sexreeducated:

Here are some other things to know about taking emergency contraceptive pills:

• Don’t swallow extra pills. They probably won’t reduce your risk of pregnancy any more than the recommended dose for emergency contraception. But they will make it more likely you’ll feel sick to your stomach (one of the more common side effects).

• If you feel sick to your stomach, it should be only mild nausea that goes away in a day or so.

• If you throw up within an hour after taking the pills, call your health care provider. You may need to repeat a dose, and it might make sense to take some anti-nausea medication (Find out more about side effects here).

• If you have any other symptoms you are worried about,contact your health care provider. Ask for an appointment right away if you have:
  • Severe pain in your leg (calf or thigh)
  • Several abdominal pain
  • Chest pain or cough or shortness of breath
  • Severe headaches, dizziness, weakness, or numbness
  • Blurred or loss of vision or trouble speaking
  • Jaundice (if you see a yellowish tint in the whites of your eyes, your skin, or your mucus membranes)

• Your next period should start within the next month, although it might come a few days early or late (find out more here). If you don’t get your period by the time you expect it, you might consider getting a pregnancy test.

• Start using a regular birth control method you think you’ll be able to use every time you have sex because that will be more effective than relying only on emergency contraception. And, if there’s any chance you could be at risk of sexually transmitted infections, use a condom.

The table below lists all of the brands of oral contraception available in the U.S. which you can use to prevent pregnancy in the few days after sex. For information about how to use a specific pill as an emergency contraceptive, click on the brand name in the table.

^b The labels for Next Choiceand Levonorgestrel Tablets say to take one pill within 72 hours after unprotected intercourse, and another pill 12 hours later. However, recent research has found that both pills can be taken at the same time. Research has also shown that that all of the brands listed here are effective when used within 120 hours after unprotected sex.

Please Visit the Website for a Larger version of the Table!

hellyeahscarleteen:

Translation: “Re-focus” = turn what was once sex ed into marriage propaganda.

MADISON, Wisconsin (Reuters) - Wisconsin lawmakers have approved controversial measures to block the state’s new health insurance exchange from covering abortions and require sex education classes to emphasize abstinence as the preferred method of birth control.

Both bills, which were voted through the Republican-controlled Assembly by 61-34 late Tuesday, now head to the desk of Republican Governor Scott Walker, who is widely expected to sign them.

The laws ban private insurers from offering abortion coverage in the plans they offer through the state-run exchange where thousands of Wisconsin residents will buy subsidized coverage under President Obama’s healthcare overhaul.

…Also late Tuesday, the Assembly passed a bill that repeals the so-called “Healthy Youth Act” passed last session by Democrats that provided “comprehensive sex education.”

Once Walker signs the measure, it will require schools that offer a human development and growth curriculum to emphasize abstinence as the preferred method of birth control and emphasize the role and “socioeconomic benefits” of marriage.

The measure would also remove information on contraceptive methods approved by the Food and Drug Administration from the required curriculum.

Democrats argued the bill would neglect science-based teaching and put children at risk from sexually transmitted diseases and teen pregnancy.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/sns-rt-us-wisconsin-abortion-sex-educationbre82e022-20120314,0,1164343.story

prolongedeyecontact:

pantslessprogressive:

thedailywhat:

Abstinence-Only Bill of the Day: With the nation’s attention trained on the media’s breathless coverage of Super Tuesday, Utah’s legislature this evening quietly passed a bill requiring schools to teach abstinence-only sex education, or else skip the classes altogether.

Additionally, both teachers and students would be prohibited from discussing contraception and homosexuality in the classroom.

HB363 passed in the state Senate by a vote of 19 to 10. Utah’s House approved the bill last month.

Senator Stuart Reid (R-Ogden) said the legislation takes sex ed out of the hands of teachers “who we have no idea what their morals are” and turns it over to parents.

But Democrats countered that parents already had control over their children’s sex education, as they were given a choice whether to keep their child enrolled in sex ed classes or pull them out.

Under the new legislation, sex ed classes — if they are offered at all — must teach abstinence only, and parents are required to opt in if they want their child to attend.

“It’s concerning when now we’re trying to dictate morality,” said Sen. Ross Romero (D-SLC). “We’ve been discussing this as if every child has the benefit of two loving and caring parents who are ready to have a conversation about appropriate sexual activity, and I’m here to tell you that’s just not the case.”

The Utah PTA expressed vehement opposition to the bill. “I just can’t believe they did this,” said the association’s president-elect, Liz Zentner. “I think they’re going to have to revisit it in a couple years when the teen pregnancy rates and teen [sexually transmitted disease] rates shoot through the roof.”

It remained unclear if Gov. Gary Herbert would sign the bill into law or veto it. Speaking ahead of a House Education Committee hearing on HB363 last month, Herbert said he felt the existing curriculum “works pretty well,” but also said he personally supports abstinence as a form of pre-marital contraception. 

[sltrip / fox13.]

Abstinence-only education is about as effective as trying to hold a rational discussion with Rush Limbaugh. 

It should be illegal to do this. Research is very clear on abstinence-only education:

• The Content of Federally Funded Abstinence-Only Education Programs
• Federal Funding and Statistics
• The Facts
• Study: Majority of Young Evangelicals Have Pre-Marital Sex, Exposing Flaws With Right-Wing On Sex Ed
• U.S. Teen Pregnancy Rate At Lowest Level In Nearly 40 Years [hint: almost entirely due to contraception and sex education!]
• Researchers find abstinence-only sex education does not, in fact, promote abstinence
• “Abstinence Comes To Albuquerque” [Just try not to throw a chair when you watch this]
• Sex-Negative Education and the Spectre of Rape « Sex Positive Activism 

From Are You in the Know? [Teen Edition]

• What impact does comprehensive sex education have on teen sexual behavior worldwide? Comprehensive sex education, which includes information on both contraception and abstinence, often results in delayed sexual activity, lower frequency of sex and fewer sexual partners.[49] This type of sex education can also increase condom or contraceptive use and reduce risky sexual behaviors.  Receiving comprehensive sex education does not lead teens to have sex earlier.
• What impact does abstinence-only sex education have on teens? A review of 13 commonly used abstinence-only curricula found that 11 had incorrect, misleading or distorted information.[70] Some abstinence-only programs have been shown to deter contraceptive use among sexually active teens, increasing their risk of pregnancy and STIs.[67] Moreover, there is no strong evidence that abstinence-only programs influence teens to delay sexual activity, to have fewer sexual partners or, if already sexually active, to become abstinent.[71]

Not to mention most people support the teaching of comprehensive sex education in schools.

That awkward moment when I’m more qualified to be a lawmaker than a significant portion of our elected officials.

Can’t we make it mandatory that the laws they pass have to be scientifically and medically sound? Shouldn’t we care whether the research that is the foundation of laws such as these is legitimate? Because when it’s not it has real consequences. For instance, Priscilla Coleman’s research on abortion causing mental illness has been officially and thoroughly debunked. But prior to that several states passed laws for mandatory antichoice counseling prior to abortions based solely on her research. I have my doubts that they’ll ever be repealed. So allowing lawmakers to pass laws based on absolutely nothing, like the above legislation, will adversely affect us for the foreseeable future.

pantslessprogressive:

thedailywhat:

Abstinence-Only Bill of the Day: With the nation’s attention trained on the media’s breathless coverage of Super Tuesday, Utah’s legislature this evening quietly passed a bill requiring schools to teach abstinence-only sex education, or else skip the classes altogether.

Additionally, both teachers and students would be prohibited from discussing contraception and homosexuality in the classroom.

HB363 passed in the state Senate by a vote of 19 to 10. Utah’s House approved the bill last month.

Senator Stuart Reid (R-Ogden) said the legislation takes sex ed out of the hands of teachers “who we have no idea what their morals are” and turns it over to parents.

But Democrats countered that parents already had control over their children’s sex education, as they were given a choice whether to keep their child enrolled in sex ed classes or pull them out.

Under the new legislation, sex ed classes — if they are offered at all — must teach abstinence only, and parents are required to opt in if they want their child to attend.

“It’s concerning when now we’re trying to dictate morality,” said Sen. Ross Romero (D-SLC). “We’ve been discussing this as if every child has the benefit of two loving and caring parents who are ready to have a conversation about appropriate sexual activity, and I’m here to tell you that’s just not the case.”

The Utah PTA expressed vehement opposition to the bill. “I just can’t believe they did this,” said the association’s president-elect, Liz Zentner. “I think they’re going to have to revisit it in a couple years when the teen pregnancy rates and teen [sexually transmitted disease] rates shoot through the roof.”

It remained unclear if Gov. Gary Herbert would sign the bill into law or veto it. Speaking ahead of a House Education Committee hearing on HB363 last month, Herbert said he felt the existing curriculum “works pretty well,” but also said he personally supports abstinence as a form of pre-marital contraception. 

[sltrip / fox13.]

Abstinence-only education is about as effective as trying to hold a rational discussion with Rush Limbaugh. 

There’s a difference between supporting abstinence and promoting dangerous ignorance and confusion that could lead to life-altering consequences. This will not protect anyone.

womenaresociety:

danceswithfaeriesunderthemoon:

10. Laws against abortion do not stop abortion; they simply make it less safe. The number of women who get abortions does not change when it goes from being legal to illegal, or vice versa. The only thing that changes is more women die. Every year, 78,000 women die from unsafe abortions.

9. If people want to stop abortion, they should turn to methods that do work. These include comprehensive sex education and safe, affordable contraceptives. Unfortunately, as illogical as it sounds, the people who are most against abortion are also often most against these preventative measures. If they truly wanted to reduce the number of abortions that occur, they would embrace these methods.

8. The politicians “pro-lifers” so ardently support are only after one thing: self-interest. The majority of them are not “pro-life” because they agree with you; they are because they know you will continue to vote for them—and they know that making women remain pregnant not only takes away their power, but it also keeps them busy, in line, controlled, as well as a baking factory for their failing economy. The more people they have to rule over, the more they have to work and buy. Period.

7. Religious ideology is no foundation for any law. Freedom of religion is guaranteed to any citizen in the United States; so why would the beliefs and values of one religion mandate actual laws for all citizens? It would be unfair, unjust and immoral. We do not have laws against eating fish, nor do we have laws that declare it is legal to sell one’s daughter, rape someone, or keep a person as a slave—all things that are promoted in religious text.

6. Reproductive restrictions do not end with abortion. Many people also argue that contraception itself is wrong—another mainly-religious philosophy—and will deny women the protection they need based on this belief. There are legislative acts that allow actual pharmacists to deny women their birth control because of their beliefs; does this not violate the Hippocratic Oath, especially if thousands of women are on birth control because their very lives depend on it (see #2)? Also, since it is my belief that men should not rape women, if I were a pharmacist, would I have a right to deny a man his Viagra just in case he uses it to rape? You never know.

5. Most people who are against abortion will never even become pregnant. If a law would never, in any circumstance, apply to a man, a man creating that law is preposterous. It is akin to men creating laws that ban women from voting, owning property, or showing skin in public—only much more deadly.

4. Women who are raped or victims of incest should not be forced to carry out a pregnancy. Odds are that 1 in 3 women will be victims of sexual violence in her lifetime. Does this mean that 33% of all women should be forced to carry out a pregnancy from this violation? Considering how many people are killed during childbirth (see #2), should we allow this further risk to endured on top of what has already been done?

Many would argue that these women could endure the pregnancy, spending nearly a year of her life simply re-living the rape and its effects over and over again, to give up a baby at the end of it for adoption. However, we all are aware of the fact that there are millions of unwanted children awaiting adoption as we speak who remain unclaimed; in fact, UNICEF estimates that there are 210 million orphans in the world right now. If they have no one willing to be their parent or guardian, why would another baby have a better chance?

My theory is that people who spend so much time, energy, and money on anti-abortion campaigns should instead spend it on the precious children they say need saving so much—the ones who are alive and parentless. Imagine if all the funds spent on all those billboards and flyers and campaigns were instead either spent adopting or donating to places that are overrun with orphaned children… perhaps some actual credibility would be given to these people who claim to love children so much.

Also, there is the fact of the matter of the more than one million homeless youth in America alone. The number one factor for a child being homeless is physical or sexual abuse at home. Perhaps these “child-lovers” should step in and care for these already-born children as well.

3. Reproductive choice can be the only thing that stands between a woman and poverty. There is a reason that the 1 billion poorest people on the planet are female. In sub-Saharan Africa and west Asia, women typically have five to six children, which leaves them powerless to provide for not only their own families, but themselves.

2. Reproductive choice can be the only thing that stands between a woman and DEATH. Women who face deadly consequences of a pregnancy deserve to choose to live. Teen girls, whose bodies are not yet ready for childbirth, are five times more likely to die. Not only do 70,000 girls ages 15-19 die each year from pregnancy and childbirth, but the babies that do survive have a 60% higher chance of dying as well.

During my own pregnancy—which had been unexpected though joyful up to this point—I was horrified to learn that I had preeclampsia only 25 weeks in. While they were able to save both my daughter and me, she was born at 1 pound, three months premature, and was a medical miracle. Most babies at that weight do not survive; and if they do, they suffer severe complications—as do the mothers, including myself. I was then informed that my risk of it happening all over again was extremely high, and that if there were a next time I may not be so lucky. I am fortunate to have access to birth control, but many women—especially young ones—do not. Preeclampsia alone affects 10 to 15% of all women! There are hundreds of other complications that arise besides preeclampsia that can, and will, result in death as well.

1. Doctors, not governments, should always be the people to make medical recommendations and opinions. Would you allow the government to tell you if you could have a kidney transplant or a blood transfusion? Of course not. The fact that we evenconsider, let alone allow, governments to regulate a medical procedure is both illogical and foolish.

The source is down there \/

(Source: amplifyyourvoice.org)

I don’t really care if I’ve reblogged this, I’m gonna reblog it again. All I would change is that the abortion debate doesn’t just apply to women but all people able to get pregnant.

sanityscraps:

michelle-my-belle:

Why are people afraid to talk to their kids about homosexuality and transgendered persons? I have a feeling these same people don’t even want to discuss heterosexual sex or use the correct names for genitalia. 

“IT WILL CONFUSE THEM!” Then, when they’re of college age, they will ask their sexual health professor if a woman can get pregnant if she swallows semen. Seriously, I know someone who is a sexual health professor who is asked this question ALL THE TIME.

This is one of many reasons why comprehensive sex education is so goddamn important!

inherhipstheresrevolutions:

lizardkitsch:

prolifehypocrisy:

gasptambourines:

sanityscraps:

lifesuhgamble:

There is a chemical in a girls’ brain is released only two different times in her life, when she has sex, and when she breast feeds her baby. This chemical emotionally connects her to another person for the rest of her life. Us guys? We only release this chemical when we bond with our children. So if you think sex is a game and go around fucking as many girls as you want, remember that you can mentally mess this girl up for the rest of her life. If you’re still friends afterwards then whatever, but she will always feel some sort of feeling for you, just because of the chemical.

It’s called Oxytocin, it’s actually released when a woman gives birth as well. But this is so true… sex is more than just a game, and this is a clear reason that explains why humans were only created to have sex with just one person. Doing it with multiple people will have a very strong negative effect on your relationship with the person you want to be with for the rest of your life. I wish more kids knew about this… not that this should be your only motive not to have sex before marriage, but it is one of the most important.

Everyone should know this.

Though I’ll contest that we were “created” for anything, this psychological stuff is basically true, to the best of my knowledge.

lol using science to slut shame

cool

Actually, pretty much none of that is true. Both men and women have oxytocin. It’s released during both sex and masturbation.

And no, having multiple sexual partners does not mess you up mentally or make you unable to bond. Premarital sex isn’t inherently different from marital sex, either. And besides, if sex makes us bond so well, why do most people still have multiple sexual partners during their life? Why do people still break up?

It’s love that breaks your heart and messes you up mentally. Not sex. Being broken up with or betrayed is what makes people cynical and distrusting. I think the reason people mix the two up is because the two are closely intertwined and a lot of people (most people?) only have sex when they’re in a serious relationship. It’s correlation, not causation. Oh, and the fact that sexuality is treated as shameful in our society doesn’t help.

Sorry for this somewhat off-topic post, but I think it’s important that people know the facts when it comes to human sexuality. Telling people that there’s something wrong with them just because they’ve had more sex partners than you approve of does not do them any favors. It just makes them feel ashamed and hurt, if anything.

Oh, and here’s some other magical wonderful things that oxytocin does!

Uterine contraction – important for cervical dilation before birth and causes contractions during the second and third stages of labor. Oxytocin release during breastfeeding causes mild but often painful contractions during the first few weeks of lactation.

and

Sexual arousal. Oxytocin injected into the cerebrospinal fluid causes spontaneous erections in rats,^[34] reflecting actions in the hypothalamus and spinal cord. Centrally administrated oxytocin receptor antagonists can prevent non contact erections, which is a measure of sexual arousal. Studies using oxytocin antagonists in female rats provide data that oxytocin increases lordosis behavior, indicating an increase in sexual receptivity.^[14]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxytocin

Sounds like fun stuff.

It also seems to make people more ethnocentric:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/11/science/11hormone.html

Oh, and as for how harmful premarital sex is? Here’s how it worked out for me:

• No diseases.
• No pregnancies or pregnancy scares.
• Married my high school sweetheart.
• Only ever had one sexual partner.

So maybe there’s something to that oxytocin thing (I think sex made us both feel closer) but as for the premarital sex being inherently harmful and ruining you for life? Not so much.

My first serious relationship involved no sex. There actually wasn’t any physical contact. But when he broke up with me I was devastated for a while and had a hard time trusting or loving anyone. I was almost too scared to enter into my current relationship thinking that maybe it was a rebound or it would just hurt me again. Love did that to me. Breaking up was what broke my heart. Not sex. (Happy ending: It’s all okay now because we weren’t right for each other and he was right to end it. I still talk to him and consider him a good friend. So that first heartbreak feels like the end of the world, but it’s not.)

So I guess the conclusion of this little ramble is that you shouldn’t feel ashamed, bad, or damaged by having premarital sex or multiple partners throughout your lifetime. Sometimes we think we’re in love and it’s going to last forever but it doesn’t. Sometimes we just want to have casual sex. That’s not inherently bad. You just need to always be honest about your intentions and make sure that you’re taking care your and your partner’s health. Don’t betray, mislead, infect, or unintentionally impregnate anyone and it’s okay.

…Wow, I had a lot to say. Sorry if that annoyed anybody.

You actually release Oxytocin when doing a lot of things….like petting dogs. Or hanging out with your friends.

so

um

way screw up on science, OP.

GENDER. STEREOTYPES. ARE NEVER. TRUE. EVER. EVER. EVER. STEREOTYPES OF ANY FORM ARE REDUCTIONIST AND EXTREMELY INSULTING. OMG PEOPLE.

So why don’t more schools have sex education? It’s pretty clear we /desperately/ need it.