Kweli, my bad for thinking you were a woman. I would tell both my son and daughter that they should wait until marriage before engaging is sexual activity. However, I would tell my daughter that she faces an extra burden of risk from such activities, which is the truth. Given that the risk is greater for her, I would be irresponsible not to make an extra effort to prevent such activity from her. That having been said, if every parent were convincing their daughters not to engage in such activity there would be no outlet for boys hormones other than a porno magazine. I do believe that male sexuality is more bound by opportunity than is females and there have been studies to prove this. Thus, it only makes sense that the best strategy to reduce promiscuity is to reduce the opportunities supplied to males.
In regards to my brother, that is a self-serving interpretation. The difference is that I did not have little influence over my brother's behavior, nor did my parents. However, I looked up to my brother, as most young siblings do. Therefore, what he told me was very influential. It is very unlikely that I had the same effect on my brother as he had upon me. The fact that you think I loved him less then he loved me is totally incorrect. Maybe he loved me more than he loved himself, because he was willing to risk his life and freedom in the game, but could not stand the thought of me risking mine.
If you think that his message is not my message than your ability of comprehension is clouded by your emotions on this topic. My message was exactly that women have the power to influence men behavior and that men will not change their behavior without the incentive provided by women. He answered the question I asked to MBM with an affirmative....so how the hell is that a totally different message? Bro, you are just seeing what you want to see.
You also need to go back and check my definition of promiscuous, which you, I believe, asked me to provide in an earlier thread. You ignored the definition that I provided so that you can go on a self-serving tangent of reasoning. Once you go back and check my definition, then you can then apply it to that last question you asked...which I thought was pretty silly.