I can see where Prudie is coming from on LW1, but doesn't she miss the core issue--why does this guy need his mom--or anyone else--to buy condoms for him? If he can't get down to the drugstore himself now, why will he do so in the fall?

As a parent (of little kids), I know this is a really hard balance between protecting your kids and forcing them to take responsibility for themselves--whether the issue is "did you remember to bring your coat," "did you get your homework done," or "are you having safe sex." But I went to college with way too many kids who seemingly didn't have the sense to take care of themselves because mom and dad always did it.

I see an "oops" in the future for this guy...

My assumption was that he didn't really need his mom to do it anymore than he needs his mom to clear his room. Its just a case of 'if she's offering, why not?'.

But that was a complete and total assumption based on nothing.

Ok, ew, sorry about the header. But really, ask any teenage boy/man what he needs to do to take care of himself on a regular basis, and he'll give you probably a pretty good list (groceries, rent/chores, clothes, music downloads, birthday cards/gifts for family/gf, video games, condoms, put shit away so I don't break it and I can find it later, show up at class, set the alarm...etc). Then ask him how much he's remembered to do or get in the last month. He may be able to name the music and games, but if he's honest he forgot most of the rest. It's one type of risk to forget your gf's birthday card, it's another entirely to forget to bring a rubber.

He will definitely need to assume responsibilty in the future, or his partners will. However, with Mom buying them now, (1) he gets in the habit of using them, and (2) she doesn't have to worry about him becoming a father NOW. Once he's in college, if he screws up and gets a girl pregnant, he's old enough to get a job and support himself.

I tell my son to get up in the morning when he oversleeps. I don't plan to call him at the dorm to do so. I hope he'll have more motivation on his own, taking classes he wants to take. I also buy his soap, shaving cream, food, etc. I don't think he'll stop eating, shaving, or bathing just because I quit supplying the products he needs to do so.

my dorm experience suggests otherwise. Shaving and bathing were, well, often overlooked. As was throwing away Tuesday's pizza.

In the letter, the kid's not 14. It's May-June. He leaves in August-September. The difference between now and later is pretty minimal, IMO.

the necessary equipment for sex. For nearly every 18-20 year old, I've ever known, the subject's, well, top of mind at some point during the day/hour/moment.

This isn't like buying bananas, doing the laundry, or mailing mom's birthday card--there's no forgetting. Ever hear of a college guy forgetting to pick up beer for the party? Didn't think so. Same thing here. You are either prepared or reckless.

And young women are becoming more and more insistent upon having that condom before she will consent to sex. So if he does happen to forget once, I'll bet you he won't forget again!

Prudie and basically every poster seem to focus on the unexpected pregnancy issue. Getting a job and supporting himself doesn't do much with respect to STDs.

Is it solely because I was in college in the early 1990s, when AIDS was (a) clearly a heterosexual issue and (b) not reasonably treatable, that I hear "unprotected sex" and immediately think "idiot's going to contract or pass along something?"

Are you saying the ones who forgot to pick up beer were just skinflints?!

As a female, I can deal with most STD's (other than the big one of course) pretty easily. That baby growing in your stomach is much more difficult to handle, no matter what option you take with it.

"the big one" was always top of mind.

I suspect it's somewhat unique to that time.

Probably. By the time I started having sex it was pretty old news. We all knew you had to be careful and stay protected but its not like anybody in our circles actually had it.

I imagine it would be much scarier if you were around when it first started showing up and nobody knew the facts around it.

Some operate on the theory that their chances improve if the women are drinking harder stuff. Really.

Can I ask you (approximately) how old you are?

My experience is similar to LuxLawyer's - a lifetime of having the "risky sex = AIDS " drilled into my head. AIDS entered the public eye at roughly the same time I became aware of public issues (I remember as an 8yo in '85 taking a ribbing for thinking someone was talking about "aides" - like the teacher's assistants). By the time my cohort reached sexual maturity (roughly '91), it was largely seen as a fatal disease and had made the jump from a niche disease to a widespread public health threat. As such, I think it primarily defined the risk of sexual activity for my generation.

I don't remember exactly when the first cocktails came out. But, I think it was around '97 that people began to see it as a manageable disease rather than a speedy killer. As time went on, the rumor was that the kids coming up under us didn't have any real fear of AIDS - that it was seen as unlikely and survivable.

If you're younger than myself, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on how you think your generation's perceptions might differ.

I've figured every generation manages to convince itself of two unshakeable truths--(1) the kids today are twice as depraved and foolhardy as we ever were; and (2) the kids today are half so inventive and rebellious as we ever were. Thus, most of the talk I've taken for the sort of BS by which a social group defines itself through exclusion ("we" know a more essential truth about sex than "they" do). But it would be surprising if there weren't differences based on context.

On a purely anecdotal basis, having lived in San Francisco, I've known and worked with a lot of HIV survivors. A surprising number of them seemed to hit some kind of "10 year wall" on their medications regime - when their cell counts started dropping precipitously and they began falling ill to opportunistic infections (i.e., they began developing full-blown AIDS again). I hope we don't see a spike in the transmission rate among kids in their teens and twenties (though I've heard we already have). The drugs are still too new to know for certain their effectiveness over time, and sub-Saharan Africa shows how serious a sexual epidemic can ultimately become.

You're right--my experience is the same (I guess I am about two years older).

My anecdotal experience is that people who are more than 5 years older or more than 5 years younger than me have a decidedly different take on HIV/AIDS. The older ones came up thinking it was "the gay thing" and that any STD could be cured with a shot. The younger ones--including my 25 YO half sister--obviously don't want to get it, but don't have the same sense of foreboding that was drilled into us.

I was unaware of the "10 year wall." That's terribly sad and frightening.