ok, lol or maybe, it could be that the teenager's 'i want to have sex' hormone thingy came out earlier than some..(early developer -bigsmiles )
Even so, if the teen's (as you stated) hormonal drive equated to 'I want to have sex...' then it's the incorporation of parental values that prevents them from acting on it. I remember the way that a psychology prof best explained it as: Which factor ultimately prevails in the teenager psyche, again, is dependent on the various factors as previously stated.
LOL... Oh no, I just ruined it with 889... :laugh: I think Evo's looking for some Ursine Love, but careful, remember this thread?: The Panda... is a BEAR???
is there anything a researher can't a link up with???? wish these gouverments would spend their money on something more useful
LOL, ridiculous. Not eating breakfast = more hormones to bang early. WOW. Yea, yea, I read what people said about family and stuff. Still not a great theory on the jap part.
"Not eating breakfast = more hormones to bang early," ... WOW, is right. Because you COMPLETELY misunderstood what you read, LOL... This isn't about hormones, but about familial dynamics, and assessment of parental involvement using the social act of breakfast as an indicator. Not a great theory? Actually, I found it to be a pretty elegant piece of work. That "family and stuff" that you so casually dismiss is at the heart of what the research was all about. :rolleyes2: Sidebar: By the way, you may not be aware of this, but the word 'Jap' to a person of Japanese ethnicity is taken with the same emotional impact as Chink, Chinaman, Nigger, Paki, Kike, et cetera. If you want to shorthand 'Japanese' I suggest using 'JPN' instead.
haha that's one weird survey. I mean seriously, who ccomes up with these surveys? I think they just come up with random ideas surveys and see if they're true.
Why is it weird? Far from being random, to be able to positively correlate early sexual experience in teens vis a vis the social act of eating breakfast is a fairly sophisticated piece of inductive reasoning. What I find of rather greater (and perhaps the sadder) humor here is the total lack of this understanding by many respondents.
<sigh> A statement like this fails to appreciate that unwanted teen pregnancies eventually wind up costing taxpayers even more in the aggregate. Helping to identify and intervening with those at risk before they become pregnant, or before they impregnate someone, would help to avoid these costs (financial and societal). In other words, this would turn out to be a huge money saver in the long run. -what? like... HUH? How'd that happen...? Who wudda thunk it? Sidebar: Obviously, with so many well meaning respondents having read this story and gone away with a less than succinct understanding of the real issues (of familial dynamics and its effect on teen pregnancy), there must be something afoot. Since it's doubtful that everyone here is an absolute dummy, one therefore must conclude that the article was written extremely poorly; its words failed to convey or lend clarity to the story, and did little justice to the cited research. It's sadly illustrative that even seasoned and distinguished writers (Reuters) can sometimes produce a piece that remains less than intellectually compelling, and an important reminder of what can result when our words fail us.
