Showing posts with label sex education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sex education. Show all posts

Thursday, June 21, 2012

Life Finds A Way!


Henry Wu: You're implying a group comprised entirely of females will breed?
Ian Malcolm: No, I'm simply saying that, life, uh, finds a way.

Jeff Goldblum's character in Jurassic Park was pointing out the foolishness of believing it is possible to eliminate every potential gateway to disaster, because the wonder of life is that it can invent creative solutions humans never dreamed of.

That's what went through my mind when I heard states passed laws stripping public schools of their authority to teach sex education.  I thought, "Parents found a way."

In 2000, the Department of Education standard in CA schools was "abstinence until marriage/faithfulness in marriage."  No one knew that was the standard and they weren't actually teaching that, but that's what was on the books.  Children were taught whatever the particular beliefs were of any given Health teacher. 

I know, because I saw it.  In the San Fernando Valley where I live, for instance, there were teachers who taught it was a scientific fact that there is a "homosexual gene."  I saw another classroom presentation where the instructor opened the subject by writing the names of genitals and sex acts on a whiteboard then asking students to "Call out the street names for these words," which he wrote underneath the terms he had already written on the board.  For the rest of the class, he stood in front of those names for parts of their bodies and intimate human behavior.  It was supposed to "desensitize" them so they could have a "mature" discussion.


Parents objected to this and began supporting abstinence education.  In 2002, Federal money was designated for abstinence educations ($1 for every $12 that went to other types of sex ed.)  That didn't sit well with people who have a vested interest in promoting casual sex.  Fewer pregnant teens meant fewer abortion dollars, condom purchases, and STD containment services or research.  Not to mention, pointing out there are benefits to saving sex for marriage wouldn't advance the cause of same-sex unions.

What was the reaction? A systematic herding of parents and children toward "Comprehensive Sex Ed." 

First, any program which refused promote condoms or birth control was designated as "Abstinence Only."  A program which discussed such devices but didn't actively recommend using them was still designated "Abstinence Only."

Then they made up things like "The high rate of teen births is the result of 'Abstinence Only' programs which failed to tell students that about birth control and condoms."  Right. Like no adolescent would know such devices exist unless told by their Health teacher.  Not to mention it's a lie.  Birth rates began dropping immediately after abstinence programs began to be implemented.

Then they bullied the decision-makers.  An ACLU/Planned Parenthood campaign called "Not in My State!" threatened lawsuits.  They intimidated elected officials into refusing federal money for programs that were already working in their state.

The next step was to change the law.  Many states went from allowing school districts to choose the curriculum which best suited their community, to deciding the state knew what was best for everybody.  It wasn't because they listened to what parents demanded that CA went from "schools will emphasize abstinence" to "schools will either teach Comprehensive Sex Ed. or no Sex Ed. at all!"

Here we are in 2012: Quick, close the gate before anyone gets loose!  Deny new charter school applications, crush school voucher programs and create new textbooks to encourage children to think about who they will have sex with beginning in kindergarten.

Parents don't like to herded, so given the chance, they voted to take away the school's authority to instruct their kids about sex.  Yep, life finds a way!


Tuesday, May 5, 2009

Guest Post from Arizona State U

The following is a guest post from Shaun Thomson, in his 3rd year at Arizona State University in Phoenix. Shaun heard his first Positively Waiting talk (unwillingly, I might add) when he was 14 and a freshman at El Camino Real High School.

Over the years, as he saw his friends deal with the consequences of sexual activity, my credibility increased significantly. Not long after joining a fraternity, Shaun agreed to be interviewed with me on KFWB after a report came out saying "abstinence doesn't work."

Responding to a question about taking heat from his frat-brothers for not being sexually active, Shaun's classic response was: "Some guys don't eat meat. I don't have sex. Got a problem with that?"

Doing The Math About Abstinence

We all know there are tons of numbers and statistics flying around trying to say that "abstinence education doesn't work." However, I thought it would be prudent to address this with some simple math, and some common sense.

In a broad sense, math tells us what can and cannot happen under specified circumstances. This applies to abstinence in that we know without a doubt, what can happen if adolescents engage in sexual activity... STDs, pregnancy, emotional problems, etc. These are not fictional or doctored results. They are Real-Life for an ever-increasing number of young people here in the US.

These consequences are not the "by-product" of a strange coincidence. They are the result of sexual activity, and nothing else.

Consequently, the opposite is also true: if you avoid sexual activity, the likelihood of having negative consequences goes way down.

So, getting back to the math, if you abstain from sex (that is subtract or remove it from the equation), then is is no longer possible to get pregnant, and the risk for contracting an STD or having emotional issues related to sexual relationships drops dramatically.

It can be simply put as "You can get in trouble for something you aren't doing." If you are abstaining from sex, then you are protecting yourself against all the negative side effects of sexual activity.

Conse
quences of sexual activity do not happen if there is no sexual activity.

(Duh. Thanks, Shaun!)


Wednesday, July 23, 2008

If You Don't Tell Them, Who Will?

Today I received the first of what I expect will be many heartbreaking phone calls. A teacher in LAUSD has been preparing her students to hear my story, and found out today that I'm not allowed to tell it in her school anymore.

As we talked, she echoed every conversation we have had at Positively Waiting. What about...? A taped presentation? Getting in with the clinic speakers? Webcasting?

The hurt and urgency in her voice squeezed my heart. Both of us are thinking, "what about THESE kids?" They will get only the one view (Be safe, use "protection.") Who will tell them they're worth waiting for? Who will tell them there are BENEFITS to learning how to control those powerful impulses?

The teacher assured me she will do her best, but pointed out, "They listen to you because you've been there."

I'm not giving up. I'm looking for ways to smuggle the truth in underground. But I'm dreading every one of those phone calls this Fall.

Wednesday, April 16, 2008

Really BAD Abstinence Ed.

I was reminded today of the two contestants on American Idol who "promoted" abstinence education. One was a middle aged man who sang a song called "No Sex!" and the other was a high school student who wanted Simon Cowell to know it would "just be better" if he waited for sex until marriage. They, like the Church Lady from Saturday Night Live and the "coach" at the beginning of Mean Girls, give abstinence a bad name. We do look utterly foolish when we pretend sex is bad, dirty or evil.

The American Idol contestants represent just two of several forms of really bad abstinence education. Here are some others:
  1. Data Dumping: Scary statistics, graphic pictures of diseased genitals and study after depressing study on the negative consequences of non-marital sexual activity. It does produce a fairly impressive eeyewuuww! factor, but information doesn't change behavior.
  2. The Sleeping Beauty Method: extreme censorship of any and all material which might inspire a sexual thought. This is a favorite of churched families, generally based on the wrong belief that preventing ALL exposure to the sex-saturated culture as a young person will somehow keep them from wanting to have sex. It makes mom and dad feel good, but leaves the child totally unprepared from the onslaught of emotions and desire they have when they step outside the cocoon.
  3. Lowering the Bar: changing the standard to something other than wait for marriage, most often, "wait until you're ready/older/in a committed relationship." This are vague and unspecific targets which have broad interpretations. An adult's interpretation of the "commitment" stage is very different from a 14-year old's.
NONE of these strategies work.

I know this for a fact, because we tried them and failed. We found out the hard way that fear only works as long as the fear lasts. Its great when they're 5, but really ineffective at 15. When we finally set aside our pride, and really asked what works? what impacts your attitudes toward sex? Teens gave us the answers.

More next time...

Friday, April 4, 2008

LAUSD and Me

From 1998 until December of 2006, my husband and I talked to teens in LA Unified Schools (mostly in the San Fernando Valley). A frank talk about living with the consequences of sex really impacted their perspective about sex, about "safe sex" and about not "doing it."

BUT... in December of 2006, LAUSD made us stop. They were worried about "discrimination" and "medical accuracy." OK. We worked the system. Lots of legal hoop jumping, delays, written proposals and more delays... In the end, they have decided:

1) We are not qualified to tell our own story
2) While the whole point of our story is that "safe sex" failed us, in order to come back to LAUSD schools, we would have to include tell students there are "other FDA approved methods for preventing pregnancy and contracting STDS" [Note: That means we have to encourage them to use condoms.]

The absurdity is the FDA and the CDC will only say "Condoms are not 100% safe, but if used properly, will reduce the risk of sexually transmitted diseases."

REDUCE the risk???!! By how much? The rates vary depending on the disease, whose infected and what type of sexual activity they're engaging in...

(You didn't really believe a condom gave you 100% protection, did you?)

So, back to LAUSD... if we agree to tell students something we KNOW experientially didn't work for us, and we can PROVE scientifically won't work for THEM, the district will allow us to talk to the students... oh wait, I forgot. We aren't qualified to tell our own story.

Thursday, March 27, 2008

The Truth about Sex Education

If I read one more article saying "abstinence doesn't work" my head will explode. Its such a ridiculous statement. Of course if you're not having sex, then you aren't going to have sexual consequences. DUH. But the argument isn't about whether or not "abstinence" works, or kids need more access to birth control. It really is about ADULT agendas.

If kids learn how to control their sexual passions, develop a broad range of interest to re-channel that energy, and learn good relationship skills... they will be more successful in life. That's a fact supported by a ton of research. It's also what every parent wants for their kids.

BUT, if a teenager, in the full flush of their peaking hormones, exercises some sexual self-control, the response from adults isn't "Good for you! Great job! I'm proud of you!"... it's "Uh-huh. Be sure you have a condom in your wallet, just in case."

The problem is that ADULTS want to believe there is such a thing as casual-sex-without-consequences. But there isn't. You can trust that latex condom all you want, but the FACT is the most common sexually transmitted diseases have the same transmission rates with or without condoms. Look it up on the CDC website.

And because teenagers are kind of famous for not following through, that whole business about 98% effective against pregnancy is a myth. Teens using condoms to avoid getting pregnant, have a failure rate of 30% in the first year (that means they GOT pregnant).

The desperate belief that pills, shots, creams, foams and condoms can somehow allow teens to be sexually active in serial relationships, but still arrive at adulthood unscathed is RIDICULOUS!

For me, its not just about avoiding STDs and making babies. Its about developing character. Being faithful to one person is hard. It takes a lot of practice and mental discipline. Learning to communicate on an intimate level requires a person to abandon the self-centeredness of childhood, and care about others. Real lasting success in relationships is hard work. If a teen is giving in to the desire to satisfy that drive for sex and only concerned with avoiding the social consequences, how and when will they learn these important skills??

Sexual self-control is hard, but so beneficial. I know, I did it myself. When I was giving in to my desires for sex, I didn't care about anyone but me. But when I stopped using people for sex, I learned how to love them.

I want that for the kids in my community.