High intelligence is the best protection against early sexual activity during adolescence, research has shown. Can it be that intelligent kids don’t need free condoms to be convinced they shouldn’t have sex? Well, yes, that may be, but it may also be that smart kids just can’t get dates. To reach this conclusion about intelligence and sexual activity in teens, researchers in this year 2000 study at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and McGill University took two separate sample groups in the 7th to 12th grades. Both studies used the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT) as an intelligence measure and confidential admissions of sexual activity. Their results showed a distinct bell curve. Teens at the upper and lower ends of the intelligence distribution were found less likely to have had sex. And even once they started being sexually active, the more intelligent ones postponed the full range of partnered sexual activities until later than the rest. So it’s really only the average intelligence kids we have to worry about. That means the guys on the football team couldn’t get laid either? I bet you feel a lot better knowing that. What the study leaves out is whether or not the kids in this study could have had sex. It’s easy to correlate intelligence with not getting sex if you don’t ask about willingness.
uhh.. what? that last part totally went over my head. but i don't think any amount of studies can really estimate or put a label on people who are more likely or less likely to engage in adolescent sexual activity. i think it really depends on the individual person and how they take the information they receive about STDs and unplanned pregnancies, etc.
But who would want to have sex at such an early stage. Haven't they thought about the risks of diseases. The responsibilities. It will be so much pressure for them to handle.
lol. probably. if i may -- quoting lee-lee with agreement from hiake hahaha .. the way the first sentence is worded. it gives the impression of sex being a bad thing.
^ oh no. i meant the first sentence of the op. its the way the sentence is structured around the word "protection" w/sexual activity. lol. it just seem odd to me. -shrug
lol. sex at 12 years of age. i agree ... it doesn't seem appropiate. so, in a sense, being smart helps you get good grades, have proud parents, and a healthy non-sexual lifestyle.
^ how so? i think most parents would be proud if their child is smarter than the other children in the class. they may be a b*tch to talk to ... but, i would think under it all, they are bloody proud of their kid. -lol (of course, there are exceptions)
I guess it's the way it's worded "have proud parents" sounded as if the parents' pride is unfound @_@bbb Just personal choice of words I guess I would have said "make the parents proud"
hum... should kids really be trying to get laid in the first place...... my theory is the more knowledge of sex someone has the more thier likely to get laid.... no ones to f*ck a newbie (well some ppl prefer virgins) but ppl that lack experience tend to be shy and unsure about what they are doing
