Study: 'Virginity Pledges' Are Ineffective

According to a study released earlier today, teenagers who have taken a "virginity pledge" are still just as likely to engage in premarital sex than those who have not pledged their abstinence. But worse than that, the study found that those same abstinence-swearing teenagers are far less likely to use a form of birth control - condoms, etc - when they do become sexually active.

The new analysis of data from a large federal survey found that more than half of youths became sexually active before marriage regardless of whether they had taken a "virginity pledge," but that the percentage who took precautions against pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases was 10 points lower for pledgers than for non-pledgers.

"Taking a pledge doesn't seem to make any difference at all in any sexual behavior," said Janet E. Rosenbaum of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, whose report appears in the January issue of the journal Pediatrics. "But it does seem to make a difference in condom use and other forms of birth control that is quite striking."

Keep reading...

Comments

[billw8017]

Sex is not by nature evil or vile. It is a part of good mental health and sociability. Postponing sex can cause it to break out in unanticipated ways because it will break out and will do so where your "defenses" are less attended.

In your life every stage of maturation has its time. As you accept it, your behavior is more natural. This is sometimes called "imprintin­g." What you do not learn while you should, you never learn gracefully.

[ZellaBee]

Forget the celibacy rings.
When I was a teenager, my cousin gave me a coin.
On one side was printed "Birth Control 100% effective.
The other side said, "place between your knees and squeeze"

[nguirado]

A new study suggests that the answer is no. While teens who take virginity pledges do delay sexual activity until an average age of 21 (compared to about age 17 for the average American teen), the reason for the delay is more likely due to pledge takers' religious background and conservative views -- not the pledge itself.

[wolfgangmo]

Keep in mind that these "studies" are based on self disclosure. I suspect, like many do, that they are not telling the truth.

Sociological studies are not science. They are research principles and methods applied to gossip.

[IndianaConservative]

Let’s continue with the premise that acting upon sexual urges and attraction can’t be controlled. Here’s where I believe it gets really dicey. There are liberals who believe that pedophiles can be rehabilitated and favor allowing them to live in communities rather than be incarcerated (in spite of recidivism studies that contradict this naive and harmful assumption). Based on the conventional wisdom here, aren’t pedophiles hard-wired to be attracted to children and unable to control their attraction and desires?

How could you believe one group of people can't control their behavior, but then expect another (a deviant population, no less) to be able to live a life of discipline and restraint and not act on their urges?

[Mahall]

"there are liberals who believe that pedophiles can be rehabilita­ted..."

Umm, I'm liberal as hell, and I don't think you can change someone's sexual predilections at all. I'm not sure how society should handle pedophiles. As a parent, however, I know I don't want 'em anywhere near my kids. If they act out, I expect their punishment to be severe and long-term.

But I have a lot of problems with the straw men you used in your post to argue your position. I thought it was conservatives who felt homosexuals could be rehabilitated-- or is that just a fundamentalist Christian notion? Or is that the "conventional wisdom"?

Or is that just another cliche? There are so many in your argument, I actually don't see any logic left to parse.

[IndianaConservative]

WelI, I think this topic is much bigger than humorous views of teenage sexuality. I think it's more about fundamental beliefs of human nature and free will. If you follow the logic people are suggesting here, sexual appetites are a wild beast that can't be tamed (thus the views about teenage sexual behavior). Humans really aren't that much different than animals...­they will want to follow the biological urges to copulate with whomever whenever, regardless of any "virginity oaths," moral or spiritual codes or even marriage vows. If you believe that's true, monogamy and faithfulness in marriage is a sham. Commiting adultery isn't really anything other than acting upon your predestined biological imperative­....so much for free will!

On the other hand, if you believe that mankind can & should behave better, and exercising restraint (instead of acting on the desire to flip the bird to that idiot who cut you off on the freeway or bedding your neighbor's wife) than maybe it is possible to appeal to the better angels of our nature? I believe that people are proned to act a certain way, and it takes tremendous discipline in many cases to do what's right. I do believe that people can and should behave better. I think that's an issue of putting other's best interests above your own self-centered interests and being considerate of other's needs and wants & believing in something bigger than yourself. Call that a "fundamentalist Christian" notion or whatever, but I do believe that.

[Nikola Tesla]

No one believes pedophiles can be rehabilitated, IndianaStrawman, but as Americans they do have the right not to be incarcerated after they have paid their debt to society.

[IndianaConservative]

Some people do believe that pedephiles can live without acting on their impulses. Call me a typical conservative pessimist, but I don't buy it. But I do happen to agree with you...few people ever change their stripes, they are what they are. My problem is how some liberals try to balance the rights of a pedophile over the rights of keeping a community safe from them. I make no apologies.­..my kids safety and their rights are who I'm looking out for. Frankly, I don't give a crap about pedophile's rights.

[IndianaConservative]

I think the opposing viewpoints on this subject actually speaks to a much larger disagreement that is more philosophical and (God-forbid) perhaps spiritual view of human’s free will. The overwhelming majority of the posts on this thread seem to be saying that controlling sexual impulses are futile. People are going to copulate no matter what. It’s part of how we’re hard-wired. Furthermore, there is nothing wrong or immoral about promiscuity, and the last thing needed is any Puritanical hang-ups about sex. It’s unrealistic and illogical to expect teens to abstain. Sexual appetite is a very uncontrollable animal.

If we assume that people are not capable of controlling sexual appetites or behaving a certain way because of biology (regardless of an oath, or moral/spiritual beliefs or even marriage vows) are we not close to concluding that we’re really not much more evolved than an animal? Is that incompatible with many people’s views of fidelity in marriage (wouldn’t adultery then just be fulfilling a normal biological function and not really something we can or even should control?). If so, then mankind really doesn’t have freewill. They're just predestined to act on biological impulses. So why even pretend that monogamy or fidelity in marriage is realistic? This subject could get very interesting if discussed from the standpoint of certain feminist theories on male sexuality and the degradation and devaluing of women.

[citizensrus]

I'm not really sure monogamy for a male is realistic. I can see how it would benefit a female. But where in nature does it benefit a male? Lions are monogamous, right? More so, I think, than the human male. How many mates does a lion have? Just one? Polygamy was realistic for humans at one time. Just speaking over years and years of human evolution, what is realistic?

[DarkWitch]

I think you are framing the argument wrong. Most certainly all of us, raging hormones or not, can choose whether or not to drop our pants, when, and with who. The argument should be:

Do we educate our children about their sexuality in a responsible, truthful, factual way, understanding that whatever choices they make we will have done our best to keep them safe and help them to act responsibly.
OR
Do we teach our children nothing but one religion's dogma of sexual sin and shame, expecting them to figure out on their own how to deal with the very complex subject of human sexuality and how it works biologically and socially in our personal relationships.

To which my answer is (for my children) -

Knowledge is Power.

[berrycooda]

How many teens did you ask about this.....

I'm sure there are just as many who will honor their pledge as those who won't.

Seems kind of unfair to judge all of them with one survey....

Is it wishful thinking or is there so little faith that some people have more
morals than others.

[chamberslee]

As a former program manager who worked in a state public health agency and oversaw a program funded with abstinence-only funds, I can say with certainty, the findings are correct. The literature is conclusive. Abstinence-only as a legitimate method for reducing sex among teenagers is a farce. In fact, teens are more likely to engage in unprotected sex.

Morality as nothing to with it. The problem is that youth are being held to an unrealistic expectation. Most troubling, they are not being taught safer sex practices.

Teens are having sex; therefore, they need to know how to protect themselves.

[citizensrus]

Just ask any Catholic girl from any generation how well the pledge worked for them. They all took a pledge, it was indoctrination. It wasn't a weird father/daughter ball and promise rings. It was more like "I'll kill the SOB that gets my daughter pregnant". So, even with that fear ..how many girls were able to stay chaste? God, hell, morality, superiority, angry dads, society taboo, shame, adoptions,getting kicked out of school, ..all of these..non­e of them worked. Boys said Please, girls said yes, and soon it was all forgotten and mom and dad were grandparents of the "happy married" GOOD CHURCHGOING couple. And the pattern repeats itself.

[LeftRight]

First, this is not the only survey on the matter.

Second, look at what other nations, or even other locations in the USA are doing. You will find that those who provide comprehensive sex-ed programs to their youths are suffering through MUCH lower teen pregnancy rates, MUCH lower STD rates, older ages of first sexual experience, and MUCH higher rates of safer sex practices once they DO start having sex!

and Third, this was a scientifically conducted study which showed that FEWER kids were keeping the pledge than breaking it, and that those who DID break their pledges were MUCH less likely to practice safer sex, leading to the increased risks of teen pregnancies and STDs!!

[poliscibabe]

Anybody else ROFLMAO over the "personalized purity rings" ad that is on this thread?

[decrepittex]

Well duh!

[BannedInBoston]

And this surprises whom?

[gorideabike]

Sex ed works.

[The Lorax]

Kids don't fear much of anything anymore so many do what they want without thinking about consequences. And all the cr@p on TV really doesn't help.

[DesertKayaker]

Agree 100000000%!

[DarkWitch]

Maybe those kids need a little less self-righteousness and a little more common sense guidance and understanding. Blaming pop culture for corrupting our youth is an old, worn out saw. Personal responsiblity starts with the parent. I'd say all the cr@p coming out of people's mouths while they sne.ak around doing the opposite is the example most of these kids get.

[citizensrus]

What worked for me. I had a friend in my age group, slightly older, who kept saying..te­ens don't have the emotional maturity to handle a sexual relationship. I could understand that reason for avoiding sex. As far as "immoral", that never clicked with me.

[jcollell]

Virginity pledges are ineffective? No kidding. They actually spent money on this study?

http://www.youspar.com/

[Jetling]

You should see what the Bush Administration spent to promote abstinence-only birth control education.

[markinaz]

This just in...sky blue.

[DWGRadio]

F'ing DUH!