Somebody I know is 20 and has slept with over 200 guys

I want a daughter, first and foremost, who is safe and healthy. You seem to have disregarded my point on those I've talked to with HIV.

A lack of sex education - which making sex a taboo topic can often create - is a breeding ground for STIs, not to mention teenage pregnancy. I would have thought - as a doctor - you'd be able to understand that viewpoint.

As I said, she would most likely do it with or without my permission and you'd be naive to think otherwise.

This is a view I've held for quite a while, especially having volunteered at a sexual health-related charity for more than two years. I thought this when you said I was "wonderful" and "sweet."

It's a realistic view.

Having sex with 200 guys in 4 years is wrong. Its highly pathological. Its not a question of being a parent that allows some freedom, its a question of being a parent that wants to raise a child that is doing something socially acceptable and reasonable.

Everyone should be educated, you should have frank discussions about the topic but that doesn't mean its to sleep with 200 guys. Condoms reduce your risk of HIV by 10-fold. So thats the same as that person sleeping with 20 guys. This isn't really a discussion of sexual safety its more a discussion of morals and social acceptability.

I don't understand how it's pathological... Can you expand.

You have really fallen from grace if you want a daughter that shags 200 men before the age of 20. My goodness.

Having sex with 200 guys in 4 years is wrong. Its highly pathological. Its not a question of being a parent that allows some freedom, its a question of being a parent that wants to raise a child that is doing something socially acceptable and reasonable.

Everyone should be educated, you should have frank discussions about the topic but that doesn't mean its to sleep with 200 guys. Condoms reduce your risk of HIV by 10-fold. So thats the same as that person sleeping with 20 guys. This isn't really a discussion of sexual safety its more a discussion of morals and social acceptability.

So?

Her life, her choice. You shouldn't be making judgements solely on the basis of how sexually active someone is

x

Because really its only escorts and sex workers that would do so many numbers.

Its a new sexual partner every single week for 200 weeks.

There are some things where you can't use statistical information to back up your statements - there is just an obvious pathology that doesn't fall within normal social constructs.

4 years = 96 months = ~ 2 per month

I mean if you're single that's actually not that much sex You have more sex than that in a relationship (well I did )

4 years = 208 weeks (not 96 months)

1 new sexual partner week

We're not talking about Times either, we're talking about new partners.

Wrong on all fronts EW.

4 years = 208 weeks (not 96 months)

1 new sexual partner week

We're not talking about Times either, we're talking about new partners.

Wrong on all fronts EW.

4 years = 208 weeks (not 96 months)

1 new sexual partner week

We're not talking about Times either, we're talking about new partners.

Wrong on all fronts EW.

My reply is stolen from Indeterminate:

Yes, but by shaming things like this, you risk creating an atmosphere in which your child feels like they can't come to you with any questions they may have in regards to sex.

But if you want to argue morals, why is it wrong?

Give me one reason it is wrong that can be applied to everyone in society, as you seem to feel you can dictate it's wrong for everyone. This means it can't be a reason related to religion as not everyone is religious and can't be related to your own views.

Social acceptability is relative.

Why is a new sexual partner different to having sex again with the same partner. Do you know for sure they're not having sex with a different partner? The disease risk is the same, and there's no necessary link with any level of attachment.