British Government Admits Sex is Awesome, Encourages Kids to Do It More Frequently

Safe sex? What about good sex? Or frequent sex? The Sheffield branch of Britain's National Health Service has just published a pamphlet entitled Pleasure encouraging sexual health professionals to play up the enjoyable aspects of sex in their discussions with young people. The Telegraph reports:

The advice appears in leaflets circulated to parents, teachers and youth workers and is meant to update sex education by telling students about the benefits of enjoyable sex. 

The authors of the guidance say that for too long, experts have concentrated on the need for "safe sex" and committed relationships while ignoring the principle reason that many people have sex. 

Entitled Pleasure, the leaflet has been drawn up by NHS Sheffield, but it also being circulated outside the city. 

The leaflet carries the slogan "an orgasm a day keeps the doctor away". It also says: "Health promotion experts advocate five portions of fruit and veg a day and 30 minutes' physical activity three times a week. What about sex or masturbation twice a week?" 

 

The new keys to a healthy lifestyle: fruits, vegetables, exercise and …frequent sex? I'm all for encouraging people to get it on, but something doesn't seem quite right here. Maybe I'm paranoid, but I can't help but think we ought to be at least a little bit worried when a government starts classifying sex as another annoying fitness requirement just like eating celery and jogging. 

You can view part of the brochure here. 

Previously, Brendan O'Neill wrote about the right to excessively noisy sex.

Comments

[Invisible Finger]

Sounds like they're about ready to tax it.

[John C. Randolph]

So, is the NHS about to start employing hookers for the sake of everyone's health?

-jcr

[Untermensch]

A lot of nonreligious parents I know, not just religious ones, would think this goes too far and strays from any sort of reasonably defined "educational" role into something approaching "stick your morals in your eye" lifestyle evangelism. For the life of me I can't figure what prompted this except the desire of some functionaries to deliver a giant middle finger to anyone who might have the slightest compunctions or moral qualms about indiscriminate sex. My guess is that the Sheffield NHS functionaries are about to get their heads handed to them on a platter...

[Untermensch]

I'm also with Peter on being bothered by the equation of sex with broccoli. Maybe there's a sophisticated reverse psychology here and they're really trying to scare the kids away from sex: "anything those fuddy-duddies like must be boring..."

[Rich]

"an orgasm a day keeps the doctor away"

Well, it depends on how strong the squirt is.

[Pro Libertate]

I read about this somewhere else today, and I could've sworn the emphasis was on self-gratification. Of course, as I continue not to read the primary material, I speak in the most absurd ignorance of the matter.

[Obama]

Thanks for the tip. Taxing sex is just the thing we need to pay for health care reform. I'll get Ted Kennedy on this right away.

[ChicagoTom]

An orgasm a day keeps the doctor away?

I am gonna have to show this to my wife.

[ChicagoTom]

The new keys to a healthy lifestyle: fruits, vegetables, exercise and ...frequent sex?

I read about this somewhere else today, and I could've sworn the emphasis was on self-gratification. Of course, as I continue not to read the primary material, I speak in the most absurd ignorance of the matter.

I read this on Huffinton post here and the emphasis seems to be on having an orgasm daily rather than on having frequent sex (granted having sex is probably the preferred method of reaching orgasm - but self stimulation still produces benefits thank FSM) -- but that isn't stopping opponents from condemning the campaign as promoting underage sex (as if that's inherently bad) or that it can lead to more STDs or more unprotected sex.

[Chicago Tom\'s Wife]

I just hope Tom doesn't find out that I'm sleeping with his doctor.

[Peter Shelley]

Be careful kids!!

[perilisk]

Sounds like reverse psychology to me. But what does physically non-strenuous sex have to do with health anyway?

[Enyap]

Sounds very Brave New Worldish

[HeadTater]

I wonder if you get half the benefit if you are by yourself?

If sex is so good for your health, does that mean that there will be a weekly requirement for sex in the healthcare reform bill? If that is the case, I wouldn't mind the horribly increased price of healthcare. Government sponsored hookers!

[prolefeed]

An orgasm a day keeps the doctor away?

Seeing as how I'm married to a doctor, this seems like a slogan that would SO not go over well.

[Episiarch]

Oh noes, sex! And masturbation! For fuck's sake, people need to lighten up.

[Voros McCracken]

If sex is so good for your health, does that mean that there will be a weekly requirement for sex in the healthcare reform bill?

That's already been passed. The federal government has been screwing us regularly for years.

*rimshot*

[James Anderson Merritt]

# Enyap | July 14, 2009, 7:14pm | #
# Sounds very Brave New Worldish

My first thought exactly. Or Logan's Runnish, my second thought.

Back when I was in Jr. High, there was a big push for sex education in American schools. Despite strenuous denials from proponents of Sex Ed, opponents predicted that the curriculum would someday entail the actual promotion of sex and lots of it.

This is just another data point in support of my belief that, if you live long enough, everything that people claimed could and would never happen, can and shall. Nothing is too outrageous to not someday come true.

[Chicago Tom\'s wife]

What's an orgasm?

[Chicago Tom\'s doctor.]

You've been faking them? You bitch!

[Former Surgeon General Jocelyn]

So, the British are finally catching on, but does anyone give me any credit?

[Manfred, Freiherr Von RIchtove]

I'll show you how to use the joystick, Frau Doktor Elders.

Love,

Manny

[Meanwhile, in Flyover Country]

Somalis, relief over indictments
Associated Press Updated: 07/14/2009 05:46:57 PM CDT

Over the months that federal investigators delved into the baffling recruitment of young men who left Minneapolis to fight with Islamic militants in Somalia, the city's Somali community grappled with the fear they would all be branded terrorists.

But this week as the FBI netted its first grand jury indictments in the case, many hope the arrests of two Somali men will spell the beginning of the end of an investigation that has wracked their community.

Minneapolis is home about 32,000 Somalis -the largest population of Somali immigrants in the U.S. - most of whom fled the Somalia in the 1990s to escape a brutal civil war that plunged the country into chaos.

But in the last 18 months as many as 20 young men are believed to have left Minnesota to join al-Qaida-linked militants who want to establish an Islamic state in the Horn of Africa country, which is plagued by an ineffective central government. Family members say at least three of the men are now dead.

"The image of this community has been hit very hard in the last few months," said Farhan Hurre, executive director of the Abubakar As-Saddique mosque in Minneapolis. His mosque fell under suspicion as a recruiting site for some of the men.

After a months-long FBI investigation, grand jury indictments against two men from Minnesota were unsealed Friday. The indictment accused Salah Osman Ahmed and Abdifatah Yusuf Isse of providing material support to terrorists and with conspiracy to kill, kidnap, maim and injure. Ahmed is specifically accused of traveling to Somalia to fight with Islamic militants, according to the indictment.

http://www.twincities.com/news/ci_12836459?source=rss&nclick_check=1

[qwerty]

I think it's outrageous some people are having sex more than others! It's a health care issue! We need government action to make sure that everyone gets to have sex at least once a day. A few extremists will carp about "individual rights", but we live in a society! It's about the health of everyone.

qwerty: the commentator formerly known as Mike who decided he didn't want to get mixed up with the other Mikes

[phalkor]

this kind of pamphlet concerning sex and pleasure should really only be made available to kids curious enough to seek it out, not thrust upon an entire classroom. I hope that's the case, otherwise (as said above) this is a big middle finger to those who believe intercourse is much more than a physical act.

Nothing wrong with the pamphlets as long as available "on request".

[jtuf]

I oppose governments dictating bedroom choices, even if those dictates are pro-sex. That being said, I think the effort might be a response to the following study on UK sex habbits which was recently reported in the Times of India:

A third of men would rather play video games than have a night of passion with their partners, reveals a new UK study. Men 'prefer video games to sex'

And this rises to two thirds if there's a chance of playing a brand new game.

Reasons men gave for choosing to twiddle with their control pads rather than opting for romance ranged from partners "being hard to please" to "not being as much fun" as playing computer games.

[Fist of Etiquette]

Perhaps Brits finally realized their immigrant population growth is outpacing their own. Time to catch up, mates!

[Lamar]

You know what they say, even bad sex is better than great sex.

[Mad Max]

This is strictly man bites dog.

A government bureaucracy in a Western democracy issues a pamphlet which flies in the face of the accumulated wisdom of the human race about sex and children.

The reason this is a nine days wonder is the explicit language.

But as one of the links in this thread indicates, even here there are people who justify this pamphlet as (I'm not making this up) helping to fight AIDS and child abuse by encourage children to postpone sex, with the usual denunciations of 'tabloids' and religious people who irrationally oppose such initiatives.

I suspect this blows over, and the sex educators go on as usual.

[Robert]

What's unhealthful about a dearth of sexual activity, or lack of orgasm?

[John C. Randolph]

I oppose governments dictating bedroom choices, even if those dictates are pro-sex.

I'm with you in principle, but if Her Majesty's government provided some hot chicks* and then ordered me to get laid for my health, I might not oppose it as vigorously as some other things they may order me to do.

Just sayin'...

-jcr

*no silicone. I hate that.

[P]

I don't want to sleep with a public hooker for the same reason I don't want to use a public toilet or swim in a public swimming pool.

thas just nassssssssssty

[Art-P.O.G.]

I hear Morrissey's really dismayed.

[Charles Montgomery]

Robert

What's unhealthful about a dearth of sexual activity, or lack of orgasm?

It apparently leads to, besides general uptightness, prostate trouble.

[cputter]

Soylent Green is people!

[shriek!]

hehe, public hooker. So a wife is just a private hooker?

[Abdul]

Only a bureucrat would think that they need a brochure to promote masturbation to teenagers.

"Are our teens jerkin' it enough? Better make a pamphlet, just to be safe."

[Beavis]

this kind of pamphlet concerning sex and pleasure should really only be made available to kids curious enough to seek it out, not thrust upon an entire classroom. I hope that's the case, otherwise (as said above) this is a big middle finger to those who believe intercourse is much more than a physical act.

Heh, heh, heh. You said "thrust."

[Zeb]

I think that it is probably better to encourage young people to have sex and tell them how to be reasonably safe about it than to try to discourage them and not tell them how to do it safely. A positive outlook on sexuality, I think, would encourage kids to have sex for positive reasons and make it less of an act of rebellion.

That said, schools should really just stick to facts in any sex education and not try to promote or discourage any particular approach to sex.

[Jim Bennet]

For decades liberals have claimed sex ed was not about encouraging kids to have sex, but just to teach them how to do it safely, since they were going to do it anyway. I guess we've now reached the bottom of that slippery slope.

[jtuf]

shriek! | July 15, 2009, 9:24am | #

hehe, public hooker. So a wife is just a private hooker?

Shriek, you pay your wife for sex!? Do you give her a weekly stipend, or does she charge by the event or hour?

[anarch]

this kind of pamphlet concerning sex and pleasure should really only be made available to kids curious enough to seek it out

Wouldn't their curiosity indicate that they already know the attractions of sex?

I'd say leave it to parents to teach, or appoint others of their choice to teach, about sex, and for that matter, everything else.

[ok]

Ordinarily I don't like having the government telling me what to do.