Boys staying over - when?

[Gellert]

DD is 16, as is boyfriend. Very new relationship but as he lives some distance away it means that someone has to drive him home or they don't spend an evening together - 2 busses otherwise.
Considering letting him stay over when they are both ready, my thinking being if they are going to have sex then they will regardless.
Have obviously had safe sex talk with DD and boyfriend is very open with us and said they don't want to rush into things.
Am I irresponsible or sending the wrong message if I let him stay over? I can see this cropping up in half term.

I have two teenage DDs. DD1 is 19 but has never had a regular bf so she hasn't had anyone stay. Even though she's now an adult I'd still want her to be in a stable relationship before anyone stayed because I don't want to encourage a stream of randoms staying in my house.

DD2 is 17 and has been with her bf for 3 years and he's been allowed to stay over for the past year. He's a really lovely, sensible lad and I knew they'd find a way to have sex if they wanted anyway. They've also had weekends away on their own and her bf came with us on our summer holiday and they shared a room.

It helps a lot when it's a stable relationship and the bf is a nice person. If they were bringing home rough edged undesirables every other week I'd not be happy having them stay.

If I was the OP and my daughter was 16 and in a very new relationship then I probably wouldn't let them sleep in the same room, but that's just me.

My DSS20 has a steady GF.
She isn't allowed to stay full stop.

I was never allowed to have people stay when I lived at home, neither was my partner.

Might be old fashioned but I don't want his GF's staying over.

@itsbritneybiatches

Why?

Yes I was just wondering why?
Obviously your house, your rules.
But is he allowed friends to stay? I can almost understand not wanting other people in your house. I am not a big fan of having guests hanging around when I want to watch telly in my scruffs.
But I can’t imagine being 20 and not being allowed my boyfriend to stay over. I had a mortgage and a full time job by 20! (Not recommending that by the way, but it’s completely possible).

Our house is too small.
I can hear him breathe of a night the landing between the bedrooms is about a square metre wide.
That's one reason.

Other reasons are I'm just not comfortable with it.
Neither is his father. I'm just not, I don't know why.

Final reason, he's only lived with us for 6 months and for a
Few reasons and incidents since moving in, I cba detailing here he needs to grow the fuck up.
When he can act like an adult he will get treated like one.

Well, there's at least one good reason in there, so fair enough. Certainly it gives a lot more context than just "Because I said so" which is the tone I took away from your initial post.

When I moved into this house it was fine for my daughter and me.
My DH moved in and the third bedroom because our storage and wardrobe space etc.

We are now all on top of each other. Just not prepared to have another person here when it's already a fucking nightmare to keep tidy, have any kind of intimacy with my DH, and so on.

It's getting to me.

No possibility of moving somewhere bigger for the next twelve months at least.

The plan is then to move and let SS stay here and rent from us if he grows the fuck up massively.

Look for a larger house with some sort of annexe or self contained granny flat
To give us all some privacy if he doesn't.

Ffs

Became
Not because

Most of those reasons seem very reasonable indeed Britney.

Very different to ‘I just don’t want him to have sex’

So you're saying that because there are different problems for current teens than previous teens, current teens should not have sex?
My point was that comparing parental experiences of sex in the pre internet porn age with the sort of entitlement culture surrounding sex that has arisen since its advent is a comparison of apples and oranges. Both boys and girls have been affected by the entitlement culture that has developed. Porn has been a disaster for teen girls and for women, not the empowering thing you suggest it is, with your comment wrt porn having an impact on what both boys AND girls are expected to do/look like/be like during sex. Even the porn is very different from what it used to be.

Nobody should be copying porn as a foundation for lovemaking.
It's not a question of mechanics, of copying porn under the sheets, or 'Don't try this at home'. It's the cultural shift that accompanied the tidal wave of porn that matters, the massively disrespectful attitude toward girls and women, the attitude that they are there for sex and sex only, the attitude of entitlement on the part of men. Just as Trump has emboldened the Right, the racists, the misogynists, the white supremacists, so has porn emboldened very inadequate men and boys. It has made loutish, predatory behaviour and attitudes mainstream. It has turned the idea that girls owe attention and affection and sex to men and boys, owe them their time and energy and reassurance, into an assumption that goes unchallenged. Hence 'incel' groups, which are only the tip of a very large iceberg.

As Moodypants said above, abstinence teaches nothing.
Au contraire, abstinence teaches that you can live without sex until you are able to make sensible decisions without the need for mum and dad in the next room, ready to rush in if something goes wrong (and do what, I wonder...)

"You help them to realise that their self worth does not depend on having a sexual relationship with someone."
How does telling them to avoid sex accomplish that goal?
You don't have to explicitly tell them not to have sex. You bring them up from early childhood on to be motivated, serious about their own future and with hope that their talents will get them far. You give them as many opportunities as you can to embrace new challenges.

Then as teens, you ask them to consider what their priorities are and to consider whether they might be compromised by time and energy devoted to an intense relationship. You ask them to get part time jobs and to participate in extra curricular activities and volunteering and contributing to the running of their home, making sure they are gaining self esteem from actual accomplishments and not from how attractive they may be to someone else. You make it clear to them that time management is up to them and that you will curtail activities if their grades suffer or if they show signs of not being able to burn the candle at both ends. This reinforces the message that their studies are the most important element in their lives.

At the end of the day, helping your near-adult offspring make good decisions about priorities does not mean railroading them in the direction you want them to go.
Indeed. It is a lot more subtle than that, and you need a good game plan, to start early, and to stick with it.

"Early" is also a relative term. You cannot put a number to it. How do you define "Early"? I know some 20yr olds who I wouldn't trust with a corkscrew, never mind sex. On the other hand I also know some 15yr olds who are extremely sensible and reliable, stay calm and make good decisions. An age of consent is important in a legal sense, but beyond that, you can't benchmark a human being. You can't say "Today you are not ready, but tomorrow you will be" when it comes to sex, because it's not an exam you pass or fail. It's entirely down to the individuals involved.
The age of consent is there because on average it is an indication of a certain level of maturity and ability to make sensible decisions, and perhaps to safely bear and bring up a baby.

It used to be younger, back when the only consideration was that girls might physically be able to bear a baby and when the question of a financially independent future for girls was considered a ludicrous and impossible flight of fancy. We now recognise that there is more to life for girls than bearing babies, we recognise that that they can be exploited, and we have tried very hard to create a culture where girls' educational and career ambitions are nurtured. Most people would be horrified if their 16 year old daughters decided to leave home, throw over their education and move in with a BF, because she would be jeopardising educational and career opportunities.

Yes, the Pill has changed the landscape considerably, but still girls tend to aim for more stereotypically feminine careers, and girls can also way back in the back of their minds entertain the idea that they will have the 'second' career if they are part of a couple, the one that can be dipped in and out of, while the man forges ahead with the primary career. When parents facilitate a situation where a 16 year old might enter into a very intense relationship they are allowing their child to play with fire. Yes it might all turn out fine, but otoh it might not. A girl could get seriously distracted from educational and career priorities, could miss out on the really important formative experience of friendships, jobs and challenging activities in early adulthood. It is still very acceptable for girls to take the mummy track. It is still very acceptable to view relationships with the opposite sex as the be all and end all of life, and parents often collude in sending this message.

We are not so evolved that we do not disregard our hearts any more. We are not so evolved that girls no longer absorb old messages about a woman's place.

In addition, we are not so evolved that we are able to spot an abusive teenage boy or grown man, many of whom are very good at reserving their worst side for their GF or partner while putting on a great show for everyone else. I would suggest keeping it nice and cool when it comes to welcoming BFs into DDs' lives and a family's life while they are still teens. Don't give them the impression that your home is their home.
www.loveisrespect.org/resources/dating-violence-statistics/
Some stats from the US site Loveisrespect.

• Girls and young women between the ages of 16 and 24 experience the highest rate of intimate partner violence — almost triple the national average.
• Among female victims of intimate partner violence, 94% of those age 16-19 and 70% of those age 20-24 were victimized by a current or former boyfriend or girlfriend.
• Violent behavior typically begins between the ages of 12 and 18.
• The severity of intimate partner violence is often greater in cases where the pattern of abuse was established in adolescence...

... * Only 33% of teens who were in a violent relationship ever told anyone about the abuse.

• Eighty-one (81) percent of parents believe teen dating violence is not an issue or admit they don’t know if it’s an issue.
• Though 82% of parents feel confident that they could recognize the signs if their child was experiencing dating abuse, a majority of parents (58%) could not correctly identify all the warning signs of abuse. (direct C&P^^)

www.urban.org/features/teen-dating-abuse-digital-age
Still more potential for abuse.

Blithe assumptions on the part of parents are not a teen girl's best friend.

In particular, the assumption that you have a good enough relationship that your DD will come to you if there is any problem can often be nothing more than a pious hope.

My boyfriend slept over at 16. We were together 15 years after that so I suppose my mum knew it was a solid thing rather than a teen fling.

Good post mathanxiety.
I not for trying to stop my teens from having sex, and they know I don't see it as 'wrong' or anything, but I'll let them be the ones to lead the way.

I hope you haven't agreed, but I suspect you will.

As your dd is only sixteen, her brain is still forming as is her body. Although intelligent and sensible she is still developing her own thoughts and values, and it would be far healthier for her to be able to grow into an adult and make those decisions as an adult.

I would have loved my parents to let my bf stay over at night, but in hindsight I was in too deep, the relationship was too intense and we ended up at his house a lot, and it was too much too soon. Although at the time I felt I could handle it, I really couldn't.

Excellent post from math (not for the first time). I want so much more for my teenager than 'going steady & being in a serious relationship' at just 16/17. I have seen the fall out from friends,/relatives teenagers who have got into serious relationships at a young age - unwanted pregnancies, unplanned babies, abandoned study/career/sporting opportunities, and - call me old fashioned - but I think it is very sad which is why I will certainly not be encouraging my teenager to have a girlfriend sleeping over (in the same room).

Dd#2's boyfriend sleeps in spare room, she didn't question it, she may well sneak in once we are in bed, I'm not bothered but haven't assumed as she hadn't asked to share with him - they split up recently anyway and she says no more boys until she gets her a levels! (We'll see)

I can certainly understand where math anxiety is coming from, and agree with lots of points .

But it sounds more like you want to stop them having a boyfriend/ girlfriend who is serious full stop (for understandable reasons) than just objecting to their partner saying the night in their room.

At the end of the day, she's going to have sex whether you let them sleep in the same bed or not. I would say, wait until they have been together longer until you allow them to sleep in the same bed but until then perhaps let him sleep on the sofa.

I think some people forget that teenagers will have sex whether we try and stop them or not - refusing to talk about it is what results in teen pregnancies and std's. Well done for being so open with your DD OP!

BF or GR staying the night at 16 would be more than one step too far, yes.

What function does having a serious boyfriend serve at age 16? What does serious mean at that age?

If the idea is to cut your teeth, so to speak, and there is no intention of progressing to a committed relationship in their own home together in a few years, then both parties are using each other. If the intention is to progress to that, then both parties run the risk of compromising educational and career plans, but in our specific culture that compromise is far more likely to be made by the girl than by the boy. University application time comes around and I have seen it many, many times that the boy will plough ahead with applications to the universities he genuinely prefers while the girl will take into account where the BF is applying. I have also seen many a girl who was going steady from age 15/16 dumped by the BF at Christmas of the first year of university - the effect of the reduction of life to the scale of a fishbowl populated by a large number of very attractive young women... And there is the girl, in a university where she maybe didn't really want to go, where she hasn't invested in friends because who needs friends when you have a BF, going home in the holidays to a town where she hasn't invested in friends during her late teen years. Of course, people are resilient, and they often pick things up and proceed with 'lesson learned'. But wrt the practical details, they are often stuck in a university they can't transfer out of, or they really haven't given the time they should have to the question of what is right for them, degree wise or career wise, when they have got used to seeing themselves as half of a couple, and often as half of a couple in which the other half will have the main career.

When you have someone in your life at 16 who is taking up a significant amount of time and energy, you are foreclosing the other options that are available to you - deepening and widening friendships, developing in an extra curricular activity, and the temptation is always there not to join clubs or get a p/t job or more hours at a job, because that would cut into time available for the relationship. Or even to give up activities outside of the relationship.

Very intense feelings can cause teens to prioritise elements of their lives that can lead to negative repercussions later in life.

There is also, as statistics show, the increased potential for a relationship to be abusive. This should come as no surprise, given the basic immaturity of the average teen.

not the empowering thing you suggest it is,

My point was not that porn was empowering. My point was that expectations for boys and girls alike have both changed. Boys are expected to have a completely shaven penis that's at least 8 inches long when erect, and be able to thrust mindlessly for half an hour or more before coming. This is pretty equally damaging compared to the expectation that the girl be again, completely shaven, and be happy to engage in all manner of physically improbable positions that professional gymnasts might not even be capable of, before having the guy spaff in her face.

I completely agree that porn is damaging. However the solution is not to avoid it. The solution is to educate your child properly. 40 years ago the terror of the day was AIDs, and the appropriate response was to exercise good caution with partners and use protection.

Ditto your point about womens sexuality and everything else. You shouldn't be forced out of sex due to another persons erroneous concept of what sex is for either of you. You should be having the conversation about this before you have sex at all.

abstinence teaches that you can live without sex until you are able to make sensible decisions without the need for mum and dad in the next room, ready to rush in if something goes wrong

Um, not to my mind. Abstinence from sex has no greater benefit to yourself than abstinence from rock climbing. It's not about NEEDING to have your parents rush in, any more than we routinely NEED the fire brigade to come to our house. Would you rather have the fire brigade available in an emergency, or not? I'm thinking you would. Ditto mental health services. Most of us don't NEED a therapist, or ever expect to use one. However is something really bad happens, for whatever reason, it's nice to have access to one. Parents fulfill both of the above roles for their children while they still live at home.

You ask them to get part time jobs and to participate in extra curricular activities and volunteering and contributing to the running of their home, making sure they are gaining self esteem from actual accomplishments and not from how attractive they may be to someone else.

Firstly, the fact that you think a teenager is going to be equally happy about the prospect of volunteering and the prospect of sex is pretty amusing. Secondly, who decided that part time jobs, volunteering, and contributing to the running of the home are not compatible with also having sex or a relationship? Why are you making the decision for your child that randomly working in an old persons care home is of more value to their life than their first romantic relationship? You seem to be saying "But OBVIOUSLY X, Y and Z is better for my child then Q" except plenty of people disagree with you. I personally can't think of a way to make my kid hate me faster than saying "No, you're not allowed a girlfriend, now get back to Oxfam where old people can mumble at you for 4 hours on a Saturday" and I would never ever tell my child to do that.

You make it clear to them that time management is up to them and that you will curtail activities if their grades suffer or if they show signs of not being able to burn the candle at both ends.

Okay. Your child sustains perfect grades, does housework, has a part time job, and does a couple of afterschool clubs while having a relationship and sex with their partner, however they don't volunteer. Would you have a problem with that?

Most people would be horrified if their 16 year old daughters decided to leave home, throw over their education and move in with a BF, because she would be jeopardising educational and career opportunities.

Nobody is talking about anyone dropping out of school. We're talking about a successful teen continuing to be successful while having a sex life. You seem to be of the opinion that this is somehow impossible.

we are not so evolved that we are able to spot an abusive teenage boy or grown man + statistics

I could also quote you a boatload of numbers about the likelihood of someone suffering brain damage, broken bones, torn ligaments and everything else when they play Rugby.

However that doesn't mean I would prevent my child playing Rugby. It means I would do my best to make sure that the coach is competent, that the players seem to be playing properly, and encourage my child to play as best as they can, because then they're less likely to be at risk.

You seem to be saying that because something has greater than zero risk, you should prevent your child from engaging in that activity. That's crazy. It's equally crazy to say "Teens are 0.3% likely to be abused, and 30+ women are 0.1% likely to be abused, so nobody should have sex until they're 30+" Risk management is part of life.

I have seen the fall out from friends,/relatives teenagers who have got into serious relationships at a young age - unwanted pregnancies, unplanned babies, abandoned study/career/sporting opportunities

All of which can be reduced in likelihood to less than a hundredth of a decimal place by using a condom and an implant, and can be avoided entirely if your daughter has an app for tracking her periods and your household is open to early pill induced abortions. No, abortions are not ideal, and personal choice and yada yada yada. However the lost opportunities you indicate in your post were not suffered because a teen had sex. They were suffered because a teen had sex, and didn't use protection, or didn't notice fast enough that they were very late, or didn't take the morning after pill if their protection failed, and then after all of the above, they chose not to abort. An abandoned education or career due to pregnancy is a choice, not an inevitable risk.

What function does having a serious boyfriend serve at age 16?

Making your teenage years fun and memorable? My life outside of my relationship at age 16 was miserable as hell due to being bullied continuously from age 10 onwards, I had no friends, and was basically waiting for university to happen so I could GTFO. The key part here is that I was miserable for 6 years BEFORE I even met my GF of the time. So I wasn't "sacrificing" anything by having a relationship. I was gaining a huge amount of crystal clear fond memories that I treasure to this day, aged 32. Would my life in any way have been improved if I hadn't had that relationship in the last 2 years of school? No. I don't think so.

then both parties are using each other

Yes. That's what a relationship is, when you get right down to it. Friendships, even. I use my friend for emotional support, and they use me for the same. I buy my friends things, and they buy me things. I drive us to a theme park, and my friend pays for entry. We're "using each other" all the time. If that's how you want to look at sexual relationships, then why not view all of humanity in that way?

The rest of your latter post is basically saying "What if your daughter makes bad decisions?".

Your daughter is capable of making plenty of bad decisions even without a boyfriend in her life. A decent boyfriend would actually help advise her on making good ones, and vice versa.

(Cheerleading Sethis from the sidelines again)

Spot on, every word!

(Cheerleading Sethis from the sidelines again)

Spot on, every word!

I would also think that micromanaging your child's life to this degree is a sure fire way to rebellion.
What if they don't want to do any extracurricular activities? Can't it be their choice after a certain age? Equally a pt job - if they want to have more time for studying (and friends!), then let them, as long as they accept the financial consequences

Yep brilliant post seethis.

I was just going I say, the primary function of a sexual relationship at 16 is for FUN! Done right with the right person or dare I say it people it’s brilliant.

I have also seen friends completely fail at A Levels because of parents divorce, a bereavement, and also because their horse died, or they didn’t get picked to compete for a team they had been working hard at their sport for. Because they might have been prioritising their social life even though they were single. Drinking irresponsibly etc or the biggy at the moment, gaming on a console.

That doesn’t mean I won’t let DD have a pony if she wants, or a hobby she is passionate about and works hard for, or let her have alcohol in moderation. Might even let her have a go on a games console. 😱 Teens need learn about everything in moderation. All these things are fun. Just because somethings primary function is fun doesn’t make it bad. Let’s face it, chocolate has no function other than fun. If you just binged on chocolate without learning about a balanced diet it would have detrimental impact on your physical and eventually mental health. Don’t ban chocolate do we. We don’t say abstain from chocolate until your career is on track because it’s hard to give up. Nope we teach them a balanced way to eating it! Even learning how to balance fun, work, sleep etc is a skill.

Anyway I completely respect everyone’s views on this, it’s obviously an emotive subject. But my life as a 16+ year old with an active sex life was a lot of fun, I didn’t fail my a levels when my boyfriend dumped me, I just developed sensible coping mechanisms (good mates for chatting with, chocolate, duvet days and box sets of friends) and got over it, having learnt some new life skills (relationship ones not BJ techniques 😉).

And yes agree to all relationships having an element of using each Other. I use DH for fun, friendship and sex, parenting teams stuff and lifting heavy things. He uses me for fun, friendship, sex, parenting and growing his babies 😁) it’s what life is. I use my work colleagues friendship to make the day more fun. Doesn’t mean I don’t value them as individuals or their friendship. My dog uses me for food and shelter and strokes, in return he gives me unconditional love and companionship. Winner winner really.

Yeah I should also throw out and make clear that I fully defend and support everyone's right to have an opinion on any given topic - just because I disagree with a person doesn't mean I'm automatically right and the other person is automatically wrong. I enjoy conversations like these as a way to clarify and explore my own thoughts and provoke respectful conversation, rather than as a way to shut someone down or invalidate anyone's feelings.

Just like anything else I think we grow through being challenged, and that holds true as much for beliefs and concepts as much as it does for going to the gym or learning a new skill. Regardless of where a discussion ends up, I appreciate the chance to take part in it, and thanks to all PPs for contributing to the discussion!

Again excellently put seethis. It’s so beneficial to have these discussions and consider our win thought processes etc. Thank you to everyone who has contributed and to OP for starting the thread.