Grrrr... the stupidity of others kills me... Abstinence Only Sex Ed doesn't decrease STDs in fact, it seems to increase them!

I came across an interesting opinion about this issue (slightly tangentially). It argued that even were there to be a rise in abstinence, it could increase the spread of STDs. The idea is that individuals cautious enough to be swayed by such campaigns are less likely to have an STD themselves, and by taking themselves out of the pool of possible sex partners, they make it more likely that the individual one hooks up with is relatively incautious and a greater risk.

Struck me as a thought experiment in need of some empirical data, but interesting nonetheless.

I had read that too, billytea, at some point. Dunno if I buy that part of it, but certainly provocative.

calling ita: thoughts on these earrings?

thoughts on these earrings?

I'm not sure what organic wire wrapping means, but, regardless, I think they're pretty and almost delicate. I say go for it.

Comic Critics reveals what the Watchmen video game might be like. ...Well, not really, but it's funny:

[link]

I wonder if they're using organic to describe the style in which the wire is wrapped, as opposed to a more precice/rigid/linear style. Beautiful lighting and photography there.

Quick poll:

• Does the term "underwear" include the bra?
• Does "undergarment"?

For me, the answers are yes and yes, but I'm thinking that in the US at least the answer to the first is "no." Based on a snippet of a Style TV special I saw today, the answer to the second is "yes."

Which doesn't make all the sense in the world to me.

I wonder if they're using organic to describe the style in which the wire is wrapped, as opposed to a more precice/rigid/linear style

The first time I typed it out, I left out the word "wrapping" but then I looked at it again and realised maybe that's what was organic. I still think it's overuse of the term, but less impossible.

I think I'd generally interpret "underwear" to include bras.

And I'd interpret "undergarment" to mean the speaker is being oddly formal for someone talking about underwear.

For me, the answers are yes and yes, but I'm thinking that in the US at least the answer to the first is "no." Based on a snippet of a Style TV special I saw today, the answer to the second is "yes."

For me, it's 1 - no, 2 - yes. And undergarments could be further expanded to include slips, camis, etc. For me, anyway.

ETA: But mostly I'd use the particular words for each item. Unless I were being lazy. And oddly formal.

I'd say "underwear" can include bras, and "undergarments" does include bras. If I said "I went to the store and bought new underwear," I'd probably mean panties, but if I said "She's wearing only underwear," that would mean bra and panties. "Undergarments" sounds kind of old-fashioned, and sounds like it includes a slip and a girdle.