Dec. 14th, 2009

epporsimuove: (Default)
According to a new study out of the University of Minnesota, there is "no higher level of psychological distress among young men and women who engage in casual sexual relationships."

I don't want to talk to much about the results of the study, they don't surprise me much, but the author of this article found it necessary to include this gem:

The takeaway message isn't that casual sex is OK — not with the risks of sexually transmitted disease, unintended pregnancy and even sexual violence that can occur, [the lead researcher] said.

What the fuck? You have just found that casual sex does not lead to higher rates of psychological distress, but BEWARE!!! casual sex is still bad for you? First of all, comprehensive sexual education and birth control (condoms, chemical birth control, etc) dramatically reduce the risk of STDs and unintended pregnancy. Use protection and the risks are few. Secondly, CASUAL SEX =/= SEXUAL VIOLENCE. There is no correlation. That this level of victim blaming comes from the lead researcher of this study, and that the reporter felt the need to include this shit, is offensive and pisses me the hell off.

Really, anyone else tired of this form of fear-mongering and victim blaming arising again and again even as the data shows it to be baseless?


epporsimuove: (Default)

August 2010

89101112 1314
1516 1718192021

Most Popular Tags

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags