Crisis Pregnancy Agency keeps knees together

ishmael whale

http://www.breakingnews.ie/2004/09/20/story167326.html

“Study highlights negative attitude to safe sex
20/09/2004 –

A study commissioned by the Crisis Pregnancy Agency has uncovered a lack of information and negative attitudes towards contraception among young Irish people…….
A further 25% of respondents said they believed a woman who wasn't in a relationship, but carried condoms, was "easy" or looking for sex……”

Firstly, don’t get me wrong. I’m not from the Taliban and I’m not declaiming condom-carrying women as harlots. But I can’t see why a woman who wasn't in a relationship would carry condoms, other than if she had a reasonable expectation that she might have sex with someone. What other reason is there? An expectation that she might smuggle drugs by swallowing them?

The Crisis Pregnancy Agency seem to be suggesting that the 25% of respondents “who believed a woman who wasn't in a relationship, but carried condoms, was "easy" or looking for sex” is evidence of a negative attitude to sex. However, the apparent fact that 75% of respondents couldn’t bring themselves to make a link between condoms and sex is actually far more revealing, as is the Crisis Pregnancy Agency’s reluctance to point out the strangeness of the majority view.

Its still a funny old country.

koneko

Can't say I agree. That 75% probably see it as being safe, well prepared. Carrying a condom doesn't mean you're looking for sex, but if you happen to find it anyway you're prepared for it.

I have an umbrella in my car in case it rains. Doesn't mean I'm looking for it or expecting it, but it sucks to be caught out in the rain with no umbrella if you catch my drift.

If we were talking about men carrying condoms, would they still be easy? Or prepared and safe? I wonder actually did they cover that in the survey. I guess not as it's relating to unplanned pregnancy, but it still takes two to make a baby.

Sparks

What the hell is wrong with looking for sex? Or have we suddenly reverted back to a 1950s "you only do it for the children and you don't dare enjoy it" mentality after reading todays diatribe against Irish morality by yet another crazy Irish priest in the Indo?

ishmael whale

koneko wrote:

I have an umbrella in my car in case it rains. Doesn't mean I'm looking for it or expecting it, ...

While in one sense it is presumptious of me to speculate why someone else carries an umbrella. In other sense its trivial. Can I suggest that if someone carries an umbrella that they are not necessarily looking for rain, but they are expecting it. Equally if someone carries a set of golf clubs in their car they might not be expecting a game, but it suggests they have the hope that the opportunity might arise as they journey through life.

All of which brings us back to the same point. The survey results suggests a reluctance to say ‘obviously if a woman carries a condom she’s open to the idea of sex, although not if you wander over to her pissed shouting “any chance of a ride”’. That suggests prudishness. As Sparks says, does anyone see anything particularly wrong or controversial with a woman looking for sex? I’m comfortable with the concept.

oscarBravo

A further 25% of respondents said they believed a woman who wasn't in a relationship, but carried condoms, was "easy" or looking for sex...

More than anything, this indicates an immature attitude to sexuality that's all too common in Ireland (and, frankly, in the UK too). It would be nice if such an attitude was relatively uncommon, as it would then reflect only on those who held it. The fact that it's so widespread leads to unfortunate consequences such as women not carrying condoms.

In a mature society, words like "easy" would have no place in a discussion on sexuality.

I blame tabloids and soaps, meself.

pickarooney

You carry an umbrella because despite your best wishes, it will rain.
Are condoms to lessen the hassle if someone should decide to have sex with you against your will? Hardly.
Pretty much everyone is "looking for sex" (with the right person) surely?

koneko

You're taking it too literal, perhaps umbrella wasn't the best analogy but you're missing my point. Not everyone that carries a condom is actively looking for someone to sleep with (and use that condom). It's there "just in case".

But for the record, I don't think there's anything wrong with looking for sex, or sleeping with someone you've just met and you want to sleep with. It's unfortunate people feel the need to label others, but I don't think that's something that will change.

for the last few years we've been bombarded with advertisments in the papers, TV, in pubs etc about carrying condoms and now that they find that women actually do, they're giving out? Idiots, the lot of them.

Its actually been proven (I'll come back with a link once I find one) but women are actually more sexually responsive than men. In that their capacity for sex is virtually limitless. So what if they carry condoms. I prefer that to the baby boom amongst 15-18 year olds I saw a few years back.

Besides, if i'm foolish enough or drunk enough, that I don't have condoms myself, I like a woman to have one. It shows that she has respect for her own body, and is intelligent enough to know the risks involved with being an adult.

ishmael whale

koneko wrote:

You're taking it too literal, perhaps umbrella wasn't the best analogy but you're missing my point. Not everyone that carries a condom is actively looking for someone to sleep with (and use that condom). It's there "just in case".

Let me say I don't think our positions are irreconcilable - but I still think the CPA survey seems to represent a kind of thinking that is not helpful.

My read on it is the CPA survey implicitly suggests that a disincentive to women carrying condoms is that a significant minority of others take such as evidence that they are interested in or looking for sex (or whatever neutral term you might like to pick that suggests they might be more than wallflowers waiting to be swept off their feet.)

It could be said (and I suppose I am saying) that this is getting it backwards. Clearly if someone is committed to a life of celibacy there is little point in carrying condoms. Carrying condoms is therefore a rational practice by people who expect to engage in sex. Some people seem uncomfortable with stating this, in particular in relation to women.

So we are invited to follow a bizarre and unnecessary path in saying “of course a woman might carry a condom, but not really be sexually active at all and just carry it in case of the rare one-in-a-million chance that her prince might one day come”. All because we can’t publically express the possibility that women seek sex. It’s the modern day equivalent of the way Victorians could not accept that women sweat.

ishmael whale

Let’s take this at face value. Lets assume that the survey reveals that an amount of women will not carry condoms because that are uncomfortable with others thinking they are “looking for sex”.

Am I the only person who thinks if someone is uncomfortable appearing “looking for sex” that they probably shouldn’t be having sex until they feel more certain, and that the State might like to pause a little before making contraception the subject of a public information campaign? Its not so long since the State was imposing legal bans on the importation of contraceptives. What makes them so confident they’ve got the approach right now?

While its hard for the State to pick a clear line in matters of personal morality, I would have though that if we notice that young Irish people are clueless when it comes to sex that our first port of call would be to see what can be done in schools. This is not to say that the schools can cure everything (or anything), just that it initially seems a more effective way of reaching the target group than advertising on RTE. Also, treating the issues in school would allow a fuller approach than the kind of superficial ‘carry a Johnny’ message – which is all that TV advertising can do.

It seems to me self evident that someone who feels confident about themselves will use contraceptives if required by their lifestyle. It seems equally clear to me that some people may choose abstainance, or abstain until they feel happy about it. The problem seems to be that an amount of people (the CPA seem to highlight young women in particular) are unclear about what they want. The issue for Government, to the extent it has a role in matters of private morality, would seem to me to be to help people acquire the confidence they need to make their choices, rather than a misdirected and simplistic advertising campaign which leaves the main issue unaddressed.



http://www.examiner.ie/pport/web/ireland/Full_Story/did-sgq3uAXA9xAFAsg0aewFBADppk.asp

“21/09/04
Women risk pregnancy fearing promiscuous slur
By Jim Morahan
WOMEN fear being branded “slags” if they carry condoms and are willing to risk getting pregnant as a result, a survey has revealed.

And they are worried about getting the tag of “looking for sex” if not in a relationship and on the Pill, according to the Crisis Pregnancy Agency (CPA) report on women’s attitude to fertility, sex and motherhood.

“Fear of being labelled as promiscuous is leading Irish women to risk unplanned pregnancy rather than protect themselves,” said CPA chairperson Olive Braiden yesterday.

A woeful lack of sex education is leading to crisis pregnancies among school leavers and other young adults.

A second study on sexuality, contraception and unplanned pregnancy reveals that sexually active young people have “a strong tendency” for sexual risk-taking and poor levels of fertility knowledge.”

pickarooney

Interestingly, they seem to have no fear of being branded "fúcking idiots".

Sparks

Interesting to note that the survey showed 90% of those under 45 were not opposed to abortion.

From the Indo:

It shows that more than half (51pc) favour allowing women the right to choose abortion in all circumstances. A further 39pc say abortion should be available under limited conditions, making a total of 90pc who would permit abortion in some circumstances.

gandalf

OK first thing is if I could give a prize for best thread title on Politics this year this one would win it.

Now to the content. What I cannot understand is some people attitudes to other peoples sexuality and the fact whether they carry condoms or not. I would deem it to be socially responsible to carry a condom at all times but also I do not judge others that don't, equally I do not expect to be judged by others on the fact I do.

This is why I hate people who cannot keep their own noses out of others private business. Take care of your own morality, sexuality and we will take care of our own !!!

simu

Women fear being "branded slags"? I find this hard to believe unless maybe, it's the case in small country towns where all the people know each other. if anything, it's considered cool to have sex with lots of people.

I don't really trust surveys much because people tend to tick off the first option that's vaguely familiar rather than thinking about how they really do behave.

More than likely, those who don't carry them are just too lazy to do so and hope for the best when it comes to avoiding pregnancy, STDs etc

If they want to get more women to carry condoms, they should rebrand them and make them look as enticing as make-up, then all the eejit women (as opposed to intelligent women who plan ahead for contraception) out there would be willing to spend a fortune on them.