Getting REAL in Washington, D.C.
Since I was one of the lucky few of my generation to get a good, responsible sex education before I got to have sex I'd like to echo the applause Planned Parenthood is giving to Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), and Rep. Christopher Shays (R-CT) for introducing the "Responsible Education About Life" (REAL) Act, which would mandates funding medically accurate, comprehensive sex education programs at the same funding levels the Bush administration squanders on abstinence-only programs.
PP president Cecile Richards says "Approximately 750,000 U.S. teens will become pregnant this year, and nearly four million of them will contract a sexually transmitted infection -- in part because they don't have access to the information they need to make responsible decisions about their health."
That's somewhere between one and a half (that would 2 X 750,000 pregnancies) and four million more teenagers having sex than I'm really happy about. (I appreciate that the four years between 14 and 18 might seem like an eternity, but in the grand scheme of things we can expect to have an active sex life for another 50-75 years after our 18th birthday. Why go off half-cocked? And wind up But I digress...)
Now, it might be more than I'm happy about, but wishing all day won't change those numbers. And if I can't change those numbers by wishing, and if I can't change them through preaching, prayer, or even bed checks, let alone the ineffective-nigh-unto-counterproductive abstinence-only education, then it seems like a good idea to try, y'know, realistic, believable, and *applicable* education instead.
I happen to believe that which I happen to believe that if implemented REAL and other Prevention First strategies will help put a big dent in a) teen pregnancy rates and consequently teen abortion rates, b) teen STD rates, c) the rate at which teens initiate first sexual contact, and, more critically d) the percentage that will engage in unsafe sexual practices for the rest of their lives.
Abstinence-only advocates and other social conservatives may squall about getting sidetracked, but I think it's about time. I'd further like to remind them that, while I believe REAL will be far more effective it could scarcely work at all and still do better than sixty five out of 490 female students pregnant at an abstinence-only school in Canton Ohio!
They are pushing for mandatory sex education in all schools in the UK and at a lower age because they've had some success in reducing the number of conceptions - in *some* areas. There must be more to it than just education though because in Glasgow two studies have shown it didn't have the results hoped for. Socio-economic factors come into play.
I can't help feeling that educating teens in isolation is only part of the story and sex education needs to be, and seen to be, part of life as a whole. For instance France has banned any unprotected sex being shown on television. All right, not everywhere shows sex on television but it's the general idea.
[Agreed. Responsible sex-ed programs in isolation aren't enough to single-handedly moderate sexual irresponsibility. (Impending fractured metaphor alert...) You can lead a horse to water, etc., etc. But here's the thing. If you think the horse would be better off just keeping away from the creek it's going to drink out of the $!%!@#$!~ toilet. :-) The point being that short of irresponsibly just handing out bottles of whisky and porn and then turning out the lights REAL *can't* be worse than the alternative. Thanks, A. --fl]
Excellent post "figleaf" !!
I'm still pretty new to you blog .. However, I like the way you think.
Kisses,
~A~
[Thank you, Angel. I appreciate it. --fl]
Figs,
I think A. has pointed out the major obstacle that any sex education program faces, no matter how good (or bad) it is.
If it's at variance with how sex is portrayed in the culture at large, then its success will be much more problematic. All of us who take sexual responsibility seriously are aware that sexual irresponsibility is pretty rife in mainstream media. And as parents, we're aware that their peers can become as great or greater an influence on kids when they start to reach adolescence. Controlling your kids' access to peer groups and thus their influence was easier in the olden days (sheesh, can't believe I said that). I think a good argument could be made that now peer groups comprise not only those who are actually their peers (school mates, friends, etc) but also those they meet online, or see on TV or movies, or magazines. The influence of these is much more difficult to combat, if for no other reason that it's so incredibly widespread.
I am not advocating censorship in any way shape or form. I am not against consensual sex - gay or straight - outside marriage. I think it's possible to have 'casual' sex in a responsible manner , but I also think you need to have the maturity of an adult to make that kind of judgment. I think having sex education programs is good, especially if no education is the alternative, and agree with you wholeheartedly that a program like REAL is a step in the right direction.
[My take on media influence is that a) it's a source of bad *ideas* for children rather than bad influences and that b) ideas themselves only become a problem when recipients have no source of countervailing ideas or c) if those ideas are reinforced by consensus among influential adults in the child's life. I appreciate the pedagogical intention behind REAL because it provides tools with which to apply judgment. For instance, if you know nothing tangible about condoms (except maybe they're "bad") then you have no basis to assume, say, Veronica Mars uses them during implied copulation with her succession of partners. If you understand what they are and you've had responsible decision making modeled for you then you're going to assume that Mars would use them and spend time wondering whether the Dick Casablancas character was irresponsible enough to forego them. Know what I mean? Thanks, Janeway. --fl]
Thanks be to God that my high school had a normal sex ed course ... actually, it was a one marking period course, an hour every day, and you went instead of gym for that third of the semester. The teacher was amazing. We learned about STDs, safe sex, drinking, drugs, etc. And it was one of the best classes I had. The end project of the class was to write an "AIDS biography." It was supposed to be at least 10 pages long, I think. You had to create a character, give them AIDS somehow, and then have them die. It was a heart-wrenching project, and after all the love I put into creating my character I had a damn hard time killing him off. But I did, 40 pages later.
Thank God I had a class like that, you know? I can't imagine going into college with no knowledge of the reality of sex. Oh, and for the record, we had no pregnancies in my particular class of 261. Although one girl got pregnant right afterwards, I think.
[Wow, WG, that sounded like a heck of a class. With an intense focus on decision making like that I can see how it would lower the odds of accidental pregnancy. Thanks. --fl]