Recently I gave a short sexuality presentation to a group of year 12 students promoting abstinence as the best choice based on all the current research. After the presentation a number of students personally thanked me for using solid research to challenge many of the popular myths around teens and sexuality.

However later that evening I started to receive emails from four students challenging what I had presented. I thought that it would insightful for others to see the where these young people are coming from and how they have been influenced by popular culture. 

I hope that you enjoy the interaction.

Student 1.

-----Original Message-----
 Sent: Monday, 19 March 2007 10:51 PM
 Subject: Abstinence speech

Your messages about holes in condoms are incorrect.
I understand where you gained that misconception, as there are holes in latex gloves, however, in latex condoms, these holes are incredibly rare. Add this consideration to the fact that latex condoms are at minumum dipped in latex twice. Therefore, the chances of there being a hole in the condom is incredibly, even minutely, low.
From the seminar you gave, this was one of many problems encountered. Please in the future, when presenting a speech such as yours to an incredibly impressionable group, check your facts. Presenting things such as this also demerits you in the eyes of the audience, thus making any byzantine point you attempt to make pointless.

Source:http://www.positive.org/Home/faq/truth.html

Sent: 3/20/07, Peter Janetzki wrote:

Dear R

Thanks for your e-mail. In fact I was not talking about latex used to make gloves (however have you thought why doctors using surgical gloves made similarly to condoms scrub before and after surgery and double glove?) I was talking about condoms.

If you are convinced that I an incorrect and misguiding young people and would like me to change what I say I issue you with a challenge. Do some research from creditable sources that show that there are no cracks, tunnels, fissures or pores in condom latex. Secondly find for me just one condom manufacturer who will say that latex used in condoms has no cracks, tunnels, fissures or pores. Thirdly can you explain to me why condom manufacturers spend large amounts of money on testing batches of condoms using a micrometer test, air volume test and a water leak test, if multiply dipping process is so effective in prevention of cracks, tunnels, fissures and pores? Fourthly are you able to tell me why we have problems with HPV, HSV, and Chlamydia amongst young people if condoms are so good at protection? And lastly can you tell me the real failure rate (not the theoretical failure rate) of condoms in the prevention of pregnancy with typical users?

M Scott Peck (1997, p.216) wrote "The truth will set you free, but first it will make you damn mad" and Siddhartha Gautama 'The Buddha' said, "There are only 2 mistakes you can make on the road to Truth¡K¡Knot starting and not going all the way"

I hope that you take my challenge and that I will hear from you shortly.

Regards

Peter J

Date: Mar 20, 2007 5:44 PM

Thank you for the prompt reply. I will definitely get around do giving you an answer, with proper research for each and every one of these challenges. I however, cannot provide complete and reliable research. I have research and answers, yet I would prefer to reference from books and proper scientific studies. I will also acquire the reference from a condom company, however I believe that they will coincide there are "holes" in the latex, however as I have stated, thus is why they use multiple layers (there are also rigours test, as you have stated yourself). I would rather, however, to construct a complete essay in answer to your challenges, yet I will require the time provided to me during the holidays (2 weeks thankfully).

Once again, thanks for the prompt reply.

Dear Peter

One thing, that I forgot to ammend to my last email:
Could you please provide me with your research for the condom holes as well. So I may compare, and gain "the truth".

Thanks again

Sent: Tue 20/03/2007 6:06 PM

Your most welcome. I will send some powerpoint slides that gives extensive research and support. However you could start with the Medical Institute of Sexual Health which is a clearing house of all the latest medical research in this area.  http://www.medinstitute.org/content.php?name=FactsAboutCondoms

I also noted that the web page you referenced is rather old I think their source is 198? & 1993 and not up to date.

Regards

Peter J

Student 2

Sent: Tuesday, 20 March 2007 7:18 PM

Peter,

I am a student of the College, to whom you spoke on Monday 19 March.

I have always been proud of ¡K... We are a young school, void of elitism and outdated traditions. C¡K. is an Anglican school, which upholds Christian values, however, religious indoctrination and conservatism are not forced upon the students, rather a sense of diversity and generally liberal social stances exist.

I was interested to hear your opinions, however, I was disappointed in your overall messages about sexuality and relationships. The previous week, a representative of the Sexual Health Clinic in Roma St discussed with us safe sex and contraception. The information he delivered was scientific and concise. Neither his personal opinions nor his religious beliefs influenced his speech. He presented simple and sensible advice about protection and contraception.

Your presentation clashed with his for several reasons. Firstly, the statistics you included varied drastically in some circumstances. For example, you claimed that the "risk factor" of contracting HIV was 15%, even with correct condom use. You did not define or validate this statistic. Upon further research, I found this figure to be not only slanted and misleading, but downright false. Other information you presented was twisted in similar ways.

Your presentation was also conflicting because you did not encourage safe sexual practices. Granted, abstinence is the only form of absolute protection and contraception, however, you seemed to dismiss condoms as ineffective. Essentially, the message was "don't worry about condoms because if you're having pre-marital or promiscuous sex, you're stuffed anyway". We live in the 21st century. New-age attitudes toward sexuality are prevalent, especially among youth. Teenagers and young adults are going to have sex. Although complete abstinence is the only infallible form of protection, the percentage of people in my generation who will take this path (voluntarily or not), is a slim minority.

I have no problem with your promotion of abstinence. I do, however, abhor that you do not promote safe sexual practices as well.

Yours sincerely,

J

Sent: Tue 20/03/2007 8:10 PM

Thanks J for your feedback.

I am pleased to see that you are a think young man who is keen to challenge what is presented to him. I wonder if you challenged the presenter from the Sexual Health clinic about any of their information? However let me respond to some of your comments.

1. You said, ¡§We live in the 21st century. New-age attitudes toward sexuality are prevalent, especially among youth. Teenagers and young adults are going to have sex. Although complete abstinence is the only infallible form of protection, the percentage of people in my generation who will take this path (voluntarily or not), is a slim minority.¡§ What is the scientific or statistical support that you have for this claim or opinion? When in fact The Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health & Society (ARCSHS) which has conducted Australia wide research of the sexual practices of Australian students on 3 occasions each 5 years apart. The most recent report (2002) indicates that only 34.7% year 10 and year 12 students have had sexual intercourse. This figure has been fairly consistent over the three reports.

2. ¡§you claimed that the "risk factor" of contracting HIV was 15%, even with correct condom use. You did not define or validate this statistic. Upon further research, I found this figure to be not only slanted and misleading, but downright false¡¨. In fact I said the ¡¥relative¡¦ risk factor for HIV was 15% and 50% for Chlamydia, 60% for Herpes If condoms are used 65% of the time and almost no protection against the 40 forms of HPV. I did mention that the support information (attached) was available which gave all the relevant sourcing unfortunately I didn¡¦t see any students take them. I¡¦m not sure where you have done your further research how ever the Medical Institute for Sexual Health http://www.medinstitute.org/ is the leading clearing house for all the latest research

3. "don't worry about condoms because if you're having pre-marital or promiscuous sex, you're stuffed anyway". I didn¡¦t say this nor did I imply this! Because of the short time for the presentation we didn¡¦t get to talk about the option for those who are sexually active and may wish to stop or take protective actions. I don¡¦t believe this perception that you hold.

4. ¡§a representative of the Sexual Health Clinic ¡K Your presentation clashed with his¡¨  Do you know the difference between ¡§Efficacy¡¨ and ¡§Effectiveness¡¨? Unfortunately many sex educators quote statistic of efficacy as this supports their world view and agenda. If you research statistics of effectiveness you will see that I have been very accurate.

5. ¡§I do, however, abhor that you do not promote safe sexual practices as well.¡¨  I do believe in promoting condoms as a safer sex option however it is in medical terms a secondary prevention and not a primary prevention. Dr Ifor Thomas the former head of the Royal Brisbane Women¡¦s Hospital said, ¡§that he is surprised that many sexuality educators promote condoms as the best sexual health option when it is a secondary strategy¡¨ (Sexual Sanity 1999). Secondly if someone has already spoken to you about this choice why should I? Jack maybe what you abhor is that I was open and upfront about my world view?

I hope that this response continues to challenge your thinking..

M Scott Peck (1997, p.216) wrote ¡§The truth will set you free, but first it will make you damn mad¡¨ and Siddhartha Gautama 'The Buddha' said, ¡§There are only 2 mistakes you can make on the road to Truth¡K¡Knot starting and not going all the way¡¨

Regards

Peter Janetzki

Student 3

Sent: Monday, 19 March 2007 3:55 PM

Subject: leave us alone

you came to our school today,

we hate you. some of us are obviously sexually active, and we don't

appreciate you trying to make us feel guilty. please don't continue to

spread your hateful message at other institutions.

it is hard enough for young people to understand their sexuality during

adolescence, and the last thing they need is guilt and fear. keep your

mouth shut, at least until you can open your mind and accept that

we are living in the 21st century.

Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 19:15:00 +1000

Dear P

Thanks for your feed back. When you say 'we' I am assuming that this means you and some of your friends.

In regard to your comments;

1. I am aware that some of you will be sexually active statistically somewhere between 25% and 47% actually having had intercourse.

2. Being a 21st century young person you probably hold to relative truth which means your truth is as valid as anyone else - so I don't understand why you would feel guilt. If you believe that sex with whoever is okay why feel guilty?

3. I also don't understand how what I shared was 'hateful' when all the information I shared comes from creditable research and supported statistically?

4. I agree that is hard for young people to understand their sexuality during adolescence and sadly media and popular culture make it even more confusing by not giving all the facts to young people.

5. I respect your opinions but unfortunately in a democratic society just because you don't like what I have shared doesn't mean I have to 'shut up' and stay out of other schools. In fact your response reinforces the importance for me to continue my work in this field. As Siddhartha Gautama 'The Buddha' said, "There are only 2 mistakes you can make on the road to Truth..not starting and not going all the way"

Please feel free to reply.

Regards

Peter J

Sent: Thu 22/03/2007 4:15 PM

bahaha.

so it is statistically proven that condoms are ineffective??   98% is not

effective enough?

trully you are spreading the more dangerous message: telling young people

that condoms are unreliable and that they should privilege abstinence as a

means of contraception is foolish.

we will continue to have sex and having us not use condoms is ridiculous. of course i understand that this is your 'profession' (which probably means

you should be using more current and accurate info/statistics) , and i

undertsand that the greater responsibilty falls upon our school. therefore, it wont surprise you that fellow students and i have also

directed complaints to the college.

as you may know, the complaints from your previous visit were many - causing

the college to 'dicontinue' employing your services.     clearly this was a

lie. all you did was avoid the topic of abortion (luckily for you).

i like your (typically christian) passive agressive style.   dont you

realise that God is ALL knowing?? which means he knows your INTENTIONS

too???   it is my opinion that compassion and good deeds are only rewarded

if pure.   this is one the the many reasons i choose not to associate myself

with christianity.

i guess to keep it simple:   its your job, so do it. BUt please present what

you have to say as opinion as it is not ALL fact.

Sent: Thu 22/03/2007 8:59 PM

Thanks for your reply.

I don't understand your hostility. I understand that you had a speaker already from the Sexual Health Clinic who spoke about 'safer sex practices'. Due to time constraints I didn't get to talk about this in the context of my presentation. I do believe in promoting condoms as a safer sex option however it is in medical terms a secondary prevention and not a primary prevention. Dr Ifor Thomas the former head of the Royal Brisbane Women¡¦s Hospital said, ¡§that he is surprised that many sexuality educators promote condoms as the best sexual health option when it is a secondary strategy¡¨ (Sexual Sanity 1999). Secondly if someone has already spoken to you about this choice why should I?

You quote 98% as effective. It is clear that you do not know the difference between ¡§Efficacy¡¨ and ¡§Effectiveness¡¨. 98% is the efficacy rate in the prevention of pregnancy (not STI's) and not the effectiveness rate. Unfortunately many sex educators quote statistic of efficacy as this supports their world view and agenda. If you research statistics of effectiveness you will see that I have been very accurate.

As an interesting side note have you ever thought why doctors using surgical gloves made similarly to condoms, double glove as well as scrub before and after surgery.

When it comes to effectiveness against STI's the ¡¥relative¡¦ risk factor for HIV was 15% and 50% for Chlamydia and almost no protection against the 40 forms of HPV when condoms are used 100% of the time, and 60% for Herpes if condoms are used 65% of the time. If you would like to check these figures the most up to date and compressive source is the Medical Institute for Sexual Health http://www.medinstitute.org

If I said use a condom and you will be safe, you might feel more comfortable and pleased but it isn't the truth. In fact what I shared was very factual it appears that you just disagree with these facts.

Regards

Peter J

Sent: Thu 22/03/2007 9:08 PM

ouchie, again with the passive agressive..... efficiency/effectivity is simply an argument of correct use/incorrect use,

yes??

therefore you were best to have spent 20 minutes explaining correct condom

use...

regadless of the factul basis behind your opinion, the fear of God has no

place in a presentation about sex. . . .

surely you can see that??  hahaha who am i kidding? its a delusions of the

mind.

if i wanted to twist a bunch of statistics my way and throw them in your

face i certainly could.

i struggle to believe that your intentions are pure,    that is all.

Sent: Thu 22/03/2007 9:21 PM

Thanks once again for your reply.

Passive aggressive? What makes you think that I or my reply is passive aggressive?

By the way I wrote 'EFFICACY & EFFECTIVENESS' not efficiency/effectivity which is a very important point. It is clear that you don't understand these research and statistical terms. And I am not sure that you are interested in having an honest look at this issue.

Regards

Peter J

Sent: Thu 22/03/2007 9:30 PM

well thanks for patronising me.

its a bit petty to say that efficacy and efficiency arent of the same

consequence. (when it comes to contraception at least)

is it crazy for me to say that i know more about teenagers (and their sex

lives) than you, a complete stranger.....?? no, probably not. but statistics seem to comfort you. however, if you really are intersted in

the truth of the issue. you should perhaps use statistics from a wider range

of sources (maybe even some that DONT comdemn premarital sex??)  clearly we

shall never agree. i sincerley hope people like you are a dying breed. we should be EVOLVING as a society not comparing our modern world to that of

the victorian era...

Sent: Thu 22/03/2007 9:50 PM

Thanks

My intent was not to patronise you. Contrary to what you think of me I have had 30 years of working with teenagers and I do know a few things about them including teens today.

Secondly I was not condemning pre-marital sex I was challenging the myth that it has no consequences as well as the popular belief of 'SAFE SEX'.

You make a number of assumptions about me and my understanding of teens and sexuality. Could you please suggest statistics sources that you think that I may be missing, avoiding or ignoring? By the way did you take a copy of the reference sheets giving all the relevant sources that were available at the end of my presentation?

Regards

Peter J

Sent: Thu 22/03/2007 9:59 PM

Katie our Practice Secretary was married late last year (30 December 2006) to Wes Davis. As many young couples do they hope to have their wedding pics in the local newspaper. However Katie was surprised to be informed that not only was she having her photos in the paper but that she was chosen as the Bride of the Year for the Redlands Times.   Check out the two page colour spread. Attachment: Katie's Wedding

Posted: 12:25 PM, 2/3/2007

Comments (0) | Add Comment | Link