Yeah, I'm with you. A woman who takes her education "seriously" should be done with a phd before she's 30, and have plenty of childbearing time. Oh yeah, and one forgets that it is possible to have both a career AND children. My father did it. :)

I know you are generalizing and have no clue that I exist, nor are you aware of the circumstances of my life, but your statement is offensive to me. By the time I get my Ph.D. I will be 38 or 40 and it's not because I didn't take my education seriously, it's because my father disqualified me from getting financial aid until I was 24 by claiming me as a dependent on his taxes (even though I was not). After surviving a life of abuse at the hands of those who are supposed to love and protect you, it's a huge feat to overcome poverty, sexual abuse, and shame -- to become functional and to work very hard every day to support yourself and receive an education. There are more people like me than you might imagine and I assume that your intent is not to shame and slander those whose lives have been harder than your own. Thank you, in advance, for thinking before you write. Reality is far more diverse than you might imagine.

Why am I the only one posting comments on that blog!?

Only one of my comments got deleted (note to potential commenters: I guess it's a complete no-no to talk about anal sex there).

My guess is that it's a take on Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility. I love how feminist love Jane because she's all about women making their own decisions and having their own voices and conservatives love her because there's no sex in her books. It makes me laugh.

I'm very sorry that happened to you and it's deplorable that the teacher would feed such misinformation, but I have to say this made me laugh out loud. Kudos to you for putting him on the spot! Keep asking the uncomfortable questions.

Sidenote: You'd think the ab-only crowd would be screeching about the awesomeness of masturbation as an alternative to sex... If it's all about pregnancy and STIs and self-loathing to them, shouldn't they be pushing solo sex?

Oh, wait, they hate sexual pleasure. I forgot.

Yeah -- I was gonna say that it is indeed possible for HPV to be transmitted from hands to genitals. (And it wouldn't surprise me to learn that stats do support Sense & Sexuality's claim that anal sex is correlated with higher STI rates -- I just can't find any about women in particular on a cursory search.) But the solution to this problem isn't to avoid mutual masturbation (or anal sex); it's to engage in these activities safely and with enthusiastic consent.

HAHAHAHA to vibrator STIs.

What blows my mind is not only do they not encourage masturbation, but most of them are anti-abortion and anti-contraceptive. WTF?

Fun fact I learned while writing a paper on the fallacies of ab-only: Texas, which boasts the highest number of ab-only programs also has the highest number of teen pregnancies.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

You know, regardless of the reason, if you're not feeling like you want to have sex you really shouldn't.

Not even "just to please your husband"

If I was your friend, I'd tell you to stop sleeping with your husband for awhile, and go to talk to a councillor.

A caring husband shouldn't want you having sex if it isn't what you want just as much.

I'm not saying it's his fault, per se, but it could be something about the way he's approaching it is not helping you... We each need different things from our relationships, emotionally, to feel comfortable.

(I wasn't uncomfortable with sex, per se, but I had just about convinced myself I wasn't capable of having a serious relationship until I met a guy this past summer that totally changed my views on men and emotions and relationships, because we just understood each other so well.)

I had the same problem. My first comment was held for moderation (I'm assuming it was deleted the second after it was read), and my second comment on another post seemed to vanish into thin air. Was my I.P. address blocked perhaps??

At least this site allows for divergent opinions.
What's the point in having a discussion if everybody thinks exactly the same thing? I've never understood the practice of only allowing blog comments that the blog owner agrees with.

The ridiculous thing about this is that the number I see most often, and the number used by my doctor, is 86% - 86% of women have HPV. I don't know if that number includes both the cervical cancer causing and the wart causing strains, or what the breakdown is for each of those, but I find it rather hard to believe that only 14% of women are desirable. Especially since cervical cancer causing HPV has no effect on men.

Sorry, but I couldn't resist! See you there.

sushi, sometimes I can't tell if you're trolling or not. I don't think this supposed "hook up culture" is exactly a recent development. Free love anyone?

I really want to reply to this whole comment but it's making my head hurt and I just recovered from a two day migraine. Read The Purity Myth.

I think most feminists agree that women should be encouraged to not feel ashamed of their own sexual desires and exercise them in healthy, responsible, and empowered ways. Whether that means having casual sex willingly and enthusiastically, choosing not to have sex at all, or having sex within a monogamous relationship, the point is that websites like this shame women for their sexual desires and rely on sexist stereotypes. They're stuck in the virgin/whore dichotomy, while feminists believe that women should not be judged for making their own informed decisions.

Do I think the casual hookup culture is healthy for young women? If it involves being coerced and only doing things because they feel they're "supposed to" please men, then no, they should be empowered to seek out only the sex they truly want and partners who will respect them and their sexual desires. I think girls should be encouraged to appreciate that they have value beyond just their appearances, they should feel free to stand up for their own beliefs and speak their minds.

The exhibitionist mainstream culture and the abstinence agenda both objectify women and overemphasize their sexuality. They really aren't that different. Feminists are the ones who really support women and their sexual choices.

Read your comment. Read it again. Where's your concern about the MEN who are hooking up?

And THAT is why it's so fucking sexist.

I have a lot of dear male friends. We talk about our sex lives and our dating lives and stuff. They've had sex that makes them feel bad. They've been disappointed when they had sex with someone and it didn't turn into a relationship. So where is the concern about THEIR feelings? How come these slut-shaming websites don't think men have feelings? How come they think only women need to be protected, as if women are only being used and not using?

I don't believe this "hookup culture" is something truly new and scary. I think a lot of people who are hooking up do so willingly and don't regret it, and THAT fact is scaring the purity-mongers. I think any concern about peoples' mental and physical health needs to be discussed in non-alarmist, non-gendered ways, using real information and providing tools to help people decide what is best for them without making any moral judgments.

So you're for lying, spreading false information, and slut-shaming? Really?

Do you realize that these people are against women having a say in their sexuality? ANY say? How is this a good thing?

"I think it's nice to see some sort of counter to the free for all hook up culture that has developed recently."

Also, this is hilarious. I guess the 60s never existed!

"A lot of women/girls DO have drunken encounters that they deeply regret"

But men NEVER EVER DO!

Look, sweetie, humans have feelings. Sometimes people make mistakes, or do something they thought they'd enjoy but later didn't enjoy. It happens. That doesn't mean these people are horrible or dirty. It means they are human.

And let us not forget that there are plenty of women (and men) who *gasp* hook up and ENJOY IT! No regrets!

I certainly have none.

Okay, I see what you're saying and I respect your opinion, but while some of us may dislike hook-ups not all of us do. In the right situation I've had a good time.

If we're going to talk about drunken hook-ups, on the other hand, then maybe we should focus more on keeping alcohol out of the hands of underage people rather than scare girls out of sex. And if we're addressing people old enough to drink, then they're adult enough to make the decision to get drunk or to not get drunk.

I do agree that a happy medium would be helpful, but those do exist. Check out www.sxetc.org, I found it while working on my paper and it's excellent.

The thing is, ab-only doesn't work. It just doesn't. Check out the Waxman Report for more info on that. Or read Jessica's book, it's excellent too.

Because making babies come before setting oneself up with a stable career and income. Riiight.

Women can get advanced degrees and have children, too. It's not like no women ever have babies after the age of 25. I would think it's common sense for a woman to want to finish her schooling before having any children.

My mother didn't have me until she was 32, and she went on to have two more healthy babies without the use of fertility drugs. In fact, my brother (concieved at the shriveled old age of 36) was unplanned! And if mom hadn't focused on her career and had just started popping us out after marriage, we wouldn't have had a nice big house to grow up in, or family vacations, or new clothes every year, or the cheap glasses and abundant health care provided by her insurance. Women should be free to decide for themselves when they are financially and emotionally ready for children, and not feel pressured into believing they are dried up and useless at 28.

Oh, and let's not forget the correlation between birth defects and older fathers. Men have a "ticking biological clock" as much as women.

My mother didn't have me until she was 32, and she went on to have two more healthy babies without the use of fertility drugs. In fact, my brother (concieved at the shriveled old age of 36) was unplanned! And if mom hadn't focused on her career and had just started popping us out after marriage, we wouldn't have had a nice big house to grow up in, or family vacations, or new clothes every year, or the cheap glasses and abundant health care provided by her insurance. Women should be free to decide for themselves when they are financially and emotionally ready for children, and not feel pressured into believing they are dried up and useless at 28.

Oh, and let's not forget the correlation between birth defects and older fathers. Men have a "ticking biological clock" as much as women.

It is true that fertility declines with age, but are there actually women who don't know that? I don't mean to sound snarky, but really. I almost got married in my early 20s, and at that time could plausibly plan for a house full of kids (3-5 was my goal). But people change. Me, I decided I wanted a more high-powered career and to get more involved with community activism. I did this with a full knowledge of my family's reproductive history (fortunately I have LOTS of female relatives) and what having children later might mean. So when the CBLPI folks sweep in with their concern-troll condescension, I get a little pissy. As other posters have pointed out, there's a BIG difference between information and scare tactics.

Our lives and the way that we live them may have changed, but our biology hasn't- our fertility and the chances of having a healthy baby decline with age- that's a fact.

Here’s another fact for you: the MAJORITY of women that have children in their 30s have uneventful pregnancies and healthy babies. Having a baby just because you are in the optimal physical condition to do so is not a good reason to bring another human life into the world.

Not every woman needs to be a mother. But those who do want that for themselves should make it a priority, rather than an after thought.

Waiting until you feel you are emotionally, physically, and financially to have a child so you are able to be the best possible parent to that child isn’t an “afterthought.”

Well, it's better than saying "she's in a delicate condition", no? Like they said in my grandmothers' time... it's just the current slang.

I hear you. I waited until I was in my 20s to date, let alone have sex, for a lot of reasons. I grew up in a small Bible Belt town, and at some point in high school it was like some signal went out, and it was ok for the "good girls" to have sex. Overnight, I went from one of many girls wo were not sexually active to seemingly the only girl in my grade who wasn't getting it on. Pressure, yes. Then I went to college, and my friends were dumbfounded to learn that I a) was a virgin, and b) wasn't a religious fundamentalist. And yes, I had a lot of anxiety that when the time came I wouldn't know what to do.

But what kept me from hooking up at every party I came across was the idea that I was worth more than a roll in the hay with a guy who didn't know my name. That empowerment was something I learned from leadership in my church and community as a young woman - NOT from the fear that people would think I was a dirty tramp.

That's where the abstinence folks get it wrong. Instead of teaching young people (of any gender, not just girls) that they're capable of making informed decisions, they try to shame and frighten them. That's why I shake my head when these same people bash feminism. Hell, my feminism - in the form of seeing myself as a complete human *because that's how the adults in my life treated me* is the reason I waited until I was more mature to start having sex. You think they'd get that.

But I'm really tired of people acting like the abstinence-only movement is the only negative force pressuring young women -I feel like it's almost TOO easy to pick on these days, it's everyone's favorite whipping boy. It deserves criticism, but it's not as far from some of the more "liberal" sexual culture as one might wish.

We criticize the abstinence-only movement because they spread lies and they shame women (and anyone that isn’t a straight cis male). There isn’t anything redeeming about them. But don’t mistake harsh criticism of the lies and shame coming from the abstinence movement for criticism of choosing abstinence for oneself. There is a world of difference between choosing abstinence because it’s what is best for you and being bullied into it through deceit and shame. It’s the deceitful, shameful practices of the abstinence-only movement that we are criticizing. They are dangerous and damaging to young people so there is no going too “far” with the criticism concerning them. Everyone, especially young people, deserve the truth so they can make the right choices for themselves.

And, I have to ask, what is a more “liberal” sexual culture?