Showing posts with label fornication. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fornication. Show all posts

Sunday, October 21, 2012

SUMPTUOUS EROTICA: Sex therapist said the couple needed immediate help



Published by Malaysia Chronicle on 20 October 2012.

SEX BLOG- Girlfriend's parents warn law student not to touch her again

KUALA LUMPUR: THE Malaysian law student who posted pictures of him and his girlfriend having sex on their blog was warned by the woman's parents not "to touch her again".

Alvin Tan Jye Yee, 24, a third-year law student at National University of Singapore, was given the stern warning by parents of his girlfriend, Vivian Lee, 23, after their blog, "sumptuous erotica", came under the spotlight. A Singapore daily quoted Tan as saying that both their parents were very upset over the pictures.

"I never thought this matter would become big. A lot of relatives called my parents asking why I did that. My girlfriend's parents also scolded me for turning their daughter into a 'bad girl'," said Tan, adding that the decision to post the pictures was mutual.

However, in a video posted on Tan's YouTube account early yesterday, he said his family was supportive and had not talked about the matter from a moral slant. In the video, the couple also did not show any remorse and said they would do it again.

They spoke of the massive support they received from friends and how they made hundreds of new friends after the blog came under the spotlight. Tan said they did not want to shut down their blog, but did so due to pressure from family members. He added that the blog had been shutdown temporarily.

Federal Commercial Crime Investigation Department director Datuk Seri Syed Ismail Syed Azizan said action could be taken against the couple if their blog was registered in this country. "We are checking where it was registered. If they did it in Singapore, it falls under the republic's jurisdiction."

A senior sex therapist said the couple needed immediate help. Dr Edward Chan, principle consultant psychologist at the LoveLife Centre for Sex Therapy, International Psychology Centre, said the couple showed symptoms of dangerous levels of sexual addictions. "From what was reported, I can say that the couple suffers exhibitionism -- a form of sexual addiction, and swinging, which is another form of sexual addiction."

"Both can be very dangerous if not treated, as they can't have a normal loving relationship. They have to resort to such extreme measures to achieve sexual satisfaction," he told the New Straits Times. He said it was good for a person to love his or her body, but there was a fine line between love for the body and being addicted to show it off for satisfaction.

On exhibitionism, Chan said an exhibitionist was a person who liked to show their private parts and get stimulated from it. Swingers are those who get satisfaction from watching their partner having sex with another person, or listening to their experiences after the sex has ended. It can also extend to partner swapping.

"Both forms of sexual addictions are treatable. They need to seek help immediately as these are illnesses which can lead to destruction of their relationship and also add stress to their lives," said Chan who has 16 years experiences in the field. For exhibitionism, he said the couple could seek help from LoveLife Centre where they would be given sex therapy sessions.

- New Straits Times
Link: 

Thursday, August 30, 2012

Statutory Rape: Courts sending out mixed signals



Published by The StarOnline on 30 August 2012.

NOW that their trials are over, former national youth squad bowler Noor Afizal Azizan can go on to fulfil the promise of his bright future and electrician Chuah Guan Jiu can focus on his fixed job and many years ahead. Through it all, no one spoke of the 13-year-old girl Noor Afizal took to a hotel to spend the night with, or the 12-year-old schoolgirl who was “coaxed” to go to her 21-year-old electrician boyfriend's flat instead of to school because he said he was too sick to take her.

These were prepubescent girls who were deemed to have consented to sex with the older boys they were dating and Court of Appeal president Justice Raus Sharif wrote in his written judgment that Noor Afizal had not “tricked the girl into submitting to him”.

In the electrician's case, Sessions judge Sitarun Nisa Abdul Aziz also thought the “sexual act was consensual”, even though DPP Lim Cheah Yit recounted how the girl had repeatedly asked Chuah to take her to school. If she did give consent, there was certainly trickery and fraud involved.

The fact remains that the girls were 12 and 13, children barely out of primary school. They are not old enough to be able to legally buy cigarettes, or even obtain medical treatment if they had contracted sexual transmitted diseases.

The law on statutory rape was meant to protect these very girls. Section 375(g) of the Penal Code states unequivocally that a man has committed statutory rape if he has sexual intercourse with a girl under 16 years of age, with or without her consent.

It is rooted in the presumption that girls below 16 have not attained the mental maturity to consent to sex, and this law was enacted to protect children from abuse. It places the onus on those around her to not have sexual intercourse with her, even if she gives consent, because she is not deemed mature enough to give consent.

In other words, the older guys should have known better. Noor Afizal and Chuah were found guilty of raping the underaged girls, but were not jailed. They were bound over for five years and three years respectively on a RM25,000 good behaviour bond.

The public uproar has been over how these young men got away with a slap on the wrist, and how the emphasis has been on not blighting their future.

Our teenagers are growing up inundated with overt sexual messages from the media and the Internet, without the benefit of a full-fledged sex education curriculum, or avenues to get answers. Clearly, our young people are having sex with each other but there is a line drawn by the law. And that is sex with girls below 16 children is off limits, even to their peers.

By letting Noor Afizal and Chuah off lightly, are the courts sending out mixed signals? Are they saying these two girls aged 12 and 13 are capable of giving consent for sex, and are they saying future good behaviour is sufficient punishment for having sex with minors? What is the message that teenage boys and younger men are getting? At the root of it all, this is about protecting our children boys and girls.

A 12-year-old girl was lured by a man twice her age into his flat, and coaxed into having sex with him, and he got away with a promise to behave himself for the next three years. Where does that leave her? What about her worth? What are we doing for these two girls? How do we protect other naive young girls from being sweet-talked by an older teen into a sexual relationship if he knows he could be found guilty of statutory rape but walk away with a promise to behave? If we do not uphold unequivocally our intolerance of sex with underaged girls, what does that say about us?

Related reports:
Adult women especially if they are less educated and financially dependent have problems saying “no” to their boyfriends and husbands sometimes even fathers uncles and brothers. Female employees often have to say “yes” to their bosses or risk losing their jobs. If these women well above the legal age have difficulties in turning away sexual advances what more a 12 or 13-year-old girl? This is why the statutory rape law exists. It presupposes that an underage person cannot have the wherewithal to refuse sex with an older person. Even if the person is only a few years older. And if the younger person is female growing up in a society where men are assumed to always hold more power in any relationship then what choice would she have but to say “yes”?

Suhakam has voiced “great concern” over sentences meted out recently on two offenders guilty of statutory rape, saying they may not have protected the interest of the victims. “Whether the rights, protection and best interests, not to mention the future, of our minors have been and will be upheld and safeguarded in cases involving statutory rape is now doubtful in the light of those sentences,” said the human rights commission’s chairman Hasmy Agam.
Hasmy said that Suhakam was alarmed that the consent of the child victims appeared to be one of the mitigating factors in both cases, though he noted that there had been similar sentences in the past in cases of statutory rape committed by young first offenders... He said that the vulnerability of a child was also recognised by the Convention of the Rights of the Child (CRC) “which states, inter alia, that the child by reason of his/her physical and mental immaturity needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection.” “It is also of great concern that the lenient sentences meted out might send the wrong message to would-be offenders, thus would not be an effective deterrence for statutory rape cases,” he argued.

Sebuah NGO yang memperjuangkan hak wanita mempersoalkan kemunasabahan seorang kanak-kanak memberi keizinan untuk melakukan hubungan seks dengan seorang lelaki yang lebih tua. "Di segi perundangan dan moral, bolehkah mereka memberi keizinan itu?" soal Pengarah Eksekutif Pertubuhan Pertolongan. Wanita (WAO), Ivy Josiah, ketika dihubungi untuk mengulas mengenai dua kes penggantungan hukuman yang dijatuhkan ke atas perogol kanak-kanak. Beliau menegaskan bahawa, di segi undang-undang, kanak-kanak di bawah umur tidak boleh memberi keizinan itu dan itulah sebabnya undang-undang seperti Akta Kanak-Kanak 2001 digubal untuk melindungi mereka.

Wednesday, August 15, 2012

More British women aborting their children over financial worries, say UK doctors



BY HILARY WHITE, 
ROME CORRESPONDENT.

LONDON, August 14, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A survey by a market research firm has found that the global economic crisis may be influencing more British women to abort their children. The research by Insight Research Group found that about one-fifth of GPs are reporting more women requesting abortion for financial concerns.

Seventeen percent of GPs surveyed felt there was an increase in patients who “were specifically requesting terminations due to financial concerns.” Fifty-four percent of those GPs said they believed the biggest increase was among women ages 26-35. Another twenty-three percent believed the biggest increase was among single women with no previous children, while twenty-one percent said they believed it was among single women living with a “partner” with 1 to 3 previous children.

Thirty-four percent of all the GPs surveyed said that they are seeing women putting off having children “until their financial security improved.”

The findings echo those of Russian demographers who fear that recent gains in the country’s abysmally low fertility rate will be lost as more women turn to abortion to ease financial worries http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/international-life-and-family-roundup1 . 

Although pro-life observers say that they have no argument with the study’s findings, they question the reaction of GPs who endorse abortion for financial reasons.

Anthony Ozimic, the communications manager for the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, said that for authority figures like doctors to affirm with their actions that an abortion is an acceptable solution to financial anxiety sends a profoundly negative message to the culture at large.

“Whatever the merits or otherwise of this study, Western society will continue in its moral and demographic declines as long as the message goes out that women should abort their children or significantly postpone conceiving because of financial concerns,” Ozimic said.

The UK should follow the lead of other EU countries who are offering financial, tax and other incentives to increase the financial security of families and encourage couples to marry earlier and have children, Ozimic said. Instead, the myth is being promulgated that there is such a thing as a “perfect” economic condition in which to have children, when the reality is that such conditions will not exist while the European fertility rate continues to decline.

“While prudence in planning a family is necessary, optimal economic conditions for raising children are illusory.”

Ozimic confirmed that the law does not technically allow for abortions for financial or “social” reasons, but said that doctors have been granted enormous latitude in deciding what factors in a woman’s life constitute a threat to her “mental health”.

This is acknowledged even by the courts to be the case, despite voluminous research demonstrating that abortion has a serious, long-term negative impact on women’s mental health and increasing skepticism http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/new-study-says-pregnancy-is-safe-even-beneficial-for-women-recovering-from/  among the psychiatric community of the existence of any mental health benefits of abortion.

Friday, July 20, 2012

Marriage for the 99%: Seeing Family as a Social Justice Issue


Marriage for the 99%: Seeing Family as a Social Justice Issue
How research demonstrates that marital status can predict a person's socioeconomic status.
By Glenn T. Stanton. Published by Christianity Today on 13 July 2012.

Bill Galston, a senior fellow at Brookings who served as President Clinton's domestic policy advisor, has explained that an American today must only do three things to avoid living in poverty: graduate from high school, marry before having a child, and have children after age 20. Only 8 percent of people who do these three things are poor, while a stunning 79 percent who fail to meet these expectations live in poverty.


Charles Murray of the American Enterprise Institute makes important observations of how marital status is related to poverty in his important new book, Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960–2010. In 1960, the poorly and moderately educated were only 10 percent less likely to be married than the 94 percent of college-educated Americans who were married. The comparison between the two groups largely held until 1978. Today, these two groups are separated by a 35 percent margin. According to a recent report from the Brookings Institute, the strong rate of marriage among the highly-educated, top-earning Americans has largely held constant and even seems to be increasing. But the bad news is that marriage is sinking dramatically among low and middle-class Americans, down from 84 percent to a minority of 48 percent today—a dramatic decline over the last 40 years, and no indicators hint at a slowing pace. The stark trend line leads Murray to lament, "Marriage has become the fault line dividing America's classes."
In some ways, the concern about marriage and class mobility is not new at all. In 1965, a young Daniel Patrick Moynihan passionately warned his boss, President Lyndon Johnson, and our nation that the new landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act was not likely to be fully successful because the African American family was dangerously fragile and continuing to weaken. On the first page of his infamous report—which was one of the first shots fired in the modern culture war over the family—Moynihan warned of the consequences stemming from the persistent "crumbling" of the African American family: "So long as this situation persists, the cycle of poverty and disadvantage will continue to repeat itself" among African Americans.
The problem has persisted: the percentage of all married women in the U.S. is 50 percent (53 percent for white women), but is a tragically low 29 percent for African American women. The wide disparity led to culturally soul-searching books such as Stanford professor Ralph Richard Banks's Is Marriage for White People?, in which he contends that marriage recovery is essential for the socio-economic well-being of African Americans. A larger question could be, "Is marriage for rich people?"
Marriage is not just a personal, sentimental institution, giving couples something to feel good about at each year's anniversary. The scholars at the National Marriage Project working from the University of Virginia offer dramatic evidence in their recent report (page 78) that marriage is a "wealth-generating institution."
All other things being equal, the never-married are 75 percent less wealthy than their continuously married peers. And two people are not necessarily wealthier than one. Cohabitors generally are 58 percent lower in financial wealth than those who are married. And those who divorce and never remarry have a 72 percent lower amount in wealth. The National Marriage Project suggests that those with better financial prospects are not necessarily more likely to marry, but the "institution of marriage itself provides a wealth-generation bonus."
Nobel-winning economist George Akerlof has explained the pro-social influence of marriage upon men and fathers. "Married men are more attached to the labor force, they have less substance abuse, they commit less crime, are less likely to become the victims of crime, have better health, and are less accident prone," he said in a prestigious lecture. He found cohabitation was incapable of providing these benefits, he said, because, "men settle down when they get married and if they fail to get married, they fail to settle down."
And settled-down men work more, earn more, save more, and spend more money on their families than on themselves. Married men are also dramatically less likely to abuse their wives and children than men of any other relational status. Marriage boosts the well-being of women as well in nearly every important measure of well-being.
The evidence is impossible to ignore or explain away. Marriage drives well-being and upward mobility. The absence of marriage drives it down. Any smart poverty alleviation program cannot ignore this.
And for Christians, the research enriches our reading of two of God's earliest and most profound statements about humanity and marriage. First, "It is not good for the man to be alone." Second, "That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife." As we are created as an icon of the Trinitarian God in the world, we're made deeply and mysteriously for one another. And just as Jesus yearns deeply for his bride, it is very natural and deep in our wiring for us to yearn for a spouse. It is in our God-imaging nature to do so. No wonder marriage boosts our well-being in such important and diverse ways.  
Such a truth is so evident that even some sociologists grasp it. 
Will the church?
Read more here: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2012/julyweb-only/seeing-family-as-a-social-justice-issue.html?paging=off

Wednesday, June 20, 2012

Standing up for sex workers is standing up for pimps




Prostitutes are not sex workers, they are prostituted women.

ELITE academics in Australia love to profess their support for ''sex workers''. University of New South Wales academic Catharine Lumby in ''Sex is not dirty work'' on these pages pleaded for the media to treat sex workers with more respect, given that prostitution is a legal form of employment in Australia.
Lumby recalls telling her sons over the dinner table to not make jokes about women their friends call ''prosties'', and to remember that feminists and Christians could be condemned for failing to properly recognise prostitution as work.
This idea of prostitution conveyed to the two Lumby juniors is unmistakably a liberal one. In this framing, prostitution is embarked upon by individual women as something akin to a small-business enterprise (women in brothels in Australia are legally recognised as sub-contractors, not employees). While ''sex workers'' might be at the bottom rung of the social ladder in terms of education, prior victimisation, social networks, and personal asset bases, liberals see them as admirable for attempting to improve their circumstance, and possibly give their kids a better chance in life.
In conveying this idea of prostitution, Lumby teaches her sons to be nice to ''sex workers'', which is indubitably a charitable thing for an elite academic to do.
However, in framing prostitution as a benign form of ''work'', Lumby also disenables her sons taking social and political measures against the sex industry and its customers as perpetrators of serious and widespread harm against women in Australia.
There now exists a mountain of empirical research, not only from feminist social scientists, but also from psychologists, clinicians, nurses, anthropologists and economists, of the harms of prostitution for women. These harms include post-traumatic stress disorder, genital and other physical injuries, pregnancy, depression and anxiety, and social isolation.
It has been known since the late 1970s that a major precursor of women's entry into prostitution is childhood sexual abuse. There is also empirical evidence of the damage to women's social status, and the negative impact on women's connection to local community, of the sex industry.
Overwhelmingly, the social science and health literature condemns prostitution as a source of harm to women, as well as children.
For liberals to successfully frame prostitution as ''work'', rather than commercially mediated sexual abuse, they must close their eyes to this evidence. They must also avoid encountering most women in prostitution - even the most conservative demographic studies of this population find that half would leave the sex industry if they could. And they must overlook the good results that governments in Sweden, South Korea, Norway and Iceland have achieved in declaring prostitution a violation of gender equality, and criminalising the sex industry and its customers.
Most significantly, though, liberals must avoid mentioning pimps, traffickers, and sex industry customers in making their argument that prostitution is a legitimate form of work for poor women. Lumby doesn't breathe a word of the profit-making activities of pimps in Australia, nor the acts perpetrated by sex industry customers who buy women in half-hour blocks. She fails to tell her sons about the strategies of violence, debt and intimidation that pimps use to keep women in prostitution, and to make sure they service customers with a smile.
She also omits to mention the kinds of sex acts customers do to women in prostitution, and the misogynistic abuse and brutality that women face when they're dispatched to the hotel rooms and houses of prostitution buyers.
These inconvenient facts cause liberals great difficulty in selling the message that prostitution is work. In light of these facts, prostitution begins to look like a system of hush money paid to pimps to supply men with vulnerable women for sexual use and abuse.
When elite academics like Lumby publicly declare their allegiance to ''sex workers'' they concurrently reveal a loyalty to pimps and sex industry customers. They do this through framing prostitution as ''work'', and therefore sending the message that no policy or community action need be taken against the sex industry as an employer of women and legitimate business sector.
In this atmosphere, pimps and their customers are able to continue their harmful activities, and the sex industry in Australia is able to profitably expand and diversify.
On the other hand, when elite academics like me declare our support for ''prostituted women'', we declare a commitment to elimination of the sex industry. We work towards public recognition of prostitution as a social harm through public awareness campaigns highlighting the effects of the sex industry on individual women, and women's social status.
Just like the anti-smoking campaigns that began in the 1970s, we seek a reorientation of the public's thinking about prostitution towards a critique of the ''pretty woman'' and ''happy hooker'' stereotype. Australian policymakers and community leaders mobilised against the tobacco industry in the past three decades, and we seek similar government action against the sex industry as a driver of social harm.
The criminalisation of pimps and sex industry customers is a necessary first step towards this goal, but we also call for public education about the reality of prostitution, as well as policy planning for programs and initiatives to assist women to leave the sex industry and build lives that reflect their worth as full citizens.

Dr Caroline Norma is a lecturer in the school of Global Studies, Social Science & Planning at RMIT University.

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

The Rhetoric of Chastity: Making Abstinence Sexy



Communications expert Christine Gardner reveals what makes abstinence campaigns work.
Interview by Sarah Pulliam Bailey | posted 11/18/2011 09:52AM Copyright © 2011 Christianity Today.

Evangelical abstinence campaigns have shifted their emphasis from "just say no" to sex before marriage to "just say yes"—within marriage, that is, says Christine Gardner. In Making Chastity Sexy (University of California Press), the Wheaton College communications professor examines the rhetoric of three evangelical abstinence organizations, comparing them with an abstinence campaign in sub-Saharan Africa, where HIV/AIDS is a common threat. Christianity Today online editor Sarah Pulliam Bailey spoke with Gardner about the larger ideas communicated to young people in the campaign.

What did you find upon examining the language of the U.S. abstinence movement?
This is a study of rhetoric in the classical sense—the study of the art of persuasion, focusing on three very specific church-related evangelical campaigns. These groups are using a savvy rhetorical strategy: They are using sex to sell abstinence. They are using the very thing they are prohibiting to admonish young people to wait. They are saying, "If you are abstinent now, you will have amazing sex when you are married." The argument then becomes a promise of marriage.

What are the limitations of this approach?
Such campaigns don't address the challenges of singleness. Also, what if you are gay? What if you do get married, but sex isn't all it's cracked up to be? There are many challenges with this kind of strategy, as savvy and persuasive as it is.
Evangelicals are quite good at interacting with secular culture. We have a long history of adapting secular forms for religious ends. The language of self-gratification in "sexy abstinence" is showing the ability of evangelicals to speak the language of the culture.

But in doing so, are we actually transforming it?
You looked at how Africans view abstinence, saying they "saw their bodies as temples of the Lord and themselves as caretakers … a more deeply theological response."
I assumed that HIV/AIDS would be the big motivator for [African] young people to commit to abstinence. It is big, but I found this other undercurrent that was deeply theological. A leader of one of the programs told me that yes, they do talk about AIDS as a motivator for young people to commit to abstinence, but they noted that "you can get malaria and die, too." AIDS is not as much of a motivator as a Western researcher coming in would have assumed.

How do the American and African messages compare?
Americans have turned a prohibition into a more positive admonition. In this case, pleasing God is an end in itself. Pleasing God will have tangible benefits. In Kenya and Rwanda, it was more of a combination: "Avoid death. Avoid HIV/AIDS, and do it out of fear of God, because he wants you to do this."

'I'm concerned that we may be raising a generation of abstinent teens but setting them up for divorce.'—Christine Gardner

Also, in the places I visited in Africa, the condom is viewed as a medical device, a tool for saving lives. It is not viewed as a tool for promiscuity, as evangelicals in this country largely view it. The same little piece of latex is described so radically differently by evangelicals in two different cultural contexts.

How does Western rhetoric translate to the African context?
It offers an understanding of self and empowers young people, especially women, to respect their bodies. This is, of course, fabulous and indeed, very biblical. But the language of individualism and self-gratification can seep in and pose a problem.

You say that U.S. evangelicals are strange bedfellows with feminists when it comes to sexuality and reproduction.
The campaigns borrow an essentially feminist argument of "my body, myself" to encourage young people to take control of their bodies, to wait to have sex. In essence, evangelical campaigns say secular culture is telling young people that they have no choice but to have sex, that they are governed by their hormones. In contrast, evangelical campaigns tell young people, "You can control your body. You can choose to wait to have sex."

How do these campaigns deal with those who are no longer virgins?
They talk about "second virginity" or "renewed virginity," how a young person can make a decision from that day forward to remain abstinent until marriage. It's a rhetorical construction of virginity, but it's steeped in a theological understanding of God's forgiveness. Some would criticize that as a form of cheap grace, that you can go out and have sex with your boyfriend or girlfriend and then go to the abstinence event and renew your pledge. But the young people I talked to understand that there is no cheap grace. There is no get out of jail free card with these abstinence pledges. The young people who have broken their pledges carry heavy emotional burdens.

What are other ways the U.S. campaigns are successful?
Millions of young people have committed to abstinence since these campaigns began. Have some of the young people broken their pledges? Sure. But this isn't just a numbers game. These programs are successful because they are opening a space for the church to talk about sex. They are teaching both women and men a sense of respect for their physical bodies. We Christians are people of the Incarnation, and yet the physicality of the body scares us. These campaigns empower young people, especially women, to respect their bodies, to realize that they are worth waiting for.

What role do purity rings play in the campaigns?
The purity ring mimics the wedding ring, a physical manifestation of that pledge. One of the young people I interviewed talked about how if someone breaks his commitment, he is encouraged to flush the ring down the toilet in order to maintain the integrity of the symbolic power of the ring. It's a pledge to God, it's a pledge to one's future spouse, but it's also a pledge to a community of other abstinent teens.

What did you learn about the "fairy-tale narrative"?
Some of the campaigns use fairy tales about passive princesses and valiant knights to communicate traditional gender roles. When I looked closer, I found an interesting subversion: The princess, even though she seems to be inactively waiting for her prince, is pictured as actively choosing to adopt princess-like behavior. The dragon that the knights are supposed to slay in order to rescue the princess is really the dragon of their own sexual desires. The campaigns may not be as conservative as they think they are: the young men are impotent, enslaved by their own desires, while the young women are powerfully choosing princess-like behaviors.

What role does modest fashion play?
Modesty is not to be confused with meekness. The campaigns talk about modesty as a form of power. It is similar to the function of the hijab, or head covering, for Muslim women. The hijab forms a kind of community, a physical manifestation that joins women together. It also portrays women's power over men, because it suggests that if they were to reveal their bodies, men would be lusting after them. So if they veil their bodies, they maintain and conserve that power.

What did you find missing from the campaigns?
The campaigns largely avoid talk of sexuality as sacrifice or suffering. But of course it's not sexy to talk about sacrifice and suffering to young people who are raised in a sexualized culture. On the other hand, perhaps this is where the evangelical church is selling out too fast. Language of sacrifice and suffering can be transformative to those who know that sex sells everything from cars to deodorant and, now, abstinence. It's a new kind of asceticism for the generation that has it all.
Instead of trying to master the idioms of the day, we could emphasize the difference the gospel message makes. The gospel is radical enough all on its own, even without the music of Usher or Beyoncé in the background. It's truly an alternative lifestyle. I think that too could be very persuasive among our media-savvy young people. That language of sacrifice and suffering for the purpose of worship to God, and understanding our sexuality as a gift of God, is key.

How might this self-fulfillment language potentially impact a future marriage?
I'm concerned that we may be raising a generation of abstinent teens but setting them up for divorce. I don't think that you need to promise fabulous sex in marriage to make marriage winsome. If we are focusing on great sex in marriage as a reward for abstinence now, then when those young people marry and the sex isn't great—then what? I'm afraid we are making marriage all about sex. So if it's not that, then what is marriage?

You suggest that abstinence is part of a larger endeavor.
By daily acting on that commitment, young people understand through their bodies what it means to become more like Christ. It's essentially a call to holiness that the Scriptures give us. It's just like practicing scales on a piano if you want to become a concert pianist. It's practicing abstinence that allows young people to inhabit their faith commitments in practical and tangible ways.
The largest study and the most quoted critique is that these kinds of pledges only delay sexual debut by about 18 months. I wonder if a more richly theological undergirding to some of the programs could help lengthen those commitments. When the going gets rough, and there is no marriage partner on the horizon, and the abstinence pledge starts to grow cold and stale, what is going to be there for them? I hope that it's something more than a funny skit, a dramatic rock song, or a winsome testimony from a cute guy. I hope there is something deeper from God's Word that's going to stay with them.

Monday, June 28, 2010

NGOs Call For Sex Education



Published by The Star, 28 June 2010.

PETALING JAYA: Many teenagers are having sex and this calls for an urgent need to introduce sex education in schools, said leaders of several non-governmental organisations caring for children.

Shelter Home executive director James Nayagam, who has been assisting pregnant teenagers for 30 years, said no amount of campaigning and counselling would prevent teenagers from experimenting with sex.

“A comprehensive sex education will be a better source of information than their friends,” said Nayagam, adding that preventing unwanted pregnancies and abandoned babies was its ultimate goal.


He had come across cases where girls had sex when they were having their periods, as they wrongly assumed they would not get pregnant this way.

James also assisted a 14-year-old who had three abortions, all of them in back lane ‘‘clinics’’. She had since moved in with an aunty.

Dr Hartini Zainudin, the general manager of the Nur Salam halfway house for single mothers and children in Chow Kit asked: “Which is the bigger problem? Us being shy to teach our kids about sex, or having to deal with rising cases of abandoned babies?”

OrphanCARE president Datuk Adnan Mohd Tahir said sex should be a topic to be discussed openly with the youths to help them obtain more accurate information.

Christine Alphonse, a counsellor at the Ti-Ratana Welfare Society’s welfare home, said youths should also be taught about the consequences of having sex – and if they were prepared to handle issues such as unwanted pregnancies.

In Petaling Jaya, Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abd Jalil said a 2004 survey on 1,700 young adults ages between 13 and 24 showed more than 50% of the respondents did not know in detail about the functions of reproductive organs.

“Teenagers lack information and access to birth control methods. Many teenagers are also not taught about ways to deal with peer pressure and how to say ‘no’ to sex before they are ready,” said Women, Family and Community Development Minister.

Between 2005 and 2009, the police reported 407 cases of child abandonment, nationwide.

“The statistics up till April 2010 recorded 24 cases. The statistics are increasing every year,” said Shahrizat in response to a report in The Star on Saturday about the higher number of teen pregnancy recorded by the Welfare Department.

Shahrizat said her ministry would propose to the Government to include Social and Reproductive Health (SRH) as part of the co-curriculum programmes in primary and secondary schools.

Monday, March 22, 2010

The Forbidden Fruit Is Enticing

The dating scene

By TAN EE LOO,

Sunday March 21, 2010

Most students get their first taste of freedom at college, but a lack of maturity can have negative consequences. Couples and counsellors share their views about relationship trends among young adults.

IT started off with a peck on the cheek. Then came the kissing and hugging.

And before they knew it, their tops were off. But half way through the process, Mark* decided to pull away.

“I did not want to go all the way because I was worried that my girlfriend might get pregnant,” says Mark while recalling his first intimate contact with his girlfriend Julie*.

According to Mark, 21, Julie is his 10th girlfriend.

Before he asked Julie out, he was actually seeing a girl he met at another college. But things didn’t work out for the young couple, so Mark decided to break up with the girl and started going out with Julie.

“I don’t take pride in the number of relationships I’ve had. In fact, I feel bad when I think about it because people see me as a playboy,” he says.

College is where most young adults get their first taste of freedom, be it through dating, drinking or driving.

After all, who can blame them for wanting to explore new and exciting boundaries after 11 years of schooling in a simple and protective environment?

Depending on how an individual defines ‘puppy love’ and ‘relationship’, some college students claim that they have been in and out of relationships since high school, with or without their parents’ knowledge.

Just ask 20-year-old Alice*, who claims that she has been in more than 10 relationships.

On their anniversary, Alice’s current boyfriend of two years booked a hotel suite at a five-star hotel in Kuala Lumpur to celebrate the occasion, complete with a romantic dinner and gifts.

So... did Alice come home that night after dinner?

“I told my parents that I was going to a friend’s place for a sleep over,” says the college student from Petaling Jaya.

Let’s face it: the forbidden fruit is enticing. Young adults are constantly exposed to sexual imagery.

On television, American drama series like Gossip Girl and 90210 portray steamy relationships and carefree lifestyles of students as the norm. Unsurprisingly, this is a major concern to some parents.

According to the Parents Television Council, a non-partisan education group, Gossip Girl conveys a message that sex is “a tool used to manipulate people”.

There are also plenty of kissing scenes and skimpy clothing which some parents may find it too offensive for their teenaged children’s viewing.

Casual attitude

Some young college couples embark on a relationship with little or no expectation of long-term commitment.

A check by StarEducation with college students, aged between 18 and 23, reveals that their relationships can last as short as two months, and no longer than two years.

LEE: Parents could help their children set priorities and find out if they can really cope with their studies should they choose to be in a relationship

“Their casual attitude is worrying, as many of them do not understand the consequences. They think it’s normal to get in and out of relationships,” says college student services officer Carrie*.

“It is a form of approval and the need to feel wanted. College students are curious about their newfound freedom that often involves new and wider circle of friends,” says a college counsellor of a private institution in Petaling Jaya.

“But they have not understood the meaning and importance of commitment so they tend to follow their heart. They would probably go ‘Oh, I’m feeling good about this. Let’s go out’ in a very casual way to their object of affection. If the girl says yes, then you would feel you are accepted,” she says.

College student Derek*, 20, says hugging and kissing are common and seen as ‘acceptable’ in the college dating scene.

“Couples who claim that they don’t kiss and hug are lying,” says Derek.

Some would engage in pre-marital sex without thinking twice, while others would practise abstinence.

Alice says her boyfriend refused to have sex with her because of his religious beliefs.

“His religion does not encourage him to have pre-marital sex so even though we have spent the night before, we didn’t do it.

“But I wouldn’t want to have sex with him either because I am worried that I might get pregnant,” she says.

Many of the college students cite “unwanted pregnancy” as their primary concern during the interview, when young couples planning to go into a sexual relationship.

It is also found that the college students are not worried about sexually transmitted infections (STI).

Derek says his girlfriend of five months, who is a devout Christian, is completely against the idea of pre-marital sex.

“There have been a couple of times where we both got really turned on but she doesn’t want to do it ... which I respect her for.

“Even if she had said yes, I am not sure if I would have wanted to do it because I have a lot of things that I want to achieve such as setting up my own business after completing my degree.

“Protection is not 100% so an unplanned pregnancy is the last thing I want right now,” he says.

The ‘Cool’ identity

While some college students think it would make them appear ‘cool’ among their peers to have a new boyfriend or girlfriend every month, little do they know that it could actually backfire.

“It could have an opposite effect which may affect their image and reputation, besides causing emotional damage to those they broke up with,” says Sunway University College student services director Lee Siok Ping.

A counsellor says that students’ casual attitude when it comes to dating is worrying, as many of them do not understand the consequences.

Carrie agrees, saying that many get distracted and lose focus on the important things in life.

“They seem to think that the only thing that really matters is the relationship they are in. Some failed their exams, delayed their course of study and even had to resit for exams.

“This is simply because they do not know how to prioritise,” she says.

She adds that some students would engage in pre-marital sex and even abusive relationships, which can trigger destructive behaviours and consequences such as dropouts, abortion, cohabiting, teenage pregnancy and so on.

“They need to understand that there are emotional scars and physical damages. Broken relationships are not easy to mend. Young people may not be able to cope with it effectively.

“Some just stay away and completely stop acknowledging each other. On the other hand, we see extreme cases where they hurt themselves or try to commit suicide because of a failed relationship,” she says.

Student counselling services is a good place to seek objective advice should college students need guidance on relationship issues.

At Sunway, Lee says her counselling unit has received positive response from students.

“Based on last year’s statistics, 21% of students who come to our department to seek counselling services were boy-girl relationship and family issues related.

“Some students choose to walk in while some cases (students) are referred by their lecturers,” she says.

“We believe in a wholesome education experience and want to help them complete their studies succesfully. So when students experience problems, we encourage them to come and talk to our counsellors,” she says.

Carrie agrees, saying that students need to have an appropriate channel to share their problems.

“The college is also responsible for educating the teenagers on respectfulness and abstinence. It’s vital for the college to take on this role and not leave it entirely to the parents.

“However, it can be a tricky situation and difficult for the college to interfere, especially when it’s considered a personal problem.

“Unless they come to us, it can be difficult for us to lend our support,” she says.

What can parents do?

As a parent herself, Lee can understand the dilemma that every parent goes through when it comes to educating their children about relationships and sex.

For Lee, she would buy reading materials related to the topic for her teenaged children to read, and follow up with a discussion.

“Parents can play an effective role in helping their children understand the responsibilities that come with being in a relationship.

“They could help them set priorities by talking to their children and find out if they can really cope with their studies should they choose to be in a relationship,” she says.

She adds that she also sends them for talks or camps on understanding the opposite sex.

Carrie says parents can take on the role of a friend.

“They can offer their opinions and share their own experience without coming across as too harsh or controlling, and you will find children more likely to open up to their parents.

“However, you may find that many Asian parents tend to be very uptight and domineering so much so that their teenage children find it difficult to approach them, and insecure to discuss any matters, let alone relationship problems.

“Many parents feel uncomfortable to talk about relationships and may just leave it to the children to ‘discover’ for themselves, which may yield negative results,” she says.

*Names have been changed.

Monday, April 27, 2009

Don’t Neglect Youths’ Emotional Needs; Don't Spoil Them Either



Star Online, Monday April 27, 2009

PETALING JAYA: Emotional development in young people is being neglected in today’s fast-paced Malaysian society, say experts.

The emotional needs of the young are often overlooked as both parents work to fulfil their children’s material and educational needs, says Inte-grated Psychology Network Sdn Bhd’s consultant psychologist Valerie Jaques.

“As such, more young people are starving for attention and end up confusing sex with love,” she said.

Jaques said that youths, especially girls, were not taught to speak up.

“Many girls are not taught to be assertive and say no or to complain about those who have taken advantage of them,” she said.

Among the ways to deal with this, she said, was for parents to attend parenting courses and learn how to communicate with a child.

Women’s Aid Organisation executive director Ivy Josiah said the authorities and parents needed to acknowledge that young people were getting more curious about sex at an earlier age now.

“More young people are exploring and experimenting,” she said.

Josiah said there was an urgent need for formal sex education in schools as it was the only way to ensure that teenagers treated sex responsibly and knew the consequences of their actions.

These young people, she said, should have the chance to express themselves and speak to someone other than their parents about concepts they were unfamiliar with like sex and relationships.

“They are coping with raging hormones, they have the need to be loved and to learn what having a relationship means,” she said.

She also warned that it was too simplistic to think that children whose parents were both working would be more inclined to be involved in underage sex.

Deputy Women, Family and Community Development Minister Senator Datin Paduka Chew Mei Fun said there were many reasons why young girls got involved in underage sex.

“Each individual has her own unique story, background and experience,” she said.