough to keep to the (reasonable) rules that we set and show some consideration for everyone involved." That primarily means the kid's partner, but it also means the parents, who shouldn't have to know when their kid is having sex.
Sex isn't explicitly forbidden, because it doesn't have to be when everyone does their part.
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:55 PM
172: One doesn't mind a theoretical awareness of other people's sex lives. It's of the specific occasions one would prefer not to know.
Posted by mcmc | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:57 PM
Weren't any of you guys good kids who came to unspoken agreements with your parents? And the basis for that was respectfulness all around?
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:58 PM
Am I wrong that the girl's parents were cool with what's happening, but not the boy's? In that case, whatever offense is to the boy's parents.
And I think that that's why these things are so touchy, because two sets of parents are involved -- and their reputations, and their kids' reputations, and the siblings' reputations. And apparently the two sets disagree.
Posted by John Emerson | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 7:59 PM
'You may have sex (without hassle from us) as long as you demonstrate that you are mature enough to keep to the (reasonable) rules that we set and show some consideration for everyone involved." That primarily means the kid's partner, but it also means the parents, who shouldn't have to know when their kid is having sex.
"But Mom, the police keep on hassling us when we park anyplace, and I'm afraid to hide under the bleachers -- those guys from the lacrosse team hang out there and beat people up, and I keep getting ticks. Please, can we stay in my room if we're quiet?"
Once you've given explicit permission, I just don't see the benefit from requiring sneaking around that offsets the practical problems. (City girl here. Not a lot of safe places to screw other than in someone's bedroom.)
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:01 PM
That's why I don't think that an unspoken agreement is possible in this case. But I also think that an open, European-style arrangement would be better. It really just amount to granting one step toward adulthood while the kid still is at home.
Posted by John Emerson | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:01 PM
174: Oh, I think you're fine with setting some standard of prudery -- if threesomes, or significant promiscuity (new partner every night) freak you out, you can say 'not in my house'. I'm not trying to be perfectly consistent here.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:03 PM
177: Nope. Lots of kids aren't.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:04 PM
OK, how about this compromise: buy the kid one of those fuckmobile vans. Explain that it's in case he wants to go hunting or fishing, or engage in other healthful though potentially fatal activities such as rock-climbing or surfing.
Posted by John Emerson | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:06 PM
(I can't wait till baa discusses this one with his wife.)
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:08 PM
178 - the son is being openly disrespectful of his parents, who told him no sleepovers, in either direction. I hope he isn't also offending the girl's parents, but that isn't really the point.
179 - you don't have to give explicit permission. You shouldn't have to grant or withhold permission either way, because you aren't explicitly involved in their sex life.
"Can we stay in my room if we are quiet?" Well, your father and I will be going to the gym this evening, and we'll be back around 8:30. And if your grades stay high, I'll make a lot of noise when I get in from work in the afternoons. Of course it is a pretense, but the pretense itself has value.
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:08 PM
But suppose the parents' problem with the sleepover was simply that it was a sleepover? Just a "don't stay out all night" kind of thing. Rather than a "no members of the sex you're interested in alone in your room with you" kind of thing.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:08 PM
I'm still finding it really, really hard to imagine OK'ing him or her taking multiple partners into her room under my watchful eye.
Sounds like something out of Penthouse Forum. Accordingly, it's not a situation that ever needs to be considered in parenting, I think.
Posted by neil | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:09 PM
Weren't any of you guys good kids who came to unspoken agreements with your parents?
I was a good kid who didn't have sex in high school (not for lack of effort). Now I'm a bitter 21-year-old virgin. My feelings on this issue are rather strong.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:11 PM
186 - If the parent's problem is that it is a sleepover, then the kid is screwed for eight whole months until he goes away to college.
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:11 PM
Megan, those kinds of unspoken agreements are OK to the extent that they work, but you seem to think that they are the best solution. Why pretend?
I've answered that question already: public opinion. Parents want plausible deniability. It's not good in terms of the parent-child relationship.
Posted by John Emerson | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:12 PM
the son is being openly disrespectful of his parents,
True. I'm arguing that his parents are setting foolish rules, not that it's polite of him to disobey them.
You shouldn't have to grant or withhold permission either way, because you aren't explicitly involved in their sex life.
This is, I think, a dodge. As a teen, I had very strong opinions about what was permitted and what was forbidden, even in contexts where my parents had not explicitly stated the rules. (I wasn't always right, but I had strong beliefs.)(And if you're assuming that parents have the right to set rules for their teens, which I'm assuming you do -- we're just arguing about which they should be -- there is no third category other than forbidden and permitted. If it's not forbidden, it's permitted.) And a category of 'permitted, but must be kept secret' would have made no sense to me then, and makes no sense to me now. I would have either believed that I was violating a prohibition (guilt, fear) or not have understood the need for secrecy.
Of course it is a pretense, but the pretense itself has value.
What's the value?
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:15 PM
190 - Not public opinion. The parents want what everyone wants, which is not to know when other people are fucking. They might also like to cling to the idea that their kids, who are about to leave anyway, are still children. (Which they may simultaneously know is wrong.) It isn't only that they are trying to be Puritans in front of the neighbors.
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:17 PM
The parents want what everyone wants, which is not to know when other people are fucking.
That doesn't get you past normal roommate courtesy -- no screaming, slamming the bed into the way, etc.
They might also like to cling to the idea that their kids, who are about to leave anyway, are still children.
Eh. I can't see this as worth much.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:19 PM
I think I get what Megan is saying, because I had a similar thing with my parents. And #140 notwithstanding, I think we all build off the model of our own childhoods. I wonder if it isn't simply that, given a model that seemed to work, some of us wouldn't rather follow that model just because we understand it better. (There's some story tied, I think, to Achebe about a Nigerian farmer who's son is going off to the city for work. When asked whether he'd rather have his son stay, he says that yes, it would be his preference, though his son's opportunities are probably better in the city. But he knows farming and he could help his kid, and he doesn't know the city.)
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:23 PM
Megan, the roommate situation covers that. You learn not to bother your mind about what's happening in the next room. I think that the problem is that up till then you HAVE been intimately involved with your kids' lives, but you just have to learn to stop.
I don't think that the pretense that the kids are still children is something valuable to be preserved.
Tacit agreements are OK until they break down, but this one has broken down. Should the parents fight it? That's the question.
And it's not irrelevant that two sets of parents are involved, because that means that two sets of standards are involved. And that will be true of every couple relationship that the kid is ever in.
Posted by John Emerson | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:23 PM
191 - really? There was no other category of "Not yet forbidden and something I would really like to do"? 'Cause the penalties are less for that one.
And there was too. There was "tacitly permitted, as long as I don't force the issue".
The value is no one gets squicked out. You don't have to battle over rules when the real context is whether kids get to fuck. Family members can treat each other gently.
Maybe not so much value in clinging to the notion that your high schoolers are kids, but that doesn't mean people don't want to do it.
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:26 PM
I agree with virtually everything ttaM has written in this thread, especially about the ridiculousness of teenagers being treated like children. But then, I moved into my boyfriend's house at 16 (I was kind of like David in the David and Darlene relationship on Roseanne) and into my own apartment at 17.
Posted by dagger aleph | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:27 PM
Actually, it's all just jealousy of those young, beautiful kids and the fun they're having.
Posted by John Emerson | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:30 PM
Should the parents fight it? That's the question.
There's a lot of depends, like do the parents have enough power to win, but my call is that if that kid isn't mature enough to be in a respectful relationship with his (reasonable) parents, then he isn't mature enough to be sexually active. It comes back to basic consideration for me.
Also, family members have sex is ickier than adult roommates have sex. It calls for stronger measures.
And, SCMT, is probably right. It worked for me, so everyone should do that.
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:31 PM
196: You know, I think almost any set of rules can work fine if everyone involved is sensitive and loving and highly skilled and unambiguous non-verbal communication, and it sounds like that's how your family worked.
For the rest of us, I think there's a virtue in sacrificing a little emotional comfort for openness and unambiguity.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:33 PM
200: Nine years, baby, nine years!
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:35 PM
Lalalalala I can't hear you.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:37 PM
I'm kind of an anomaly in all of this in that I slept over at my boyfriend's house in high school a number of times (my parents didn't know) but we didn't have sex. (I actually bought into that "good Catholic schoolgirl saving myself until marriage" thing. And then I moved to New Orleans.)
I'm actually glad I waited until college to have sex but a lot of the reason why has to do with the fact that I was so much more relaxed and comfortable about the whole thing without having to worry about curfews or my parents. So my reasons are ones that would have been mitigated had I grown up in a more permissive household.
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:42 PM
194 - That was the kindest justification I came up with when I struggled with my Asian-Am ex's parents hating me for not being the same Asian-Am. It helped me hold my tongue.
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:47 PM
Megan's family actually sounds a lot like mine, and I think if either my sister or I had had sex in high school it would have turned out okay. My parents' official policy was "no sex in high school; after that we don't care" but I think they probably would have been okay with a tacit understanding that while there would be no sex under their roof they couldn't control what we did anywhere else. It never came up, though.
My bitterness is not directed at them, but at the whole structure of American attitudes toward sex.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:50 PM
Don't worry, Teo. Things get a lot cooler in college.
Oh wait.
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:54 PM
121: Well, sort of. Except that teenage sex isn't a purely personal decision, as much as I might think it should be. What the other kid's parents think matters; what their friends think matters; what happens at school if they get knocked up matters. The culture is that, as Ogged said, letting your kid's boy/girlfriend sleep over in their bed is considered extremely permissive.
145: Picture a female kid, and think whether you're happier with her negotiating her sexual boundaries in a cornfield, or in her bedroom with you in call.
In all honesty? I'd like to think that a daughter of mine is going to be comfortable saying "fuck no" wherever. I would certainly raise her to be able to do so, specifically because you can't be by her side forever. And I'm really not sure that she'd be more comfortable saying no with me in call; is a kid in a gray area situation really going to yell for mom? Or is she more likely to want to keep quiet and not argue than she would be if someone weren't there to overhear?
185: "Can we stay in my room if we are quiet?" Well, your father and I will be going to the gym this evening, and we'll be back around 8:30. And if your grades stay high, I'll make a lot of noise when I get in from work in the afternoons. Of course it is a pretense, but the pretense itself has value. This is, I think, exactly the right approach. We're talking about this as if the only opportunity teenagers ever have to have sex is at night--which is nonsense. I mostly had sex on days when I stayed home from school and invited my boyfriend over, or when my parents were out, and so forth.
I'm not going to say "yeah, go ahead and have sex." I'm going to say, *if* you have sex, be careful. And if the kid *is* having sex, and I've figured it out, and then the issue of, um, can we be alone in the house sometimes? comes up, then fine.
But yeah: for whatever reason, I'm more comfortable with the "Mom and Dad are going out tonight, we should be home around midnight" thing than the "yes, of course your girlfriend can spend the night in your bed" approach. Until, like I said, the kid has been out of the house for a little while and we've established a new sort of relationship where he now lives somewhere else, and comes home to visit.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:55 PM
(I'm sooooo sorry. I just couldn't resist. I ban myself.)
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:55 PM
Yeah, exactly. And the belief that it's discourteous to one's parents to not hide all evidence of sexual activity from them is both a symptom and a cause of the perpetuation of those attitudes.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 8:56 PM
In all honesty? I'd like to think that a daughter of mine is going to be comfortable saying "fuck no" wherever. I would certainly raise her to be able to do so, specifically because you can't be by her side forever. And I'm really not sure that she'd be more comfortable saying no with me in call; is a kid in a gray area situation really going to yell for mom? Or is she more likely to want to keep quiet and not argue than she would be if someone weren't there to overhear?
??????? The issue about worrying about being overheard only comes into play if she's worrying about getting caught. If she's not doing anything wrong, why would she worry about calling for help?
Seriously, in a certain amount of college awkward messing around, my confidence and comfort level was like night and day depending on whether I was in my own house, with thirty housemates nearby who were on my side of any disagreement, or on someone else's turf. (I sound like I've been terribly scarred by sexual violence, the way I keep bringing up rape. In fact, no. But I have been in situations where I was nervous, and I was a hell of a lot more nervous when I was depending on pure moral character and my ability to throw a punch, then when I had backup.)
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:03 PM
191: What Megan's calling a "pretense" has value precisely *because* sex is (1) private; (2) not your parent's business; (3) an adult activity, and therefore you shouldn't be asking permission. I don't agree that as a teen everything is either permitted or forbidden; I honestly think that there are a lot of things that fall into the "I've done my best to raise you to make decent decisions, and it's time you started deciding things on your own" realm. But one of the realities of making decisions is having to also negotiate other people's boundaries, one of which is that asking parents to give you permission to having your girl/boyfriend sleep over is, in this society, really a bit over the top.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:05 PM
I'm thinking this is one of those things that's going to seem like a bigger deal before it comes up than after. Having sex is going to be the kid's call as a practical matter, so it seems to make more sense to save whatever green stamps you have for "be careful" rather than wasting them on "don't" when that isn't going to work anyway. And even now, with a 10-year-old, I'm becoming a fan of "I'm not wild about that idea (and here's why), but I'm not going to forbid it if you decide that's what you want to do."
OTOH, my kid's room is small and right next to ours, so I doubt he's going to be getting any girls in there when we're around anyway.
Posted by DaveL | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:06 PM
I knew I was on my way to adulthood when I stopped asking my parents permission to have a snack after school.
Posted by standpipe b | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:09 PM
The issue about worrying about being overheard only comes into play if she's worrying about getting caught. If she's not doing anything wrong, why would she worry about calling for help?
Because having your mom walk in on you and your boyfriend negotiating sex is embarrassing?
I'm not presuming forcible rape, mind. I'm presuming, as you said, "negotiating boundaries." I wouldn't want my mother to overhear me arguing with Mr. B. about sex now, let alone when I was 17.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:10 PM
211: That seems right, but it's not clear from the Slate piece how permission became an issue. There's some screwed-up stuff about that situation--among other things, I would certainly tell my kid that he shouldn't be having anyone spend the night if the other parents weren't OK with it--but it's not clear that the thing started with "Mommy, is it OK if I fuck my girlfriend?"
BTW, Emily Yoffe is a huge improvement on Margo Howard, yes?
Posted by DaveL | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:11 PM
I'd like to think that a daughter of mine is going to be comfortable saying "fuck no" wherever.
Building on 210, I'm sure things are somewhat better now in the age of cellphones but all of the "fuck no" training in the world isn't going to help a girl who has been driven to the middle of nowhere thinking she was in for a makeout session and then told she isn't going home until she does X.
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:11 PM
I don't agree that as a teen everything is either permitted or forbidden; I honestly think that there are a lot of things that fall into the "I've done my best to raise you to make decent decisions, and it's time you started deciding things on your own" realm.
See, that's 'permitted'. Sometime around when I was 12 or so, my parents started giving me an allowance, because they'd done their best to raise me to make decent decisions, and it was time I started deciding how to spend money on my own. I was permitted to spend money without consulting them.
If you can successfully work out a clearly-understood-by-all shame-free agreement in which the kid is allowed to do what he wants with respect to sex once he reaches what you think of as an appropriate age so long as he doesn't unnecessarily make you aware of any sexual conduct, I suppose it's all right, but I think it's an awfully tricky standard to set for families that aren't very, very, fluent non-verbal communicators.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:11 PM
Don't worry, Teo. Things get a lot cooler in college.
Oh wait.
(I'm sooooo sorry. I just couldn't resist. I ban myself.)
Ha. I was going to make that joke if someone else didn't. And as someone who didn't do it until college, I feel his pain. Although his pain might be worse as I didn't really try in high school.
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:13 PM
If it weren't for aggressive women I'd probably still be as clueless as I was at 18. Arguably I still am.
Posted by DaveL | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:15 PM
I'm not presuming forcible rape, mind. I'm presuming, as you said, "negotiating boundaries."
"Donald, I said get your hand off my ass. Look, if I have to say it again I'm calling my dad in here." has a lot more force, even if the second sentence doesn't have to be said explicitly, than "I said I didn't want to have sex. Come on. Drive me home, please? It's cold out here, and I can't walk in these shoes."*
_____________________
*You knew it was going to be about the shoes, right?
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:17 PM
I can't believe you were out with someone named Donald. And I wouldn't be bringing a Donald home, either.
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:18 PM
212 is probably right. I think 209 is a bit of an oversimplification--is anyone here saying kids should "hide all evidence" of sexual activity? Aren't the prudes among us just saying that the goal is to retain a reasonable sense of discretion which might involve not coming out and announcing, "mom, dad, I'm fucking that person I went out with last week."
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:18 PM
I seriously don't think that one's ability to have mature negotiations with one's parents has any bearing on one's readiness to have sex. They're different sets of relationships. Clementine was consistently quite sulky at the dinner table; I was living there, and was responsible for making gracious conversation with her parents and relieving the silence. She was also having sex with her boyfriend and no ill came of it.
And "this society" isn't uniform. It doesn't say where these parents live, but I know of children who've actually been pressured by their parents into having sex. There are some decadent coastal enclaves in this country.
Posted by Tia | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:18 PM
Teo should bring a laptop and liveblog all dates in the upcoming semester. Who knows how useful realtime advice from the Mineshaft could be?
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:19 PM
221: I can't believe you were out with someone named Donald.
Why do you think I'm telling him to get his hand 'off' my ass?
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:20 PM
, I suppose it's all right, but I think it's an awfully tricky standard to set for families that aren't very, very, fluent non-verbal communicators.
LB's innate WASPiness comes to the fore. Yes, if you're married to John Kerry, you should probably make everything explicit. By the end of the speech, the kid will be too bored to have sex anyway.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:21 PM
Teo, are you bitter that you haven't olost virgin status, that you aren't having sex now, or that you could have had sex, and thus fun, in the past, but surrendered the chance?
Posted by Tia | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:21 PM
What Megan's calling a "pretense" has value precisely *because* sex is (1) private; (2) not your parent's business; (3) an adult activity, and therefore you shouldn't be asking permission.
Apparently there are places (the fabled continent of Yoorp) where these questions can be handled while the kid is living under the parents' roof. #3 sounds a bit Kafkaesque -- I'm refusing you permission because if you were an adult you wouldn't have to ask, but you're asking, so you're not an adult, so you aren't mature enough, so I'm saying no.
B. seems to accept my theory that public opinion (here as compared to Yoorp) is a major factor here.
I don't understand the enthusiasm for pretense and tacit arrangements and plausible parental deniability here. Especially in a specific case where these have broken down and an explicit response has to be made.
Posted by John Emerson | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:21 PM
222: Eh, we probably aren't that far apart in practice. I agree that 212 is right.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:21 PM
Yes, if you're married to John Kerry, you should probably make everything explicit. By the end of the speech, the kid will be too bored to have sex anyway.
I'm married to an earthy man of the people. I am John Kerry.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:22 PM
LB's innate WASPiness comes to the fore
whuh? The WASP stereotype is to never directly express anything. Indeed, this is true of the WASPiest people I know.
Posted by Tia | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:23 PM
On the alcohol thing. Actually I knew parents who did provide their kids with kegs. This is exactly how all of the post-highschool graduation parties worked. They also took away all of our keys. The one in Greenwich was really weird, because there was a tent with a catered buffet and a security gaurd/valet who took our keys. These were all giant slumber parties. One of them didn't let us in the house (less pleasant); the other was in such a large house that 60 kids didn't feel like a noticeable inconvenience.
My highschool had a formal policy against sex. At other schools, the kids probably managed to have sex in their dorm rooms. Everything at my school happened in the woods, the attic of teh theater and the music practice rooms. People were always making out in the music rooms; it really sucked if you actually needed to practice the piano at night.
There was a big discussion about whether condoms should be available on campus from the infirmary. I think that eventually a efw years after I left they did let them on campus. Before that day students bought them for their friends.
I remember having one conversation with my Dad about sex. (I haven't talked to my Mom about anything important since I was 7.) It was very abstract and theoretical; I think that we were discussing my school's policy. He thought that giving away free condoms would infantilize us--though I don't think he put it quite like that. Basically, he said that he didn't want to know about my sex life. He told me a story about a friend of his who had a very conservative, German father. She wanted to shock him a bit. So one year, when he asked her what she wanted for her birthday, she said, "a diaphragm." And he said, "Ah my dear, when you are old enough to need one, you will be old enough to get one for yourself." Is her father's position in line with B's?
Posted by Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:25 PM
Who knows how useful realtime advice from the Mineshaft could be?
I'm thinking "not very."
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:25 PM
A guy who is going to pull the "fuck me or I won't drive you home" thing is not going to wait until she agrees to make out with him in the car to be an asshole, I don't think.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:26 PM
The WASP stereotype is to never directly express anything.
I thought it was never to express anything.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:26 PM
227: All three.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:26 PM
Spoilsport.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:27 PM
A guy who is going to pull the "fuck me or I won't drive you home" thing is not going to wait until she agrees to make out with him in the car to be an asshole, I don't think.
This is where my confusion comes in. I don't know of anyone pulling that move off in my high school, but if, as the kids (here, teo) say it happens, I'm willing to believe it.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:28 PM
A guy who is going to pull the "fuck me or I won't drive you home" thing is not going to wait until she agrees to make out with him in the car to be an asshole.
The successful ones will. Some abusive guys are under control and capable of being very charming.
Posted by John Emerson | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:29 PM
Lizardbreath was against sleepovers before she was for them.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:29 PM
238: I don't know of anyone doing that particular move, but that's the sort of attitude toward women I remember a lot of high school guys having.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:30 PM
232's German father is probably somewhat in line with me. My mom told me I could ask her to make an appointment for me if I wanted birth control. I thought that was a bit intrusive, and went to Planned Parenthood all by my little lonesome. If my kid asked, I'd raise an eyebrow and say, "okay, then call the doctor and make an appointment."
Re. parents who host keg parties: yeah, that happened a lot at my high school too. I thought it was inappropriate then, too.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:32 PM
Well, back in my day, I've had a guy I was making out with tell me, after I told him I wasn't going to have sex with him, that I should be more careful because even though he was reasonable, I couldn't expect that everyone would be in the same situation. That would have read as an implicit threat if I hadn't been on the couch in the basement of my house, with help readily available. It's distinctly uncomfortable being told that you've just 'asked for it.'
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:32 PM
And I recall it (241) being even more prevalent among sketchy college guys who fuck high school girls. There were a lot of these guys around when I was in high school.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:33 PM
244: Yep.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:33 PM
You would say that, wouldn't you?
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:34 PM
Fuck, now I look like an idiot. I appreciate your support, though.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:35 PM
238/9/41: Of course; I'm well aware that a lot of high school boys are jerks. But I just don't buy that giving a girl permission to have her boyfriend the jerk fuck her in her bedroom is going to *discourage* him from being a jerk; if anything, a jerky guy is going to interpret that as an indication that her parents aren't protective enough. At least, inasmuch as I assume that the kind of jerkiness that thinks it's okay to extort sex from girls usually goes hand-in-hand with the kind of jerkiness that thinks that girls are supposed to say no.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:36 PM
I will use italics for (perhaps excessive) emphasis in every comment I make.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:37 PM
248: Who's saying it will?
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:39 PM
248: It's not about the guy's perception of her sluttiness, it's about her (and his) perception of her ability to enforce her wishes. It's much easier to say "No" when you want to if you aren't worrying about 'what happens if he won't listen?'.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:40 PM
I don't regret not having sex in high school (I'd say "for lack of trying", but I don't know that if I'd tried I would have) but I do regret not being more social than I was.
My high school discussed giving students access to condoms, but I don't know what they decided. There was support available for teen parents.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:40 PM
248 - My policy of discreetly getting busy when the parents are tactfully away doesn't solve the problem of high pressure boy behavior. (Or high pressure girl behavior, for that matter.)
249 - Me too!
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:44 PM
problem of high pressure boy behavior. (Or high pressure girl behavior, for that matter.)
Uh, there's a problem with high school girls pressuring guys into sex against their wishes? Really?
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:50 PM
"Dear Penthouse:
I never thought this would happen to me..."
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:51 PM
But seriously, it's been known to happen.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:51 PM
Uh, there's a problem with high school girls pressuring guys into sex against their wishes? Really?
Ah, the memories. I had a male friend in high school who told a few of us that a woman had "raped" him. He was being hyperbolic, but not entirely. This was about fifteen years ago, and we still bring it up to make fun of him.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:52 PM
#257
But was it an older woman, or a peer? If I were to count all the times in history a high school girl had forced sex with a male peer, would I even get into double digits?
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 9:56 PM
It was a peer.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:03 PM
You are right to mock him.
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:05 PM
And he didn't automatically want sex with her, just because he was a boy? And he wasn't happy with the situation because she pressured him into sex he didn't want? Thank god you're still making fun of him for that.
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:06 PM
And he didn't automatically want sex with her, just because he was a boy?
Of course he did, didn't you take biology? She just wasn't cool enough for him to admit that he was perfectly happy to get it on with her.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:12 PM
It's called tough love.
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:13 PM
I heart Megan.
Look, re. the "girls are safer with someone within earshot" thing, yes; that's a reasonable reason, I suppose, to prefer a daughter to have sex in your home than in, say, a car. But something about that argument just really bothers me. At some point she's going to leave home and still be having sex and you won't be around to rescue her from pressurey guys. Is there going to be a rule that she can *only* have sex at home?
I know that date rape can happen to anyone, etc. etc. But I somehow can't help feeling that there's something wrong with assuming that a young woman who is having sex needs to have her parents around just in case.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:14 PM
I mean the mocking.
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:14 PM
She doesn't need to, but it couldn't hurt, and the only objection I'm hearing is that it would make the parents uncomfortable. Which, as I said above, doesn't seem like a very important issue here.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:16 PM
People, Henley solved the problem, we can talk about basketball now.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:20 PM
We can, but why would we?
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:22 PM
Why? The Kings aren't playing.
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:22 PM
My poor daughter had to endure a WASP dad and European classmates: 'why can't I sleep over, everyone else is?' 'The answer is no, and we'll discuss it no further.'
This wouldn't work so well in NYC, I wouldn't think, but the Bay Area is a fine place for sneaking around. I certainly got to know Tilden Park quite well as a high schooler, and to this day I can navigate most of the more remote backroads of Sonoma County.
Posted by CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:24 PM
I don't think that's my only object, the discomfort. My objection to the sleepover thing isn't discomfort, exactly, either. I think it's just more that it violates a boundary that I think is healthy to maintain between parents and kids re. sexual activity.
Re. the potential rape scenario, yes: it's definitely something to think about (although LB's "asking for it" story took place in her parents' house, and presumably she didn't have permission to have her boyfriends spend the night). I, personally, prefer a sense of privacy around sex (no, really, I do) and the idea of having sex as a teenager with my folks in the house knowing that I was having sex would not have made me feel safer. It would have made me feel oddly violated. And while yes, rape can happen to anyone, it's nothing to do with what the girl does or doesn't do, etc., I also can't help feeling that a girl who feels confident in her own judgment and knows her parents have her back is less likely to find herself in situations where she's uncomfortable, and if she does, I hope that she'll be able to handle them, precisely because she *isn't* going to be under her parents' protection for the rest of her sexually active life.
I can see LB's point of view, but I'm really bothered by what I can't help seeing as a logical extension that sexually active young women should always be having sex somewhere where other people can hear them.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:24 PM
I certainly got to know Tilden Park quite well as a high schooler
Hey, did you ever go ice-blocking?
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:26 PM
272 -- In Orinda, yes. Never in Tilden. One more reason to invent a time machine.
Posted by CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:30 PM
I, personally, prefer a sense of privacy around sex (no, really, I do) and the idea of having sex as a teenager with my folks in the house knowing that I was having sex would not have made me feel safer. It would have made me feel oddly violated.
Surely you can concede that these are not universal preferences.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:31 PM
But there's no need to acknowledge your daughter will be having sex just because you let them sleep over. Teen couples do sleep over without having sex, cf Becks. You can allow sleepovers and still keep your polite fictions, at least in Europe.
Posted by David Weman | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:33 PM
Whatever, there are too many unknown variables here. Different families are going to properly impose different rules. There's a pretty good chance any and all of the rules will work out fine. If your parents turn you into a neurotic mess, that's fine, too: you'll fit in with the rest of American society.
Carmelo Anthony: coming of age, or an aberration?
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:34 PM
Tim is of course right. Sorry to be so annoying about this; I just get irritated at the bizarre restrictions American society puts on teenage sexuality.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:38 PM
Let's move on then.
DaveL: 'BTW, Emily Yoffe is a huge improvement on Margo Howard, yes?'
Yes, see 9.
Do you agree with 9?
Posted by David Weman | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:41 PM
#275
It's also possible they're spending the night riding around on unicorns and sewing shoes with elves. I need my fictions a bit more plausible.
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:41 PM
271: I think that the House LB was referring to was her MIT Co-op house. I think she was saying that she felt safer on her own turf, in part, because it was her own turf, and in part because she knew that she had hosuemates who could kick the guy's ass if she needed them to.
This doesn't address what seems to me to be B's chief complaint: women shouldn't have to think that they will have reason to fear for their safety when they're having sex. They shouldn't need to be able to scream out for help, but I'm not sure that she's right. My own thoughts aren't well enough formed to argue.
Posted by Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:42 PM
Carmelo: they're letting him get all the points precisely because he's not LeBron or Wade, so no one's feathers are ruffled. He is a great scorer though, and always has been.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:43 PM
Also: I'd ask the mineshaft for dating advice, if you weren't a bunch of stupid foreigners. It should be a pretty useful kind of peergroup for the rest of ypou.
Posted by David Weman | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:45 PM
274: Sure. But I can only extrapolate for my own kid(s) based on my own experience (and of course my knowledge of them). At this point, it's all hypothetical. What I've said in the thread is what I honestly think at the moment, but I might well change my mind when PK is
tentwelve years older.Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:45 PM
Hey, they've found a scythian mummy in Mongolia. That's pretty awesome.
Posted by David Weman | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:46 PM
Damn basketball. If I wanted to watch a sport where the foreigners kick our asses I'd turn on soccer.
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:46 PM
280: I suppose I should also admit that part of my "what? Teenage girls don't need mommy around to save them" attitude is also based on my own highschool/college sex experiences, in which I was *always* playing the lead. The couple of guys who tried to push me didn't get very far. I know there are jerky boys out there, but there are also a lot a lot a lot of guys who are on the shy side and when I imagine PK or a theoretical daughter dating or having sex, I imagine it involving a guy who thinks of girls as autonomous people.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:50 PM
284: Link?
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:50 PM
Carmelo: they're letting him get all the points precisely because he's not LeBron or Wade, so no one's feathers are ruffled. He is a great scorer though, and always has been.
Intriguing. I must admit that had not occurred to me. It's so hard to figure out how close or far he is from the LeBron/Wade (should really be LeBron----Wade, but I bow to consensus) level. Sometimes he just appears to be unstoppable; I keep forgetting how tall he is.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:51 PM
when I imagine PK . . . having sex, I imagine it involving a guy . . . .
Interesting.
Posted by M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:53 PM
286: See, where were all the girls like that when I was in high school? (Or college, for that matter.) This mystifies me to no end.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:53 PM
289: Newsflash: PK is a boy. If he's having sex, there's a guy involved.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:56 PM
290: Have you tried wearing Axe cologne? The advertising claims it works wonders for one's sex life.
Posted by M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:56 PM
Link
Posted by David Weman | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:56 PM
#290
Ask out the religious ones. Seriously. The ones who've been trying (or pretending to try) to "save it for marriage" can be quite aggressive if you get them alone.
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:57 PM
290: Based on my impression of you, Teo, I have no idea why you're not getting laid on a regular basis.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:57 PM
Teo, seriously, you ought not worry about it. Talk to women who seem interesting, and the sex will come.
Despite what you're about to hear from the rest of the crew, I am just the guy to take advice from in this matter.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:57 PM
Ogged's right, actually.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:58 PM
291: second "a" s/b "at least one".
Posted by M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:58 PM
294 is actually pretty true.
Posted by M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 10:59 PM
293: Thanks. Very interesting.
294: I hadn't thought of that. There could be some practical problems.
295: Thanks.
296: Don't worry, I'm not actually very concerned about it anymore.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:01 PM
Teo: I've heard you should give them wine.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:03 PM
It totally doesn't bother me. I, like, never think about it. Whatever. I'm fine with it now.
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:04 PM
Megan, don't talk to guys who seem interesting; they're neurotic. Chat up the shy ones, jump them, and the sex will come.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:07 PM
Anyone else looking for some guidance?
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:08 PM
Shy != interesting?
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:09 PM
A fuller response to 295/296 is that I'm actually painfully shy in real life, so just talking to the interesting women is a step I take less than I probably should. I'm better about it than I used to be, but still not great. And even when I do pursue something, it never goes anywhere, which just contributes to the reluctance to bother. I'm sure it'll work out eventually, though.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:09 PM
Are you the person to take advice from in the matter of interesting neurotic men?
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:09 PM
303 is excellent advice.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:10 PM
Note that ogged said "seem" interesting.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:11 PM
My high-school life dodged this dilemma in a variety of ways, one of which was not having a private bedroom, so even if I had been having sex with my girlfriend, it would have been somewhere else than my house no matter what. A sleepover probably would have been fine with my parents because it would have been entirely obvious to everyone in the house what was or wasn't going on.
I'm a bit surprised how much this thread presumes that kids have a private space in their parents' house. I don't think it's as universal as is being presumed.
Posted by Nathan Williams | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:11 PM
Based on my impression of you, Teo, I have no idea why you're not getting laid on a regular basis.
I'm guessing shyness. Ogged's advice of "Talk to women who seem interesting" is good, but harder for some than others.
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:11 PM
311 gets it exactly right.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:13 PM
Aha! I had not yet seen 306 when I posted.
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:13 PM
307: No, but, through intense introspection, he knows all about neurotic who seem interesting.
Posted by M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:13 PM
The comments sure are flying tonight, aren't they?
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:13 PM
And even when I do pursue something, it never goes anywhere, which just contributes to the reluctance to bother. I'm sure it'll work out eventually, though.
Teo, at one time or another, we've all been you. (At least the guys.) It really does work out. It's hard to believe that there's not someone at school with you who has a massive crush on you right now. (Sleep with her.)
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:14 PM
Megan, I'm here to answer all your questions.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:15 PM
Hard to believe, but that does indeed seem to be the case.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:15 PM
Crap. Add "men" to 314.
Not to mention kind of pwnd by 309.
Posted by M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:15 PM
Wait, Teo, are you still in school? Dude, "talk to" in school is entirely different from "talk to" in, say, a bar. If there's a woman you're interested in in school, there's a very good chance you're going to see her more than once, so you can totally play it cool. If you share a class, sit near her and just make a witty remark about something that happens in class one day. If she laughs, and you do it again another day and she laughs, you can ask her out, and it'll make her happy. If you don't share a class, just say "hello." After a few "hello"s, you can chat, and it won't feel like chatting up a total stranger. You don't have to have "interesting" things to say.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:18 PM
Hard to believe, but that does indeed seem to be the case.
It's time to get a bike.
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:20 PM
318: That's what you think now. Get back to us in a few years; I strongly suspect you'll be smacking yourself in the forehead.
Posted by Josh | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:20 PM
I am indeed still in school. I have done what you suggest rather a lot, to no avail. At this point I'm running out of women.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:21 PM
317 -
How many seasons are we going to get out of Ron Artest? When the Maloofs fired Adelman, did they fire one of the few coaches Artest respected? Isn't Musselman supposed to be all hard-ass? How is that gonna work with Artest?
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:22 PM
Where is this breaking down? You make your witty remarks, you get the little laughs, and then do you ask them out? Having asked them out, do you try to kiss them on the date?
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:22 PM
Where is this breaking down? You make your witty remarks, you get the little laughs, and then do you ask them out? Having asked them out, do you try to kiss them on the date?
OK, don't listen to ogged, Teo. Unless you have the black BMW and the huge gold watch.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:25 PM
Isn't Musselman supposed to be all hard-ass? How is that gonna work with Artest?
Megan, it doesn't matter in the least who is coaching, because Ron Artest is fucking nuts. You should be hoping that he doesn't kill the ball boy one day because he got a bounce pass instead of a chest pass. I can't tell you how much time you'll get out of Artest, but I can tell you that he absolutely will undermine the team just when it seems y'all have a chance to do something good.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:26 PM
What the fuck is wrong with my 325 Timbot? He's in college.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:27 PM
I don't quite understand what the problem was for Musselman and the Warriors. (Aside from it being the Warriors.) They actually played better (relative to other years since 1994) that year.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:28 PM
When the Maloofs fired Adelman, did they fire one of the few coaches Artest respected?
I still think firing Adelman was an enormous mistake. I don't know why he gets no respect, but he's probably in my top ten of current-ish NBA coaches. And I really don't get hiring Musselman, for roughly the resons you cite (though he, too, is a good coach).
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:28 PM
325: No, the dates tend to go okay until the point (sometimes months later) when it comes time to clarify the "is this a date?" issue. Or this.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:28 PM
We're used to that from the Webber era.
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:29 PM
Hey, teo, I hear having a blog totally gets you all the hottt chix. You could try that!
Posted by M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:29 PM
Come to think of it, doesn't P.J. Carlesimo usually follow Adelman? Imagine him coaching Artest.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:29 PM
Having asked them out, do you try to kiss them on the date?
This step is typically my problem. It's tricky. I rarely make a move, actually, it's usually up to the other person.
Posted by Matt F | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:30 PM
335: Me too. Really, I've just got all sorts of problems with the whole dating thing.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:31 PM
I can't tell you how much time you'll get out of Artest, but I can tell you that he absolutely will undermine the team just when it seems y'all have a chance to do something good.
Don't listen to him, Megan. Artest has some emotional problems, but he might be the best value in basketball. And he's a good guy. We're not talking about Eddie Griffin, here. Artest watches his porn while parked.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:31 PM
No, the dates tend to go okay until the point (sometimes months later) when it comes time to clarify the "is this a date?"
Motorcycle my man. No joke. With a decent bike, boots, and a non douchey jacket, shy becomes mysterious.
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:33 PM
Artest sure is pretty to watch. I really like how he anticipates. Maybe the overwhelming worship he'll get here in Sac will keep him happy?
335-336
If her torso orients towards you as you change locations, she is interested in you. If she touches your arm, she wants you to kiss her.
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:35 PM
I've just got all sorts of problems with the whole dating thing.
No you don't. You're 21, so unless your uncle Keith diddled you when you were a kid, you're just like the rest of us. The easiest way to find out if a woman wants you to kiss her is to ask. "Would it be ok if I kiss you?" Please try this the next time you're on a date.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:37 PM
What the fuck is wrong with my 325 Timbot? He's in college.
1. I dunno. Though we didn't "date" at my college, I guess that's basically what I did. But somehow you've made it sound sort of Euro-trashy.
2. Like most advice, it's not specific enough.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:37 PM
Also, I really liked what one of Dan Savage's readers wrote in:
"You can't say the right thing to the wrong person or the wrong thing to the right person."
You will never be eloquent enough to persuade someone to have a crush on you, but thankfully, if she already has a crush on you, she'll think whatever you stammer out is adorable
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:40 PM
Hey, he liked it. And it's not as if his parents didn't condone the whole thing. I sure miss those snacks his mom used to drop off on the bedside table.
Posted by Uncle Keith | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:41 PM
we didn't "date" at my college
We don't here either, really. That's what makes it so weird.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:42 PM
339: Yeah, we had a whole thread about that. It just never seems so unambiguous at the moment. I shall note my suggestion from then, which I feel still holds.
Posted by Matt F | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:42 PM
342 gets at the real issue. My problem is not that I'm fucking up the dates, it's that the girls don't actually like me.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:43 PM
As hard as that is to believe.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:43 PM
teo, have you tried adding more salt?
Posted by M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:43 PM
Three squares not agreeing with you, Keith?
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:43 PM
I'll square your circle, ogged.
Posted by Uncle Keith | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:45 PM
345 contains much wisdom. I wish women would hit on me more often.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:46 PM
Teo, you actually seem to be doing better than I did when I was in college. Are you sure that no one's interested in you? 322 may be accurate.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:46 PM
Please try this the next time you're on a date.
I've pretty sure I've never been on a date until after I've started dating the person. Before that, it's just casual hanging out with ambiguous subtext.
Posted by Matt F | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:46 PM
Seriously, I can't think of anyone that might be interested. And trust me, I've given this much thought.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:47 PM
Teo, Matt F, the next time you're feeling that "ambiguous subtext" tingle, will you ask the woman if you can kiss her, please?
(If you guys smell bad, all this advice is void.)
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:52 PM
ogged, can I kiss you?
Posted by Uncle Keith | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:54 PM
353 - Yeah, until I started begging for dates on the internets I had never been on a date until after I started dating the person. I recently went on my first ever second date. That didn't go anywhere either.
354 - But a new school year is about to start, right? We didn't date either in undergrad, but I think I would have loved being asked out on a real date. So old school!
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:55 PM
Keith, I'm 33, stay in character.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:56 PM
But a new school year is about to start, right?
Started today. All hope is not lost by any means.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:57 PM
I've changed, ogged. For you!
Posted by Uncle Keith | Link to this comment | 08-24-06 11:58 PM
33?
I'm dubious.
Posted by M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:00 AM
Uncle Keith and Aunt Carol might have some interesting things to say to each other.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:01 AM
Dubious, how?
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:03 AM
Seriously, I can't think of anyone that might be interested. And trust me, I've given this much thought.
Hmm. I'm really the last person who should be giving advice on this issue, but since ogged's unexpectedly trying to turn you into a fey poet, I'll just note that you don't need a woman to "like" like you, just to like you. That is, there are women out there in roughly your situation, and their circumstances are complicated by the extra layer of fucked-upness that seems to come with being a woman dealing with sex matters. So, essentially, they want to have sex with someone they can trust not to be a dick about it. And sometimes, that's really all they are looking for. Find those women; be that guy. You do, of course, have a moral obligation to share details here.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:04 AM
How the hell do you people keep up this pace? Trying to type up a complete sentence that is on topic and makes sense but isn't 20 comments behind the wave is like trying to get above 20th on a round of WEBoggle.
Thanks for the candid discussion of your (not inflexible) views, though. My daughter is 11 and I've been freaking out as we get closer to her debut in junior high school. I asked a friend whose daughter just married what advice he had for me and he said "none". "You must know something helpful to tell me?" Two words that I'm repeating to myself like a mantra: "be cool". Stop fretting it and typing out policies to deal with every possible situation because the stress, it's contagious; but a relaxed and confident attitude rubs off just as well.
That relatively temporary state of teenage rebellion aside, emulation is the more likely future for any of our kids. A proverb: "train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it."
Posted by ahab | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:04 AM
Seriously, I can't think of anyone that might be interested. And trust me, I've given this much thought.
I stand by 322. This is one of those things you just can't see except in hindsight.
Posted by Josh | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:05 AM
Find those women; be that guy.
Easier said than done. I'm not entirely sure how I would identify them. Any tips?
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:06 AM
355: when I say "ambiguous", I really mean that. It's hard to tell flirty from friendly (checklist of signals aside, the little doubting voice in the head is very persuasive), and the whole "unwanted advances" thing is something I don't want to touch with a 39 1/2 foot pole.
Posted by Matt F | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:07 AM
366: Okay, maybe, but all the most probable candidates already have boyfriends.
(Cheating is Wrong.)
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:08 AM
Tim's advice isn't functionally different from mine, he just wants you to be a soulless mercenary about it, while I'm all about the pretense of human interaction. Keep making those remarks in class; I'm positive that you're wrong that no one's interested; Josh is totally right about this.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:09 AM
the whole "unwanted advances" thing is something I don't want to touch with a 39 1/2 foot pole
Agreed. That's why you ask. Anyone who is willing to be alone with you won't be freaked out, even if she doesn't want to kiss you.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:11 AM
Dubious, how?
I thought you were mid to late 30s? Hmmm, must be projecting.
I'm all about the pretense of human interaction.
It's that taraf thing again, isn't it? Why can't you and your people just be honest and straightforward, ogged?
Posted by M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:13 AM
Cheating is Drama, which is even worse than wrong.
But being respectfully asked, when you know whatever answer you give is completely fine, if someone can kiss you is nice and flattering. If you want him to kiss you, it is also romantic and exciting and thrilling. Asking straight out is good technique.
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:14 AM
Asking straight out is good technique.
It didn't work out so well for me.
Posted by Uncle Keith | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:15 AM
371: Huh. Hadn't thought about it that way. Interesting.
Posted by Matt F | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:16 AM
If you're too shy to ask straight out, try getting some engraved invitations printed up that say something like "The Honor of a Kiss is Requested". Then you can just fill in her name and hand it to her. Totally classy.
Posted by M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:17 AM
Teofile doesn't have to wade through this experience with his brain, and probably shouldn't.
I didn't think I had any advice, but since I'm going to be behind the curve on yet another comment, why not just keep typing. Just add one good thing at a time to your interactions. I'm still learning how to smile at attractive people, I more naturally cower and grimace. My prior exercise in interactions with pretty women was looking them in the eye - it's finally getting natural. The next one will be telling them how nice they look in a way that makes them feel good.
And I was you dude, with my cherry intact til my mid 20's.
Posted by ahab | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:19 AM
Tim's advice isn't functionally different from mine, he just wants you to be a soulless mercenary about it, while I'm all about the pretense of human interaction.
My position is that, whether he knows it or not, a guy in teo's circumstance (a bit worried about jumping the first hurdle) is a soulless mercenary. As are similarly situated women.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:19 AM
In light of 376, y'all should know that Millsy is also Uncle Keith, which I knew even before I checked the IP.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:20 AM
The engraved invitations don't seem so strange if you already presented her with your card before calling upon her to request the honor of her presence for the evening.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:21 AM
379: What happened to keeping such things implicit?
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:22 AM
How is that "in light of 376"?
And truly, there's no getting anything past you, ogged.
Posted by M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:23 AM
And not that I really care, but what's the big deal, oggsy? I wasn't pretending to be another known commenter. Did I violate some other protocol?
Like I said, I don't care, I just don't want to be pissing you off unless it's specifically intended.
Posted by M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:25 AM
I want an explanation too.
Posted by Uncle Keith | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:26 AM
I'm not pissed, I just didn't want our young men taking dating advice from a convicted pedophile.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:28 AM
I TOLD you I've CHANGED!
Now come over here and give me some sugar.
Posted by Uncle Keith | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:30 AM
369: See, now you're moving from "I don't think anyone's interested in me" to "there might be someone, but I wouldn't do anything about it", which is a different thing entirely.
Either way: this is something that cannot be taught except by experience. You will, at some point, have it made crystal-clear to you that there is someone interested in you, and then you will commence with the forehead-smacking.
Posted by Anonymous | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:30 AM
Easier said than done. I'm not entirely sure how I would identify them. Any tips?
Well, the shy ones, for example. They're struggling with the same problem as you are; on top of which, they've got a little voice in their head telling them that they can't be proactive about it, because that would somehow invalidate the whole thing. Also, the ones who are outgoing, but slightly reticent when discussions turn to sex. But I think most women (people) feel this way at one point or another in college, just not throughout college.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:31 AM
367 - Tips on recognizing women with a crush on you:
She is willing to be alone with you.
She wants to tell you her news.
She asks you questions that anyone around could answer.
She keeps her shoulders/chest squared to you, no matter where you are in the room. (This works.)
She arranges to walk next to you in a crowd.
She doesn't get off the phone.
She touches your arm (actually, by this point she would probably sleep with you, but just ask for a kiss. Maybe that is just me.)
She listens to you talk at length about dorky things.
Her girlfriends giggle when you show up.
Posted by Megan | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:31 AM
Her girlfriends giggle when you show up.
Just hope they don't start pointing at you as they giggle, though.
Posted by M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 08-25-06 12:34 AM
387: Okay, I'll take your word for it. My point, though, is that even if there is someone out there who likes me, that's unlikely to help me on a practical level.
Posted by