?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Wise Tits [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Wise Tits

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Sex Education In Public Schools [Sep. 8th, 2008|11:16 am]
Wise Tits

wise_tits

[hahahasyyke]
I applied to a community, and in the application it asked that I pick a few of the topics and explain my opinion on them. One of the topics listed was regarding Sex Education in Public Schools, and I had more to say about it than I posted there - so I thought I'd carry it over here.


I am not sure if they have some kind of sexual education in health classes EVERYWHERE, but we had it here, and it's pretty heavily based around one idea - "Don't do it!" We'd be pressed more than anything to abstain, and we were educated more on STD's than on how to prevent them. Apparently a lot of places simply teach Abstinence-only, and apparently a lot of conservatives are all about that. What?! I understand that people don't want their teenagers to have sex for the same reasons they wouldn't want them to smoke, drink, or a number of other things. However!

Okay, yes abstinence is OBVIOUSLY 100% effective in avoiding things that only come from having sex. If something can only be transmitted sexually, not having sex will spare you any risks of getting that disease. But people tend to ignore the fact that teenagers will have sex. Okay, not all of them obviously, but there are teenagers who do, so if parents and teachers think that telling them not to will stop them, then that's just being naive. Yes, abstinence works for those who remain abstinent, but teaching ONLY abstinence leaves the teenagers who decide they will have sex as endangered as they possibly could be from their conduct. We need to teach teenagers about contraception. Tell them about proper condom use, birth control pills, simple common sense solutions that also happen to work, as this recent study demonstrates. (Those are two separate links, by the way.. hah)

"The United States seems to be following the recent patterns in other developed countries where increased availability and use of modern contraceptives and condoms have led to remarkable declines in teen pregnancy,” said lead author John Santelli. “If most of the progress in reducing teen pregnancy rates is due to improved contraceptive use, national policy needs to catch up with those realities."

So, we have this decline in teen pregnancies (thank goodness), and we have more access to more information on contraceptives to thank for it, not an abstinence only teaching system. But it seems that conservatives are hell bent on pressing their opinion that sex outside of a heterosexual marriage is wrong so doing something that would "aid" teenagers who are having sex is only going to help a sinner get out of any punishment. I guess if that's the case, then abstinence only education serves the purpose that it's intended for...

And then people will say that it's just not the school's place to tell students about these things, because then they could learn things that are against the beliefs of their parents, but isn't questioning opinions and not just going by what one person says part of what a good education should be anyway? And anyway, I don't see how telling teenagers about abstaining and contraceptives in school prevents their parents from teaching them about those things, so I don't really see any grounds to make an argument on the whole matter except that sex is icky and dirty and should only be with somebody you love enough to marry, and of course anyone who thinks otherwise should probably just have a disease or great hardship...

It's frustrating. If you know teenagers do it, wouldn't you rather them do it safely?
LinkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: jesuismeursault
2008-09-08 09:20 pm (UTC)
the problem here is both faulty logic and naivety. faulty logic because the conservative equates knowledge about something with an overwhelming desire to do it. when i turned 18, i was aware that i could now legally buy cigarettes. that did not, however, make me want to run out and start smoking. being able to do something (or having knowledge about how to do it) does not automatically make you want to indulge in it constantly. i had my first of a string of sex ed. classes when i was 11 or 12 years old. i did not race out and have sex with the first interested boy. the argument that kids will want to have sex as soon as they learn about it is fundamentally flawed.

there is another problem with the above argument and that is one concerning the stunning naivety of the adult making it. kids are bombarded by images of a sexual nature from the time they are old enough to be aware of their surroundings. if they are not allowed to watch somewhat sexually explicit television shows or movies, they have friends who are allowed to do such things and either tell them all about it or invite them over to view it firsthand. the idea that kids are learning about sex for the first time in sex ed. is ridiculous. they already know about it. what they might not know about is how to use a condom or avoid getting aids or avoid getting pregnant. i don't have a problem with teaching abstinence as one part of a sex education class, but obviously the majority of teenagers are not abstaining, so they need to be schooled on safer sex practices. learning about how to protect oneself from stds and unwanted pregnancies is not going to make the teenager who has no desire to have sex outside of marriage feel compelled to then have sex immediately. most people who are abstaining are not doing so because they believe there is no way to avoid getting an std or having an unwanted pregnancy.

Edited at 2008-09-08 09:21 pm (UTC)
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: hahahasyyke
2008-09-09 02:54 am (UTC)
So true. You tell it sister. Haha. This is exactly what I mean - where are the heads of these parents to think that not teaching something is going to prevent it completely? And it's not as though the teachers are saying "It's okay to have sex, if you use a condom. It's normal at your age to have sex." They're not going to teach it as if it is a way to go, but I'd like to think they'd teach it more with the basis that "Abstinence is good because _____. At your age, it's not the best idea because ______. If/When you are ready, there are ways to prevent _____, and those ways are as follows:____" Haha.

Furthermore, if the parents want to bitch that the schools are teaching something that they might not agree with, then why do these conservatives think it's totally okay to teach creationism to the students, when tons of parents are opposed to that?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: jesuismeursault
2008-09-09 05:04 am (UTC)
well, creationism is the truth! obviously! haha.

the conservatives are being a bit ridiculous. it isn't like the schools are busting out pornos to show kids proper technique. knowledge is power man, we all know that from schoolhouse rocks. i'm not sure what the deal is with trying to hide things from kids. they aren't stupid. and once they found out you've lied, they will never trust you again, which is a great situation to be in if you want the kid to then trust you when you say that waiting on having sex is the best thing...
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: d_h_belmont
2008-11-11 12:26 am (UTC)

Come to think of it...

I don't know if my education that I received said "DON'T DO IT!", but it didn't really discuss much about sex in itself. Sure, there was the segments on the anatomy, and the contraceptives, but it all seemed to antiseptic and distanced when it came to the subject of sex itself. Yes, yes, the penis goes into the vagina and ejaculates sperm, which make their way to the egg, you get the picture. We also discussed STD's, too, but it just really seemed to dodge the subject of sex in itself. It was like learning about all the parts in a car, how to operate it, things that can go wrong, but not discussing the aspect of driving the damn car. I'm not sure if I'm making my point right. I'm not saying we should discuss how sex is so freakin' awesome of where the G-Spot is at, but nothing was really said... UG! Am I making any sense here? There really wasn't something along the lines of "Your hormones are changing, and there are urges." Which is followed up by either "Fight the temptation and all costs." or "If you do, use a condom.", you know, there really wasn't a personalization...

Now that said, and hopefully worded right, I'm not sure where that education would fall under. It's not really abstinence, but it's not exactly encouraging safer sex practices, either.

Although this subject was covered and passed over months ago, I'll still throw in my two cents in the hopes of bringing this community back to life. I think as a culture, we need to stop being so uptight about sex. It's part of life, it is our function to fuck, basically. To pretend that by telling students not to do it, they will listen and everything will be honky-dorey is just downright... stupid and naive. How can restricting information be a good thing? I would tend to think that by making condoms and other things like that "a dirty thing", it makes young adults shy away from them, encouraging them to just take their chances.

Now I'm thinking about all the students I was with in High School who seemed to get knocked up right out of High School. Why did I laugh at them so hard? I'm a jerk.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: hahahasyyke
2008-11-11 12:33 am (UTC)
I think what you said KIND OF made sense, but maybe mostly because I am just used to how you tend to go about wording you opinions. lol.

Um. Yeah I agree it wasn't abstinence only or safe sex oriented. I think he mostly said "abstinence is 100%, condoms are less, birth control too, and uhh, here's a video from the 70's." and then went to his office to teach private sessions.

HAHA jk on the last part.
(Reply) (Thread)