Thread: Who do you think is responsible for teen pregnancies?

first of all we need to ask ourselves why teens are not considered capable of self-determination in one instance (when it suits the femistate) and in another, they are (when it suits the femistate)..

so when they want to shag, the femistate gives them (females) free contraception without the knowledge of their parents..

and when they get pregs, the femistate blames the male, or the parents..

Old enough to fuck, old enough to be a mother, old enough to take the responsibilities eh?

Or not?

A problem that has become much more common now that fathers have been booted out of the picture and their duties to protect their daughters rendered illegal..

a man can be jailed for so much as waving at his daughters in the street should mother and the femistate courts not approve..

Why not adopt the Dutch solution used in Holland, where the age of consent is 14.

Oh, and in case you are wondering, Holland has the lowest incidence of teengage pregnancies in Europe, where restrictive "Great" Britain has the highest rate!

Quote from Richard

Why not adopt the Dutch solution used in Holland, where the age of consent is 14.

Oh, and in case you are wondering, Holland has the lowest incidence of teengage pregnancies in Europe, where restrictive "Great" Britain has the highest rate!

Bordering on pedophilia though, isn't it.

Why?

Up until the late 1960s the age of consent was 21, then in @ 1968 it became 18 and during the 70's and 80s in many areas it is 16.

If the "experiment" was a success in Holland, why not try it elsewhere. Holland has the lowest ratio of teenage pregnancies, so that must say something.

Hmm... I wonder what the feminist reaction to this would be. I'm pretty sure the feminists will try to justify this one way or another. Presumably accusing the boys of being violent.

Quote from Richard

Why?

Up until the late 1960s the age of consent was 21, then in @ 1968 it became 18 and during the 70's and 80s in many areas it is 16.

If the "experiment" was a success in Holland, why not try it elsewhere. Holland has the lowest ratio of teenage pregnancies, so that must say something.

There's no evidence the age of consent is what makes Holland so successful, there's many other variables to consider.

The typical excuse is that the boy "impregnated her"...

Very true. I have not proven one causes the other, but presumed it, yet its also true that Holland has the lowest rate of teenage pregnancies in Europe.

But if the age limit on sex is younger and their society is happy with it, then it say something. I think in Japan the age of consent is 13 (I think 14/15 is about right).

Lets be honest, lots of kids experiement with sex, and if the age of consent is say 16 then this greatly widends the net of male "sex offenders". If a 15 year old boy "looks" at a 15 year old girl, he is offically a sex offender. Not so in Holland - which also has very low rates of sex offenders.

Duran, do you have any explanation?

Quote from Nikonian

The typical excuse is that the boy "impregnated her"...

Yes, the idea is that men and boys are active and women and girls are passive when it comes to sex. That is the foundation of blaming men and boys for everything that goes wrong in the world. It would be one thing to dump all responsibility on us if we also got all of the rights; however, if women and girls want rights, they must assume the accompanying responsibilities. Or, rather, morally speaking, they should.

The problem is that men gave women rights without responsibilities starting a century ago. It's impossible to undo now. What happens to a child when he's given an allowance and privileges with no chores or behavior expectations? He becomes a spoiled monster. It's not something that can be undone when he becomes an "adult". He's ruined. Likewise, modern women have become ruined. Some have managed somehow to slip through feminist cracks, but not many. Somehow, we have to reach future generations. Forget about fixing anyone over 20. It's a waste of time.

Please be aware that in my opinion, we're bordering on dangerous territory now - and I wouldn't want to start closing threads where discussions go from age of consent in one country to discussions of illegal sexual contact in this country.

The rate of fatherless kids has helped the rate of teen pregnancies. Kids without fathers are more likely to get caught into the sex, drugs and crime. The media and feminism doesn't help either.

Quote from Marx

Please be aware that in my opinion, we're bordering on dangerous territory now - and I wouldn't want to start closing threads where discussions go from age of consent in one country to discussions of illegal sexual contact in this country.

Issues have to handled delicately and thoughtfully so as not to avoid misinterpretation.

By changing age of consent one immiediately creates or eliminates problems.

And by its very nature the word "teenage pregnancies" implies the age range 13-19, and 70% of that age range is below the age of consent in the UK. And how many teenage pregnancies in the UK are below the age of consent?

We realise that sex is a taboo topic in the UK and feminists have used this to label very man a sex offender.

You're right when you say that we live in an age where women cast off all responsibility. Really it is just as much the girls fault as the guys, nevertheless it is BOTH their faults.

Really, the root of the problem is that teens are even being alone together. It is ridiculous. God has picked one person for each other person in the world, and teens, (and adults,) go around handing their virginity to anybody. No wonder so many people feel worthless today, they are giving themselves away.

Agreed. But how to educate teenagers properly?

Too much stress, and we reproduce the sexual repression which hallmarks anglo-saxon countries, too little and it can result in a wave of teenage pregnancies?

Or is it the fact that in the UK single mums get great welfare beneifts?....