The Dirty Underbelly of Ab Only
It’s now well established that abstinence only “education” programs don’t work. They don’t prevent or delay sex among teens. They don’t help teens prevent STDs or unintended pregnancy. And they’re misogynist and homophobic (take, for example, the program called “Sex is for Fags,” an abstinence program for boys. Ok, that one’s a joke but it’s not far from the truth). While there were hopes when the Democrats came to power in 2006 that abstinence only funding would wane, the Dems are now dithering.
Luckily, Amanda Marcotte, in her new gig at RH Reality Check, reminds us today why abstinence only programs undermine reproductive justice and hurt men’s and women’s sexual health. She reminds us about the real lessons of abstinence only “education.” They include:
- implicitly encouraging “anything but” sex, yet without the proper education on disease prevention
- that the third of American women who have had abortions are degenerates and failures
- People — but really, women — can “use up” all of their capability to connect emotionally if they have sex before marriage, thus making happy relationships later in life impossible.
- All those stereotypes you’ve heard about what women and men want and need in relationships are true.
The research of SIECUS and Advocates for Youth back this up. At NYU last year, we hosted an event complete with mock Ab-Only class (run by SIECUS’s Maxwell Ciardullo). People — even those in the know about reproductive justice — were shocked at what kids are learning in school. We should all be in the know, so we can fight against the continued funding of these destructive programs.
September 6th, 2007 at 6:49 pm
More of a question than a comment: what can we do about these programs?
They’re excellent fodder for education and coalition building: for example, at an LSRJ level, SIECUS and others will lead simulated classes based on actual curriculums, and these are great to do with LGBT, HIV/AIDS, health, technology/science, and women’s groups because all such groups are affected by the funds.
They’re also great for more academic panels on federalism, spending power, and health policy, because abs only does raise some interesting issues or at least issues that lead to interesting discussions (more banal: should the government be setting any curriculum guidelines, should it be supporting private engagement in public education, are matching funds appropriate, what level of scientific review has to underly police power policy decisions). In addition to the above groups, ACS, FedSoc, Law Journals, and faculty are probably keen to participate in this type of panel.
But where I fall short is on what we can actually do about these policies. Personally, I volunteered for an NYCLU project looking into use of the funds in NY State. Is exposing who is receiving these funds and what they’re doing with them something that other LSRJ groups can and should do? Can anyone help them set that up?
Should we be countering these programs, perhaps by working with local schools/students that want to provide extracurricular sex-ed programs?
Is there direct lobbying we can do at the state level (to get more states to stop accepting the funds or to positively mandate complete sex-ed?) or even the local level (to keep these programs out of particular schools and districts)?
Bottom line: this seems like a great topic for lots of engagement strategies, and I’d love to read about concrete steps others have taken, programming assistance, and program suggestions.
September 6th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
If there’s any good news, it’s that Congress is going to fund the ab-only sex ed programs with less money than before. The bad news is they’re still paying for this drivel.
September 7th, 2007 at 1:18 am
Another problem I have with the concept of “abstinence only” is that is seems to disregard the existence of rape and sexual assault. It perpetuates this notion that engaging in sex is always a choice that can be perfectly timed for marriage. If we only teach about abstience, how do we prepare our youth to cope with rape?
September 7th, 2007 at 9:28 pm
In answer to your question, Ben (or in attempted answer), I’m not sure. I think a litigation strategy would be great, but it’s hard to figure out what the cause of action would be. Are there constitutional rights at issue here? Could we make a federalism argument? I’m not sure.
September 7th, 2007 at 10:38 pm
In terms of what we can do…students should make sure that comprehensive sex-ed statutes or regs are being enforced in those states that have them. I understand enforcement is a real challenge. Meeting with school board members may be a good place to start.
September 7th, 2007 at 10:39 pm
Another thing that also ticks me off about this stuff from a policy perspective is that it doesn’t consider the necessity of real facts education for people who will wait until marriage. This is especially evident in AIDS education programs in Africa, where many women especially marry young, and abstinence education is required percentage (1/3 I think?) of any US funding package (thank you to our current administration for that one). This is ridiculous when thousands of women who contract HIV or have an unwanted pregnancy do so b/c they have sex with their husbands! Abstinence-only education’s strange focus on marriage as the only place sexuality can be safely expressed ignores the fact that often people need fact-based education about marital sex, too.
September 8th, 2007 at 6:33 pm
Comprehensive sex-ed laws are definitely a step in the right direction. Here in Washington state the legistlature passed a comp sex-ed statute earlier this year, yet it does not require school districts to teach sex-ed at all. Instead, if they choose to do so, it must be state approved, medically accurate sex-ed. http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=sexed01m0&date=20070201&query=comprehensive+sex-ed
I believe, however, that the language is unclear as to WHO exactly can be teaching these courses. Because funding is so low to begin with, many school districts contract out to orgs who teach the sex-ed classes…which leaves room for the, shall we say, more questionable teachings that we see all too often.
Our LSRJ chapter actually had a well-received panel devoted to this bill - we brought in some of the lobbyists, ACLU, etc. It would have been great to have a school administrator as well, as I’m sure she would have brought another angle to the story. Getting an LSRJ chapter to do some educational programs (both w/in the law school and in the community) around this issue may get the ball rolling in terms of lobbying the legislature of your respective state to stop taking federal funding and get their heads out of their rear-ends. respectfully.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:24 pm
I want to echo RJrockstar’s excellent point that abstinence only programs fail to consider sexual assault. An Abstinence Only advocate may counter by saying there can very well be separate rape/sexual assault awareness courses that receive separate funding. But what a poor use of resources to compartmentalize sexuality education…in fact the entire abstinence only program is a waste of precious resources given how limited and useless the ab only curricula are. We should be arming our adolescents with everything they need to know…my ideal sexual education class would discuss the entire spectrum of sex and sexuality education, including the ramifications of no consent.
September 13th, 2007 at 2:57 pm
I would like to add my favorite ab-only simile ever, gleaned from a newspaper when I worked on these issues with the ACLU. “Men are like microwaves and women are like ovens.” If you can figure out why you’re ready for a career writing ab-only curricula!
January 11th, 2008 at 9:40 am
online poker…
online poker, poker online, texas hold em, poker, video poker, casino poker, world series of poker, wsop…
January 11th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
wsop…
online poker, poker online, texas hold em, poker, video poker, casino poker, world series of poker, wsop…
January 11th, 2008 at 6:54 pm
poker…
online poker, poker online, texas hold em, poker, video poker, casino poker, world series of poker, wsop…
January 11th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
texas hold em…
online poker, poker online, texas hold em, poker, video poker, casino poker, world series of poker, wsop…
April 7th, 2008 at 5:30 am
I couldn’t understand some parts of this article The Dirty Underbelly of Ab Only, but I guess I just need to check some more resources regarding this, because it sounds interesting.