Abstinence-Only Education Reaches New Lows
15th February 2007
by Alon
Amanda has a really good post about a variety of things, from the importance of abortion to flip-flopping to sex education. On sex education, she quotes a Washington Post article by Marc Fisher that documents just how disgusting abstinence-only education can get. Says Fisher,
In the matter of the “gum game” — the yucky attempt in Montgomery County schools to impress upon teenagers the dangers of sexual promiscuity by asking them to share a piece of gum — all involved now appear to be appalled at themselves.
The idea that abstinence is the solution to such social ills as teenage pregnancy is based more on ideology than on facts. Of all developed countries for which data is available (p. 15 in the PDF), Poland has the least promiscuous teenagers, followed by Portugal. But out of 28 countries for which teen birth data is available, Portugal has the seventh highest teen birth rate and Poland has the ninth. English-speaking countries overall do the worst; dropping them, Portugal becomes fourth out of 23 and Poland becomes fifth.
In the US, research into abstinence-only education shows that its effects on STDs are not statistically significant. The Heritage Foundation tried weaseling out of it by saying that the research showed teens who pledged abstinence had lower rates of STD infections than teens who didn’t, but the research did in fact show that the difference isn’t statistically significant.
And, note, pledges are supposed to be the most benign and effective form of abstinence promotion. Scare campaigns don’t generally work; politically they’re disastrous - just ask Jerry Kilgore - while in marketing and in social promotion, they just fail to produce results. The anti-drug scare campaigns that permeate schools have after all failed to curb drug abuse.
And here’s the full text submitted about another favorite exercise that won’t be used anymore: “Exlax game.”
In this game, students were handed squares of Hershey’s chocolate, but before they popped the candy, they were told that a few kids had instead received Ex-Lax laxatives. Still want to eat it? Few did, and, in fact, Tierney assures me that although this exercise “really freaks them out,” it is only a mind game designed to drive home the idea of random risk — no laxatives were distributed to students.
So, if it’s not about results, what is it about? The obvious answer - sexual control and prudishness - is only partially correct. The organization that organized those games was a conservative group that the school system outsourced sex education to, so we can assume its motives are the same as those of the uderlying conservative pro-life movement.
Saying that this total opposition to birth control is due to sexual control is of course consistent with opposition to abortion. But it’s not the only thing that’s consistent. Modern conservatism is anti-pragmatic on everything: on foreign policy it would rather breed enemies than talk to enemies, on economics it would rather kick people off welfare rolls than offer retraining to reduce the need for welfare, on interrogations it would rather torture terrorists than get them to produce good intelligence, and on abortion it would rather ban abortion than offer good sex education.
That’s how opposition to stem cell research, which has nothing to do with sexual control, ties in. The route from a pro-life belief that embryos are people to opposing stem cell research is very short. It’s very much what the Political Survey defines as the pragmatic/idealist dimension of politics.
So it’s likely that sex education and birth control are tagged with the same association to abortion. Pro-lifers have set up what they believe to be the culture of life, defined by fetal and embryonic personhood, and immutable moral codes overruling practical considerations. In contrast, it says, pro-choicers have a contraceptive mentality. In that framework, abortion, contraception, and sex education are all symptoms of the same problem.
February 15th, 2007 at 4:14 pm
Sometimes, the whole thing makes you wonder.
If the one having a sexual hang up are the adult in charge or the kids. Or worst, screwed up adults giving all the wrong impressions.
This is why we need a “Hedonism day”. hah.
February 15th, 2007 at 9:24 pm
Son will be getting his dose of “Family Life Education” in a few weeks. After looking at the guidelines, I read him objective 7.7:
He immediately got a “wtf” look on his face at “homosexuality and pre-marital sex” that warmed my heart.
The guidelines have become so biased (healthy pregnancy info has been deleted because I guess that goes against the abstinence message) that it will be interesting to see how this whole thing is preached taught. It will also be interesting to see what an informed kid who loves classroom discussion brings to the table.
February 15th, 2007 at 9:34 pm
Is he going to ask the teacher why the guidelines imply homosexuality is a risk factor even though lesbian sex is by and large risk-free?
February 19th, 2007 at 7:47 pm
Manx–
Make sure you have your son see these abstinence-only sites:
Sex is for Fags
Abstinence Only (especially my favorite page, Anal Abstinence)
Also, although it’s irrelevant for him, he might be interested in the information at this site:
Iron Hymen