Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Abstinence Double Standard Threatens Girls' Health

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
donsu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-27-06 12:39 PM
Original message
Abstinence Double Standard Threatens Girls' Health

http://www.alternet.org/story/37956/

Not only is abstinence education ineffective; it can have dangerous health effects on girls.


The U.S. government has a solution for unwanted pregnancies, AIDS and cervical cancer. It's called abstinence education, and the government funds it to the tune of around $178 million per year. The only problem is that study after study shows that abstinence education has no effect on the rates of premarital sex or STD infection. Perhaps that's because, as a 2004 report from Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., showed, over 80 percent of federally funded abstinence programs contain false or misleading information about sex and reproductive health. But then abstinence-only education isn't about keeping teens safe -- it's about reinforcing traditional gender roles and ensuring girls are "pure."

Martha Kempner, vice president for information and communications at the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS), says that abstinence-only programs aren't giving a health message, they're giving a social one. "This is a social agenda masquerading as teen pregnancy prevention," says Kempner. "They're going so far backwards in the messages they're giving women -- that purity is the most important thing and what you should be striving for is a wedding. Saying that the most important thing you can do is get married and have children isn't the most empowering message."

SIECUS has been keeping track of abstinence-only education programs and dissecting their curriculum -- their findings are terrifying. The shame- and fear-based teachings are chock-full of sexist stereotypes, outdated notions of gender roles and even dangerous messages about sexual assault.

The sexist theme that seems to come up the most often in these classes is that girls just don't like sex, and therefore their main "job" is to keep boys, who do like sex, from getting any. A workbook from Sex Respect notes that "because they generally become aroused less easily, females are in a good position to help young men learn balance in relationships by keeping intimacy in perspective." But beware ladies, the increased sexualization of pop culture could interfere with your natural disdain for intercourse. The same workbook tells students that "a young man's natural desire for sex is already strong due to testosterone … females are becoming culturally conditioned to fantasize about sex as well."
-snip-
------------------------------------------


we need to do a better job of protecting our daughters from the religiously insane and the neo cons

real, true knowledge is power
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-27-06 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. That sounds so...like what I heard growing up
That "good girls, who don't like sex, must use it as an incentive to get those sex-crazed creatures, namely boys, to marry them" line was exactly the prevailing notion in Middle America until the mid-1960s.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-27-06 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Right, the superior morals of little girls are supposed to
make them powerful gatekeepers. Yeah, right, like boys are ever going to buy that one.

I guess CON fathers have a horrible time recognizing that women have sex drives and that their precious little girls are going to go out and FUCK when they're old enough.

They'd rather push an impossible burden onto them, try to desexualize them, and put their lives at risk. If they fuck, after all, they must deserve to die from it.

It's beyond sick. It's deadly.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arkansas Granny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-27-06 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Yes, they value their daughter's virginity more than their lives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BOSSHOG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-27-06 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
2. Yeah, young girls are going to help boys "learn balance in relationships"
I got your balance hanging right here. I chuckle at the stories of those who pledge abstinence, tell mom and dad and preacher man they will be virgins when they get married, then go out and have porn star sex (everything but vaginal intercourse.) Nothing against porn stars, they use protection.

You are right, protect our kids against the religiously insane.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The2ndWheel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-27-06 01:08 PM
Response to Original message
4. Why can't knowledge just be knowledge?
Everything in our whole damn society has to be a power trip.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-27-06 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
5. because they generally become aroused less easily
because they generally become aroused less easily

Somebody needs to talk to my girlfriend. I've seen her get aroused literally at the drop of a hat. (I had to bed over to pick it up. I'll leave the rest to your imagination).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 15th 2024, 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC