<p>JHS, cross-post. I guess I missed that term in early 70's in Ann Arbor! Or I was just clueless.</p>
<p>So, at what age is hooking up no big deal? At a recent high shc (private) open house a woman, whose D was applying as a repeat junior, asked a question about birth control, stating that her D had a steady BF and the two were sexually active. Other parents (not me, I have a D in college) were aghast at the mention of a sexually active 17 year old - - a student just one year from the college hook-up culture.</p>
<p>I didn't see any of the no-big-deal, nothing-new attitudes reflected in this thread.</p>
<p>This may not be popular, but here's what we told our kids.</p>
<p>15yo is a Scout, and as part of the Family Life badge we had to have a big discussion on various topics, including sex. Not surprisingly, Scouts wanted the conversation to go like this: "Don't do it. Save yourself for marriage." We opted for: "While saving yourself for marriage is an admirable goal that some will attain, we recognize that people are delaying marriage until their 30s and beyond. We don't think it's reasonable to tell you right now to remain a virgin until you're 35 and married. What we DO think is reasonable is to not have sex while you're in high school. Too many complications, too many important things on your plate."</p>
<p>So we set an expectation, but not one we see as unreasonable. If I discover my sons are sexually active in college I won't be shocked or disappointed. I think college is a time for all sorts of discovery, including sexual. I would be disappointed if I learned that they were having lots of unprotected sex.</p>
<p>foolishpleasure- the fact that I think it is nothing new does not mean that I would necessarily celebrate it in my high-school student. I would hope, however, that if it came up, I would deal with it appropriately and rationally, including discussions about birth control. But probably not at an open house!
And, completely separate and BTW, I think that sex with a steady BF and "hook-up culture" are not the same thing.</p>
<p>A reminder to pay attention to what corranged said: "hook-up" means sexual, means unplanned (or semi-unplanned), and means without clear commitments, but it does not always mean "having sex".</p>
<p>foolishpleasure asked:</p>
<p>
[quote]
So, at what age is hooking up no big deal?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>From your entire post, I am assuming you define "hooking up" as having casual vaginal intercourse and the "no big deal" is the attitude of the parents. </p>
<p>I have a S. I think he has a responsibility to himself and all partners to only engage in safe sex with willing partners when totally straight (no booze or drugs). I also have also discussed "willing" in the concept of the girl being no more than 2 years younger until the girl is 18.</p>
<p>As to what age "casual" sex was no big deal to me, I never thought of it in that context. I counseled S to wait to start and to practice safe sex always, but I guess I assumed that whenever it happened I'd be OK with it.</p>
<p>My S attended a private all boy non-religious school. The sex education was introduced early, was very thorough on why to practice safe sex and how to get and use protection. The parents were well aware of these courses and attended many meetings (w/o the boys). I can only remember 1 parent having any concern about the course. </p>
<p>Many of the Moms were doctors or nurses and were some of the strongest supporters of the program. I recall one Mom was particularly adamant about the boys knowing everything and that parents make sure the boys had access to condoms. She was candid, she also had a daughter, and she (1) knew the girls were sexually active much earlier than she recalled and (2) that the boys would have plenty of opportunities and needed to know what was what.</p>
<p>What happened with S wasn't casual sex, he and the same girl appeared to be exclusively involved with each other the last 2 years in hs.</p>
<p>I have a niece who is 12. She is much more comfortable talking to me about sex than her parents. And her parents said they were OK with us talking. There is a girl in her class who has been pregnant twice. My niece has been told in her public school "health" classes that birth control is highly unreliable. I have a concern for her. If I thought my child was misinformed and didn't believe in safe sex, I'd definitely NOT be OK with "hooking up."</p>
<p>Am I the only parent who feels sick to her stomach reading this? I used to worry that my son would get involved in a serious relationship too early, but now I'm worrying that he'll never have any relationships. He tells me that he prefers "random play." Thinking back to our college days...Do you remember the handsome guy that you hated? The one that lured dozens of girls and then discarded them the next day? I don't want my son to become that guy!</p>
<p>As JHS said, the "Walk of Shame" isn't a very big deal and usually isn't shameful. Going-out clothes often don't appear that different than everyday clothes, especially if a sweatshirt or coat is thrown on top. Unless the party the night before was themed (80s, Halloween, etc.), most people don't look closely enough to try to figure out what you're wearing. There are other cases when people go home in the morning wearing the same clothes they wore the night before, such as if someone decided to stay at a friend's dorm/apartment or at their boyfriend or girlfriend's place. Finally, most of these "Walks of Shame" happen early in the morning, way before most students are up and walking around campus on the weekend, particularly if there was a good party the night before. It's not a big deal.</p>
<p>With regular hook-ups (i.e. friends with benefits), this issue usually doesn't exist at all since the two people most often 1) get together during the day or evening, and 2) live in the same dorm. It's casual sex, but it's sort of a separate issue.</p>
<p>The high school question: It's much more difficult for high school students to casually hook-up, not to mention that drama and gossip is much more rampant in high school. Unless your kids are going to pretty crazy parties in high school, casual hook-ups aren't really the norm. They would require advanced planning, driving over to someone's house when a parent isn't home or finding somewhere else to go, and driving home afterwards. It's quite an ordeal in high school, and unless the kids are going to big parties that have available empty bedrooms, it requires planning and being sober. College hook-ups almost exclusively include alcohol and are rarely planned ahead of time, with the exception of friends with benefits situations. In college, you can make out with someone at a party while staying at the party (a little sketchy, but usually acceptable) or walk five minutes away to someone's dorm/apartment. You can stop at any time, and home is usually just a short walk away. Of course, as Mafool said, there is a huge difference between sex with a steady partner in high school and hooking up while in high school.</p>
<p>Toledo, girls aren't "lured" and then "discarded." They are usually equal players in whatever happens--or doesn't happen. I know guys who have turned down girls as well as girls who have turned down guys, even when back in a bedroom together. I also know people who hook-up regularly but don't have intercourse; I especially know girls who are virgins but hook up regularly (making out, oral sex, or something else). JHS gave a good reminder that sex, as in intercourse, often isn't what people mean when they talk about hooking up. Oral sex almost always "counts." Making out sometimes does; in my experience the exact definition (and what's included) depends on the particular area.</p>
<p>Mafool,</p>
<p>I agree, sex w/ steady BF is not hooking-up. </p>
<p>In fact, that was my point - - parents were alarmed at the idea of teen sex in a committed relationship just a year before the hook-up culture of college, which on this thread is dismissed untroubling and nothing new.</p>
<p>Digressing just a little---Dolphin shorts were then what Soffie's are now, and worn 1-2 sizes too small.</p>
<p>Got it, Foolishpleasure. Thanks. I did misunderstand you.</p>
<p>I agree that this thing has been going on forever. I wonder if it is really any more prevalent than when I was in school. </p>
<p>That said, it's not something that I would be encouraging in my student.</p>
<p>Corranged,</p>
<p>I recall a very informative prgm sponsored several years ago by the NYC Parents League where the student participants reported that while hook-ups were not the norm, they were not particularly uncommon either. I have heard similar reports from students attending prep (boarding) schools. Parents work, homes are empty - - it's not as difficulat as you suggeest.</p>
<p>On the safe sex issue... I know it's said that it's not safe sex if people are drunk, which is valid. In terms of condoms, though, I don't know anyone who has casual, heterosexual sex without them. The guy usually asks or insists, but I have never heard of a guy in my college refusing. It's both partners' responsibility to remember. It's extremely unusual for me to hear a friend mention unprotected casual sex, and the declaration is always met with shock and indignation. Unprotected gay sex is a different matter; it happens, and it never should. I know some committed couples who use condoms every time or most times, and I know other committed couples who rely on the woman's birth control pill and mutual fidelity.</p>
<p>Edit: Just wrote a reply to you, Foolishp, somehow got deleted. Summary: NYC is not like most places in that it has lots of available public transportation. In most areas, casual sex between high school students requires time, luck, and a car. Many students don't have cars. Students like those on CC don't have those afternoon hours free before mom and dad get home from work. There needs to be some planning for it to work out; in college, casual sex (besides friends with benefits) has no or minimal planning involved. The real question is, what's the line between casual sex and non-casual sex? What do those terms mean, anyway? Is one OK and the other bad? What issues are involved in each? How should each be handled, if "handled" is even something they have to be?</p>
<p>:) WIsh I could start a second (no, third) career here as matchmaker to all the cool posters concerned about their offspring. But of course, they wouldn't listen...and why should they?</p>
<p>More seriously, I've seen among my 3 kids how seriously they do take their singular relationships and there's a deep fear (IMHO) of breaking them off. I'm not sure that the relationsj hip that was good and intimate for 8 months is necessarily the one for a lifetime. But they seem to stay on, exceptionally loyal. And maybe that's not the best call for someone between ages 18-22? Just a thought.</p>
<p>toledo said: </p>
<p>
[quote]
I used to worry that my son would get involved in a serious relationship too early, but now I'm worrying that he'll never have any relationships. He tells me that he prefers "random play."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>If it is any solace, from what literature I've read, your son is already the man he is going to eventually be. If, as a very young and young boy, he had a model of an intimate committed relationship that "worked," he is very likely to seek that at some point for himself.</p>
<p>Also, if your son thinks his mom is asking him "why don't you have a significant relationship?" you may be getting the ego defense of "heck Mom, I'm "playing the field" [circa 1960s]. This may or may not be true.</p>
<p>I have completely opposite anxieties about my two kids. For one, I have the same fears as paying3tuitions. Completely unexpressed fears, by the way; I have no idea how I would even have conversation about this. (I tried, once. No dice. And the child wasn't even IN a relationship, then. If there's a specific relationship on the table, the whole topic is toxic.) For the other, it's the fear of not taking the risks and getting the practice necessary to build real relationship skills. Sometimes I wish their common gene pool and upbringing had produced a happy medium.</p>
<p>In case you didn't know, JHS, it's sort of a joke at the U of C (where I and JHS' children go) that students become almost co-dependent when they're dating and that they hang on to dying relationships way too long. I think you hit on an important point, P3T. I've certainly seen friends work really hard at relationships that perhaps they shouldn't be in at this point.</p>
<p>D's relationship wasn't toxic, she and BF just grew apart (he was 2.5 yrs older and assuming many adult responsibilites - - including footing the bill for his college tuition). I certainly didn't expect them to stay together as long as they did (a bit too long, by all accounts), but, now that it's over, D is finding it difficult to meet boys interested in anything beyond a casual sexual encounter. I wonder to what extent the desire to avoid the hook-up culture results in kids hanging on to, if not bad relationships, relationships that have run their course.</p>
<p>I doubt that's one of the uncommon aspects of Chicago. It has been practically universal among people I know, from high school until right now. Maybe somewhere there's a Planet of Rational Lovers where people make clear-eyed decisions about such things -- maybe you even live there, corranged -- but I haven't visited it yet.</p>
<p>Bring</a> back dating, not hookups</p>
<p>Interesting article from Nov. 2007.</p>