‘The [Birth Control] Pill Increases Breast Cancer Risk,’ Says This New Teen-Friendly Website


1Flesh.org is a strange place. The site was created by a group of college students and it looks like a super-fun, super-hip place with all sorts of sexy girls in sexy black eyeliner. The opening line to their “about” section says: “If anything can be said of our generation, it’s this: We want sexy back.” Then they go on to promote condom-free sex within marriage. They describe their movement as a “revolt against contraception in marriage,’ and they argue that “sex should be awesome and saved until marriage, that pregnancy can be justly avoided without harmful chemicals, and that love is worth fighting for.” Read more about the movement — and it’s possible harmful spreading of misinformation– inside.

Here’s what 1Flesh is telling readers about the birth control pill:

The Pill increases a woman’s risk of breast cancer.

Why? Because oral contraceptives cause a significantly higher rate of breast cell division, and in general, cells that divide more rapidly are more likely to become cancerous.

By how much? According to the 2009 study Risk Factors for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer in Women Under the Age of 45 Years, published in the journal Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers, and Prevention, after less than one year of taking oral contraceptives, a woman’s risk of triple-negative breast cancer is increased 2.5 fold.

After more than one year of use, her risk is increased by 4.2 fold. This risk is further increased if a woman begins her use of oral contraceptives before the age of 18, or if she smokes. This increased risk persists for 10 years after ending the use of the Pill.

Read more here/

Now I found 1Flesh through a really good article on Salon. Here’s what their writer had to say:

1flesh is a new and strikingly effective attempt by anti-choice Christians to mimic the aesthetic of genuinely hip pro-sex education websites. The first reaction of most liberals would be, no doubt, a roll of the eyes and laughter at them fundies for even trying. Sure, the site has remarkably good design, especially for appealing to a younger audience (it looks quite a bit like MTV’s website), but the second one starts reading the content, it becomes clear that all the Twitter and Tumblr pages in the world can’t hide the fact that it’s promoting a no-sex-before-marriage agenda that will never, ever be cool.

Even though its attempts at selling a sex-negative message are doomed to eternal failure, we should still worry about this and other misinformation campaigns that are discouraging the use of contraception. You’ll never stop people from having sex, but well-placed misinformation could discourage them from taking necessary measures to prevent unintended pregnancy and STDs.

Read more here.

Now the truth is, birth control pills (and other forms of contraception) do come with risks, like all prescription drugs. Remember when Yaz got recalled? Yeah. And someone on Salon pointed out that pregnancy comes with hella risks too. Touché.

But here’s my thing. I read all of this while watching MTV’s Teen Mom. Bad idea. I couldn’t help feeling like… ummm we should probably talk about abstinence more, lol. No, but seriously. So when the writer at Salon was like Ohhh it’s never gonna sound cool to wait for sex, I felt like I wanted to talk about that more! Is it over for that movement? That is to say, have we completely given up on the idea of young people (teens, especially) not having sex? And if we have, is that dangerous too?

And do the people at 1Flesh have a point? They argue that with all the birth control and condoms out there, so-called unplanned pregnancies are still at a high rate and so are STDs. I have no clue what the stats are on that, but I’m interested in a discussion about their ideas and the ides represented by the Salon. Honestly, I’m not completely convinced by either argument, nor can I write any of these ideas off entirely. What do you guys think?

1Flesh Agains Birth Control:

[Source] [Source]

  • J in Boston

    The underlying premise is that if you abstain from sex pre-marriage, then you’ll marry someone who did the same thing and you both carry zero STI risk–ok, that makes sense (let’s ignore the pregnancy issue for a second). The problem is that when you make sex shameful, that’s where the failure to use contraception/protection comes in: Feeling too shy to ask the guy to use a condom or too shy to buy condoms is a part of this, and that’s not a problem limited to teens. Moreover, the problem with emphasizing marriage as some kind of magical risk-free zone increases the likelihood of some people lying about their sexual history to stay with someone who perhaps did abstain to avoid being shamed etc. And finally, 1Flesh does nothing for teens who are ALREADY having sex.

    • J in Boston, thank you for such a thoughtful (and thought-provoking) question. I agree with you about the sex as a shameful act issue. It creates a host of problems– many of which you laid out. I’m still trying to figure out how we remove the shame (or complicate it) without turning sex into something that’s not a big deal, that doesn’t have heavy, complicated (sometimes lovely, sometimes not) ramifications.

  • Lauri

    I think the biggest failure in ‘sex ed’ or in society in general is the fact that sex is EVERYWHERE, but nobody wants to talk to it. Since curriculum is basically abstinence only, it’s hard for teens to feel like they have people to talk to about what sex *really* is without being made to feel guilty for thinking about having it at any point before marriage.
    The whole ‘contraception in marriage is bad,’ if you want to do that, sure. But pushing a bunch of factoids..propaganda, on a site aimed at people who are likely not married yet, not ok.

    • Lauri, I think we haven’t completely found the “right” way to talk about it. Different groups are trying different ways, but so much of it is about combatting other issues. 1Flesh is combatting one way of thinking and then Salon wants to combat another way. But I think in doing all this combatting, we’re not able to address all issues. Each “side” has an agenda they’re trying to push. You almost can’t avoid that! Still, we’re working at it.

      Thanks for commenting on this.

  • asdf

    It”s amazing to me how people will automatically label a website like this as “propaganda”. I would encourage people to actually learn what 1flesh is about rather than visiting the website with their minds already made up. Sex carries huge responsibility and 1flesh is pointing out where contraception fails us. It’s worth considering that there are other options. Abstinence does work, shouldn’t we be able to offer our young people more than pills and condoms? I know tons of intelligent and passionate young people who are living out the ideas presented in 1flesh in the most loving ways. How does Salon really know if it’s cool or not?

    Lastly, what’s the deal with labeling the pro-life movement as anti-choice? It’s really so much more than that…

    • asdf, thank you for sharing your thoughts on this one. I, too, was a bit troubled by the Salon repsonse (though not entirely). There was a dismissive air to it that I couldn’t quite embrace, although I understand where it comes from.

      And I was also confused by the “anti-choice” label. I do believe that there are those who are pro-life and anti-choice, but, like you, I think it’s usually more than that.

    • asdf

      Shannon you seriously are the best. I really admire the way you can bring up incredibly sensitive topics in a non-threatening way and encourage healthy discussion. I agree with you on the dismissive air. Waiting for marriage is such a personal decision and very near and dear to people’s hearts, mine included. It’s frustrating to see it mocked when it’s a conscious decision that I’m freely choosing and believe in it with everything I am.

    • asdf, I’m so glad you’re enjoying these conversations. It doesn’t work if everyone doesn’t feel like they can freely have their say so I try to make sure we keep it open.

      Thank you again for contributing :)

    • Karen

      That’s great for women who choose not to have an abortion — they all should have such support.

      But again, that is for women who choose not have an abortion.

      Forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term when she wants to have an abortion *is* disregarding her life and well-being in order to protect the fetus.

      And when abortion is illegal, women are forced against their will to carry pregnancies to term or resort to unsafe, illegal abortions that risk their lives and their potential to bear children in the future. (Illegal abortions often result in injury and infection that kill women or cause infertility.) This occurs all over the world in large numbers. It is a major problem where abortion is illegal. It was also true in this country and will be again if the anti-choice movement succeeds in outlawing abortion or making it impossible to access.

      I am fully in favor of women having options — being able to make a CHOICE. If they do not want to have an abortion, they should have access to the support they need to carry the pregnancy to term AND to raise the child (or give it up for adoption). But if they are fully informed of available options and want the abortion, then not allowing them that is to prioritize a fetus above the life and well-being of the woman carrying it.

      And now I am closing this website because I clearly cannot stop myself from engaging on this issue! Have a good evening!

    • Karen

      I haven’t looked at the website, but from what Shannon posted from it, it clearly provides misinformation in order to persuade people to its viewpoint. That is propaganda. If it gave only factual information — and *all* of the facts, not just cherry picking — then it would not be propaganda, even it was still trying to be persuasive.

      The reasons many people refer to the “pro-life” movement as anti-choice are generally three-fold. The first 2 are about political/social perspective, so they may spark some emotion in people on either side of the issue (just warning you). The third is, in my opinion, just straightforward and apolitical:

      1) People who are against the right to have an abortion are trying to protect the fetus’ life but either entirely disregard the pregnant woman’s life or simply prioritize her life and well-being below that of the fetus/potential person. So not everyone sees “pro-life” as an accurate depiction of what that movement stands for.

      2) Referring to the movement as “pro-life” implies that those who are on the other side are “anti-life”, which is not accurate from the point of view of those on that side.

      3) Because the debate is about whether abortion should be legal or not, i.e., whether women should have the right to decide whether to have an abortion — it seems most accurate and least emotion-driven to use “pro-choice” and “anti-choice”. “Anti-abortion” doesn’t even work because many who are pro-choice still consider themselves anti-abortion, as in: they would not have one and do not want anyone to have one, but they support women’s right to choose for themselves. So, again, labeling the sides “pro-choice” and “anti-choice” seems most to-the-point.

      I’m not going to keep participating in this discussion because the level of emotion and misinformation that can get thrown around (not saying you’re doing this!) is more than I’m up for today, but I wanted to respond to your questions.

    • asdf

      Hi Karen, thanks for the response. I know you said you didn’t want to get into it and I’m not trying to turn this into a pro-life/choice debate. But in regard to your first point, many people in the pro-life movement are thinking equally about the fetus and the mother (can’t speak for everyone certainly). Many pro-life non profits reach out to women with unplanned pregnancies and provide emotional/financial support. The mother’s well being is never below that of the child’s. I’ve been a part of these programs first hand and they do really amazing things.

    • Karen, thanks for replying– I’ll try not to pull you back into this, lol. I know it can be a lot but it’s great to have a variety of POVs, and I appreciate yours.

      One thing I PERSONALLY have trouble with is finding a way to be pro-choice (which I THINK I am) and being– as you put it– simultaneously against the idea of an abortion. I haven’t figured that out yet because TO ME there is a conflict there that hasn’t yet been resolved. I stress that this is MY personal issue because I understand that, for others, there is no conflict. But I wanted to be honest about my feelings.

      Thanks again for weighing in on this.

    • Andrew


      I’m totally pro-choice and not at all enthused for abortions. I see it as this, a woman should have a right to choose what to do with her body, in all situations. If the woman was raped and that resulted in pregnancy and she chooses to abort the fetus then she deserves our full support even if we don’t like it. Or if a woman accidentally gets pregnant but decides that for whatever reason in her life she cannot handle a pregnancy and she decides to abort the fetus then she made a mature decision on her own and deserves our full support.

      We don’t have to like it but we should be in full favor of it because of the ramifications that occur when it is illegal. I think that history shows that women will do what they can when they have an unwanted pregnancy and to keep the choice safe in legal is important.

    • Andrew, thanks for your comment.

      I have trouble with this issue because I will always feel like I’m condoning the act, even if I say I’m pro-choice, but I take personal issue with abortions. I’ve seen women (very few, granted) use abortions as a method of birth control. Meaning, having as many, as often as they need to. I do NOT want to tell any person what to do with their body, or how they should feel about a fetus or an unborn body… AND I do NOT want to participate in a culture that takes abortion casually. Like I said, I haven’t found that balance yet because I feel that if we demand it as a right for all women, then we have to give those women the right to have as many as they want. And you know what, maybe they should have that right. I’m just not sure.

      Again, thank you for working through this with me, lol.

    • Karen

      Hi Shannon — I don’t know where this is going to post, I can’t seem to reply directly to your comment.

      I do understand your conflict over this. My feeling is that, like Andrew, I believe in women’s autonomy over their own bodies. I could go into this more, because there are many reasons for it, but I’ll just leave it there. Personally, I cannot stomach the thought of anyone but me deciding what is right for my body. Just the thought gives me a powerful visceral response, like being a caged animal!

      I also know a woman who freely admits that she used abortion as birth control when she was in college. She was extremely promiscuous (for her it happened to be a way of coping with a history of abuse, but ultimately that’s probably irrelevant). So she had lots of abortions. When she told me about this, I felt uncomfortable about it.

      She eventually got her life together, finished school, went to graduate school, got a career, and got married. They started having kids when she was in her early- to mid-30s. They now have a couple of kids and are very happy.

      For as uncomfortable as her story of her college years made me, I feel certain that women who are using abortion for birth control should NOT be having children. So while I wish they’d use contraceptives, I agree with them that they are in no place to raise a child. If they can’t manage to use contraceptives, they are in bad shape and probably need some help.

      One could argue they should carry the baby to term and give it up, but that goes back to my view that women should get to determine for themselves what happens to their bodies.

      (And, as you know from having kids, pregnancy and childbirth are massive things to happen to a person’s body. It’s actually more physically risky for a woman to have a baby than to have an abortion. So it’s no small thing. And I do not believe in “punishing” women for having an unwanted pregnancy by forcing them to carry it to term. But that gets into a whole OTHER thing!)

      I think most pro-choice people want abortion to be “safe, legal, and rare”. But “rare” should occur not because women and girls have no access to abortion, but because 1) they have plenty of access to comprehensive sex ed and contraceptives; 2) their social environment and emotional health enable them to choose to have safe/safer sex; 3) if they decide to carry the pregnancy to term they will have sufficient economic and social support; and 4) if they decide to keep the baby, they will have sufficient economic and social support.

      So I think that people who feel the way you do and also want to participate in making abortion rare could find many opportunities for working toward any or all of those four factors.

    • Karen, thank you! Ultimately, I thin you’re right. I’m for agency and autonomy and I’m for doing the least amount of damage to children and babies and unborn babies (I know we don’t know when the fetus is officially a baby, or people disagree on this but I think you know what I mean). That being said, I love your use of the word “rare” and i gravitate towards THAT movement totally. I’d like to think that more and more healthy, open conversation about sex could contribute to a world where women use and not abuse) the powers that have been granted to us by the feminist movements, the sexual revolution and our very own bodies.

      Thanks again :)

  • Stef

    I feel sad about how abstinence is being portrayed as an uncool non-choice. I waited until marriage and it absolutely was my own choice, one I’m still very happy I made. And you know, I think my teenage years were pretty awesome. Maybe people pushing the ”waiting isn’t cool” line aren’t helping either & both sides are wrong?

    • Stef, thank you. I’m proud of most of my choices in life (lol) but I’d like to think that if I had waited until marriage that would have been pretty cool too. I agree that there’s something not cool about labeling abstinence uncool; and yes in a way both sides are off in some way or another.

      Thank you again for sharing your thoughts on this.

  • Leah

    Yeah I’m pretty sure the teen pregnancy rate has been steadily decreasing over the last few decades. If people choose to wait, that’s great; more power to them… but they should be able to make an (accurately) informed choice.

    • Leah, you’re right. Just browsed through a few articles stating that teen pregnancy rates are at an all-time low. Thanks for commenting.

  • LJ

    It annoys me that its uncool to wait until your married to have sex. I personally haven’t but I have close friends that have and they are in happy healthy relationships (from my outside view) its not uncool to follow your own beliefs as long as they are your own and you don’t hurt anyone else in the process. And when it comes to educating kids on sex, teach them the basics. I went to a church of england school and all we got taught was different types of contraceptives, basically the run down. I think thats all you can do, its up to parents to instil the values they want their kids to have. The argument shouldn’t be whether you teach kids about contraception all kids should be informed of anything that could protect them.

    • LJ, I’m glad you brought up PARENTS, lol! I kinda forgot about their role in all this. And I think you’re right– contraception is an option that should always be discussed. I suppose I’m hoping for a BROADER discussion. Not one that says, “oh they’re gonna have sex, give them the condoms!” nor one that says, “contraception is bad for you.”

      Thanks again for commenting.

  • JP

    Interesting that a link to a site promoting abstinence is posted on a site owned by a gay man…cause you know, we gays can get married everywhere…fail.

    Also, there hasn’t been a thorough study actually proving oral contraceptive pills can cause breast cancer. And no, studies from the 1970s are not accurate since the hormone levels in those pills were way higher than the currently prescribed medications.

    And yes, “pro-life” is anti-choice. If you want to take away the choice of having an abortion, then you are indeed antichoice. I love how antichoice women consider themselves to be feminists. You’re not. Read some lit.

    I’m not trying to be a hater, but this was major fail. This makes me lose faith in our generation. Its like the sexual revolution never happened.

    • JP, thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. And no, this topic (birth control) does not really apply to the gay community, but it’s still a pop culture issue which is (I think, lol) what this blog is really about.

      I’m glad that you brought up the sexual revolution. I always wonder whether or not either “side” of this discussion is fully living out the original intention of the sexual revolution. We know the revolution was intended to provide more choices for women, but I DON’T know that the current state (again, I’ve been watching Teen Mom) is what women were going for.

      An article that comes to mind is from the Wall Street Journal: “Has the Sexual Revolution Been Good for Women?” There’s a “yes” response from author Ann Patchett and “No” from another author. It’s very interesting. But Patchett says “yes” AND that today’s generation could use a refresher course. I think that’s true.

      Thanks again for commenting JP.

    • Andrew

      Totally agree with you JP.

      The post really has brought up a ton of discussion but I’m kinda upset that attention was even brought to this website. I don’t think they offer a valid point and promote dangerous ideas and misinformation.

      Also pro-life=anti-choice.

      Pro-choice does not equal anti-life.

  • Balito

    With all the divorces and all… who wants to get married??? Seriously… And it is very unlikely that teenagers will wait to have sex until marriage and even though they would start getting married at a young age just to have sex… I dont get it!!! :/

    • Balito, I hear you! But some people– a lot of people!– still want to get married. I did read a comment on another site where a woman who had been taught to wait until marriage echoed your point. She watched many friends marry early to have sex or make “mistakes” and live in shame. She didn’t think this movement worked, and I don’t think this is the right approach either but I don’t think it’s completely ludicrous to ask for what I’m calling “a broader discussion” on all these things. Thanks again for sharing your thoughts on this.

  • JP

    Also being in medicine myself, I love it when non health professionals say things like “no where in medicine does this happen,” and then offer their opinion.

    Right wing propaganda for the win.

    But thanks for reassuring me that I don’t want to go into women’s health. lol

    • JP, lol. I had to laugh at that part too. But I agree, it’s not funny if it rings “true” for some people.

      Women’s Health is a different field, indeed. Because so much of the discussion is also political and social and has powerful ramifications.

  • rOXy

    Sex is just sex. It’s as natural as breathing. There is nothing wrong with birth control to prevent pregnancy until you’re ready for it. There is nothing wrong with waiting for marriage, and for anyone to suggest otherwise is simply bullying and applying peer pressure. There is nothing wrong with condoms even if you’re married. There are too many people in marriages that contract STD’s because their spouse is unfaithful. Better safe than sorry.

    • rOXy, sex is sometimes maybe just sex… but it’s also a powerful act that can create and destroy. Which is what makes it the eternal “hot topic,” lol. But agree- I wouldn’t dare tell another adult how to do it and what precautions to take in their own marriage. It’s the kids I’m worked about! Lol. No… adults too. As you point out, a lot of people are dishonest about their sex lives which leads to big problems.

  • Jen

    I think everyone should be able to make the decision that is best for them. My problem is that the health hazards/risks/whatever you want to call them of having sex aren’t addressed anywhere; not at school, or at home. Nor are the options anyone (married or not) has in birth control, preventative care, and basic annual health exams/maintenance. I am constantly amazed at the amount of sex my students are having (i teach graduating seniors), how many partners they are having it with (sometimes at the same time), in completely unsafe conditions. Then they will come to me to ask me questions-because they WILL NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE ask their parents. Do I not answer them? Do I answer them and risk getting fired? Why am I not allowed to answer them if I am being scientifically accurate? (Our county has an abstinance only policy).
    I very often err on the side of being fired, because I can’t stand the amount of misinformation they spread to each other. It is amazing what you hear them talk about if you quietly pretend to be passing out papers.
    I just don’t see the harm in laying it all out on the table, and letting them decide for themselves.

    • LJ

      I agree, i think a teacher should be allowed to educate their pupils about safe sex and contraception. I do not think schools should tell a child what is right or wrong about sex, whether that is who it is with or when they should do it.

    • Jen, thanks for sharing this comment. Quite frankly, this is the stuff my nightmares are made of! Part of the issue is information and education BUT I’m also really interested in the more complicated question of “why?” Why are graduating seniors having hella sex with hella people? Even if we throw condoms at them and talk about safe sex, I still think there are other elements at work here. But I don’t know how an open conversation could be had without religion coming into play and all the other school no-nos. You know?

      Thanks Jen!

  • Alyssa

    That website makes my brain hurt.

  • Jacinta

    What if you don’t want to get married or you can’t get (legally) get married? Because a lot of people these days fall into those categories. After teaching middle school, I became extremely aware of how sexually active kids are at a young age, and while I have no problem with abstinence being encouraged, I think it’s extremely counterintuitive to disregard comprehensive sex ed. I’m a 90s kid and I remember a classic episode of 90210 where there was a big hoopla about making condoms available and what they basically said was something like, “Let’s say you have a pool and you don’t want your kids in it until they’re older. You can tell them not to do it and you can even build a fence around it, but if there’s a slight chance the kid might end up in the pool, don’t you think you should give them the tools to be able to swim safely?” And that always made sense to me. I don’t believe in villainizing abstinence, but I also don’t believe in shaming sexual activity either. I think people need to be educated, prepared and provided with the necessary resources in case something goes wrong.

    • Jacinta, “I don’t believe in villainizing abstinence, but I also don’t believe in shaming sexual activity either.” Yes. I think that’s the balance we haven’t quite found yet.

  • Nat

    I do appreciate you bringing this topic up for discussion. Unfortunately I have seen so much bunk posted by 1flesh followers on multiple FB pages, Planned Parenthood in particular, that any mention of their website has me worried if even one person checks it out and decides it’s gospel. Firstly I find it silly that a teenage boy(the founder of the page) would presume to have more knowledge about women’s bodies and how they function, then women themselves. Secondly, any page that brings in religious spin has already lost any credibility in my point of view. Thirdly, to promote no condom use, especially when a marriage is on the rocks is plain stupid. When your marriage is in trouble the last thing you do is go bare, you get counseling, get tested and use a condom. If either spouse has cheated, why run the risk of contracting an STD that may outlive the marriage? A much better choice for realistic ,accurate and healthy information on sexual activity would be http://www.scarletteen.com.

    • Nat, I think you’re right to point out that one of the main problems is anyone checking out the site and deciding “it’s gospel.” In fact, I’d argue that on a topic like this, there shouldn’t be a single place that’s considered the authority.

  • Jenn

    I like Laci Green’s youtube channel/vlogs about sex issues. I have friends who have teenagers, and I have nieces and nephews whom I’ve forwarded onto Laci’s magical videos. They’re simple, easy to follow, kid/teen-friendly and straight to the point. She is no-nonsense about the facts and comes across as really personable and friendly in a non threatening way. She even does quite a bit of “myth busting” ;)

    Even some adult friends of mine have learned a thing or two from her(specifically the hymen issue!) and I think it’s fantastic the way she is able to express these issues in funny short videos.



    • Jenn, thanks for sharing this. She’s definitely fun to watch. I still can’t tell at what age someone would be age-appropriate for her, but I love her attitude!

  • Courtney

    Uh it’s commonly known fact that Birth Control increases a womans risk of breast or uterine cancer and also what about the 15% of women of child bearing age who can’t take it for medical reasons. as for abortions only in cases of rape or incest or certain instences where the baby wouldn’t survive outside the mothers womb like anacephly.

    • Courtney, yes if you read the side affects there are many risks associated with birth control. So in this case, the site isn’t wrong, but all their stats aren’t accurate and we’re all wondering about the presentation of the issues.

  • somuchcloser

    The idea that teenagers will inevitably have sex frustrates me, because it gives teens almost no credit. Like they’re totally at the whim of their sex drive. I was a “virgin” when I was married (but still fooled around) and throughout my marriage, I’ve used the pill, condoms, a diaphragm, and the fertility awareness method for birth control. I’ve been married five years and no babies yet. While I didn’t love condoms, they gave me a real sense of security, as the idea of getting pregnant was a real concern.

    I don’t like the idea that sex is just sex, because it ISN’T for most people, at least not naturally. Especially for women, especially when emotions are involved.

    • somuchcloser, thanks for sharing this. I think a lot of people have given up on the idea of teens not having sex, but I’m not quite there, or at least I’m not ready to throw up my hands and say ‘just give them condoms.’ Because sex is often kind of a big deal, there’s gotta be more to it than that.

  • somuchcloser

    I should say that I am 100% for comprehensive sex ed, including homosexual sex. Kids need to be informed so they can make the best possible decision for their life. Something like 80% of kids that take an abstinence pledge break it during high school, and many of those teenagers DON’T use protection, because they are either not prepared, or they’re embarrassed, or uneducated.

    • somuchcloser, I think homosexual sex ed is definitely missing from this conversation. And I’m glad you used the word “embarrassed” because that’s definitely an issue at play here. The only way to get past that is for sex itself to become something we are less ashamed of, although it can still remain private and romantic, I think.