"Protected Sex" and ageism... wow, this became a rant.

[natane.livejournal.com]

just a thought...
the phrase "protected sex" really bothers me because i think it's a misleading term.

most of the time, "protected" really connotates "sex with a condom" (or dental dam, but i'm speaking from a perspective of someone who has had sex only with men, so bear with me on this). at least in my experience.

it implies that sex minus a condom is sex with a risk of STDs (which is true in some cases but not in all). sex without a barrier method, no matter the situation, is defined as "unsafe". so no matter what you may use besides a barrier method and how committed of a relationship you may be in, you're having "unprotected" sex and not being "safe".

by extension, barrier methods are seen as the only "safe" way (pregnancy-proof), which kinda annoys me, because you can have sex without a barrier method and not get pregnant. there's about 242556554 other methods of not getting pregnant besides a condom. some of which work much better than condoms!
I apologize for the misleading statistic in this paragraph. I was not trying to provide incorrect information, it was merely a typo. I have removed it since others have more detailed explanations in the comments. Thanks.

ugh. i don't know. it just seems like a really prejudiced and limiting term to me. and i'm getting really sick of being tutted at for having "unprotected" sex by various doctors (all of whom have KNOWN i was on birth control). yes, i didn't use a freaking condom. that doesn't mean i'm unintelligent, being "unsafe", or wantonly risking STDs or pregnancy. yes, i know what they are. yes, i know how to use one. yes, i know the benefits of condoms (and the risks and drawbacks). yes, i can stand up to my boyfriend and tell him to use one, please do not advise me on how to do so.

although some of that attitude, i think, is based on the fact that i'm 18, and therefore, of course, couldn't
- have a committed relationships. cause, ya know, us teenagers just go from relationship to relationship and cheat on each other all the time, and know nothing about fidelity or serious relationships. i'm just sleeping with the entire football team.
- in which both of us are STD free. cause of course we'd be too immature to think about stuff like that, and stay safe and get tested. and all teenage boys are cheating on their girlfriends because they have that masculine high sex drive *gags*, so i should be making him use a condom cause he'll give me something!
- and have no risk of pregnancy*. because, you know, teenagers are all just having sex and half-assedly using the pull-out method, and half of the girls want to get preggers anyway, to keep the guy.

obviously i agree with none of the stereotypes i quoted above. i meant them in sarcasm.

i'm so sick of assumptions based on my age. if i was twenty-five, would doctors act in the same way towards my "unprotected" sex? possibly. probably not.

thoughts? apologies for turning this into a rant. it was at first just a thought about condoms and "protected sex" and i started thinking about instances in the past that emphasis has been put on condoms in my life.

* i will admit there are times in the past i have had a risk, or at least thought i had one, and did not use a condom - and hormonal birth control is not 100% foolproof. so i guess it's more of "an extremely low risk".

Comments

[natane.livejournal.com]

the problem i have is the attitude that due to my age, sex without condoms cannot be "protected". if i was older, or married, or etc, i think the attitude would be very different, and a lot less condenscending.
and condoms are not the end-all be-all. they are very, very good, for many people in many situations. not all, and it annoys me that so much emphasis is put on them.

i understand that they do deal with situations where patients are uneducated or don't care about their own safety. but it annoys me that i'm catagorized as one of those people, largely, i think, based on my age.

[geminigirl]

I don't think it has anything to do with your age...I think it has more to do with how safer sex messages are presented in our culture in general. Read enough posts here, and you'll notice that people of all ages who talk about concerns with their contraceptive method of choice will talk about how they had "unprotected sex" because they didn't use condoms, even when they've used another reliable method of contraception. It doesn't matter whether the poster is 16 or 26. And it's an attitude that didn't change much among my health care providers until I was in my late 20s or early 30s. (I'm in my mid-30s now) and to be honest, I'm not sure if that was a function of my age or the fact that I was married.

P.S.-I think your pregnancy statistic in your original post is backwards...it's not that 80% won't get pregnant in a year, it's that 80% will, and 20% won't.

[natane.livejournal.com]

ah damn. i meant that statistic, i'll go back and edit it!

the attitude hasn't changed here yet.
i don't know. maybe i make too much out of it. it just feels very age-based when people who don't know what they're talking about tell me they do, or assume i'm an idiot just because i'm not using condoms.
i think a lot more respect and less judgement would be aimed my way by doctors if i was older.

[archangelbeth]

Or people talk about "unprotected" sex 'cause they're not on HBC. That's a blade that cuts both ways.

(And then there's protected-from-pregnancy-via-lambskin-condom, which is not protection vs. STDs at all, just to muddy the waters...)

[paraxeni.livejournal.com]

Doctors are a bit like teachers. They see so many people from different backgrounds, different social classes, with varying levels of education and intellectual abilities. They can't possibly take all of this into account when dealing with every student/patient. There comes a point when they realise that it's quicker and more efficient to just take a "lowest common denominator" approach with people of all ages.

Oh and the pregnancy statistic? Only 15% of people TTC do not conceive in a year of trying. 85% achieve it, that's why it's seen as a 'normal' timeframe by fertility specialists because the vast majority of the population are able to get pregnant in that period of trying. Of the other 15% most will conceive given up to another 12 months. Intervention is usually only offered if someone has charted, had optimal conception attempts and such for at least 18 months without success.

[natane.livejournal.com]

i got it backwards; i apologize. i haven't gotten to editing it yet.