Slog - Comments on Facts Are Problematic Things

Comment by Gitai

Gitai — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 11:33:20 -0800

I can see the PSA campaign based on this news now: "Plan for a successful future. Lose it at 12!"

Comment by Cat in Chicago

Cat in Chicago — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 11:43:56 -0800

Early sex prevents school shootings.

Comment by Greg

Greg — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 11:49:50 -0800

Well, now I'm ticked. I'm not a delinquent, but I sure didn't get laid when I was a teenager.

Comment by Sargon Bighorn

Sargon Bighorn — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 11:53:39 -0800

"There was just one problem: It is probably not true" Well it is or it is not true. So at this point we're no closer to the truth than we were on Sunday.

Comment by sam

sam — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 11:57:14 -0800

These are the same people who say abortions cause breast cancer, that premarital sex makes it impossible to forge long term romantic relationships, that condoms don't work, and that homosexuality is a "dangerous lifestyle." These people are not acquainted with truth and honesty.

Comment by Westside forever

Westside forever — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:00:57 -0800

Surely the many studies showing the fruitlessness of the "War on Drugs" will be used as a touchstone to define policy regarding continuing with abstinence education.

After all, the gov'ment only makes decisions rationally and based on the best information.

Comment by Just Me

Just Me — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:01:43 -0800

I can testify to this. I had LOTS of sex with the Captian of the basketball team in High School while he was tutoring me in Pre-Calc. and Trig. My grades went up with his talented tutoring and rather large penis.

Teenage (gay) sex = Higher Grades!

Comment by Mike in MO

Mike in MO — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:04:27 -0800

Just Me: more details please!

Comment by Just Me

Just Me — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:11:35 -0800

Details? Think I should do a PSA on NBC? The Gay Porno version of "The More you know.."?

Comment by tsm

tsm — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:13:44 -0800

Of course they won't. Freaking parents out at the thought of their little darlings using their genitals is so rich with political potential.

Comment by David R.

David R. — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:20:36 -0800

It is impossible to debunk abstinence only theories, as these theories have never been bunked.

Comment by audrey

audrey — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:41:00 -0800

it's irrelevant. it's not a question of sex per se, but if engaging in one act that is deemed rebellious will be correlated with engaging in other acts that are similarly rebellious. dare i say it's a no-brainer, as long as teenage sex is cast as a rebellious act?

Comment by Dianna

Dianna — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 13:29:38 -0800

Iraq War
Same Sex Marriage
Abstinence Only
Abortion
War on Drugs

This country has a poor history paying attention to facts; why start now?

Comment by FooFootheSnoo

FooFootheSnoo — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 13:44:00 -0800

Correlation is not causation!

--as the subsequent study in Virginia showed. So please don't overinterpret the new study, either.

I think I'm going to post "Correlation is not causation" in the comments everytime Dan posts about a social science article. It'll be like "First!" for Slog.

Or maybe you could do a regular feature called "Dear Social Science" and actually explain what the findings mean, if anything.

'Cause, you know, "facts" are problematic things when we don't understand them in their proper context.

Comment by Raindog

Raindog — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 15:08:28 -0800

"More probing study". Huhuhuhuh. Where do I sign up?

Comment by Chris in Tampa

Chris in Tampa — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 15:32:00 -0800

@14 - Right, except Dan isn't actually pushing for the government to promote teenage sex as a method of preventing juvenile delinquency. The Abstinence-Only crowd is the one saying that correlation equals causation. However, you can't even presuppose causation if there is no correlation. And this study proves that the correlation that the abstinence-only supporters cite doesn't even exist.

Comment by pro sex mom

pro sex mom — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 18:19:56 -0800

I am the mom of 2 grown men and a 16 year old who certainly sees himself as a man. When they went from constantly uncomfortable, cranky, sexually frustrated sacks of unvented testosterone to getting laid on a regular basis things really improved around our house--grades went up, socks got picked up and they all kinda just lightened up about all that stinky teenage "I am so dumped on" stuff. They all allow/allowed their girlfriends to boss them around in ways they would never let me get away with. I have never understood why there is such a stigma to teen sex. Being a teenager is hard and sex just makes life better. Why would we not want life to be better for teens? I love my sons. I want them to have a rich and full sex life. How creepy would it be for me to be rooting for them to be stunted and deprived? Abstinence only education is stupid on so many levels it is almost comical.

Comment by Jeff

Jeff — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 18:47:05 -0800

Wasn't there a big study whose results were recently published that showed abstinence-only education did not delay first sexual experiences for teenagers? That would seem to kind of make the results of these two studies mentioned above moot wrt abstinence-only education.

Comment by Marty

Marty — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 13:10:52 -0800

@17 So you teach your sons that women can belittle them and then use them for sex as if they are dogs who only get a treat when they don't jump on the furniture instead of treating them like actual adults whose identities are varified through physical connectiveness? Awesome!

Also, this study says nothing about class, race, or identity. Maybe the reason delinquets don't get laid is because they're DELINQUETS! Losers are more likely to lash out because they are not socially accepted by their peers! Well no friggin duh.