Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 7/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   abstinece-only sex education
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 166 of 306 (313431)
05-19-2006 4:25 AM
Reply to: Message 165 by RickJB
05-19-2006 4:05 AM


Yes it is. I was taught as such fifteen years ago when I was in school
Ahem, that YOU were instructed as such does not mean all have been, will be, or must be. Sex education does not require such instruction.
please note that I said "personal and cultural issues" and NOT "morals", which bring religious implications. Of course it was a western paradigm. Relationships, marriage, divorce, sexuality, peer pressure. The thrust of the content was to engender self-respect and the respect of others with regard to the above.
To me this is a completely contradictory statement. The western paradigm is a moral position, unless you are going to get into some semantic debate. Indeed much of the paradigm held by nontheists within western culture comes directly from unthinking acceptance of Xian religious beliefs. They stripped away the god and for some bizarre reason kept the moral standards associated with it.
The ability to get or prevent pregnancy, or to get or prevent STDs is wholly separate from whether one is in love, in a relationship, married, divorced, or under pressue to have sex because of all those around you. Whether you respect yourself or not, or respect your partner or not, the nature of the mechanics of sex remain EXACTLY THE SAME. The risks remain EXACTLY THE SAME.
If you cannot agree with that, then I'd like an explanation of how it differs whether one is in a respecting and loving marriage, or screwing some person you hate but everyone will think you're a loser if you don't?
Emotionally and culturally there will be differences, but that is not a sexual issue and has nothing to do with SEX education. Conflating these things is a moralistic position based on (originally) religious positions. Teaching these things together opens the door to confusion for children and fights between the state and parents.
To another poster I mentioned the real world example (it really happened) of discussing masturbation in sex-ed. A surgeon general of the US recommended this and was kicked out. Does masturbation engender self-respect or not? There are widely different view points on that, much less on when one starts having sex with others. Age, homosexuality, porn, and prostitution are four very large and contentious issues that directly hinge on concepts of respect of self respect and respect of others.

holmes {in extreme lurker mode}
"What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by RickJB, posted 05-19-2006 4:05 AM RickJB has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by RickJB, posted 05-19-2006 5:02 AM Silent H has replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 167 of 306 (313433)
05-19-2006 4:51 AM
Reply to: Message 161 by Silent H
05-19-2006 3:06 AM


Re: lemme get this straight
I was in a relationship with a girl from Denmark and lived there for a bit. One of the people was specifically a teacher of small children. I do not know what you are talking about. You are suggesting that this is taught in schools as part of sex education? If not, I am not sure what point you are trying to make.
That is what was reported in a BBC news story on sex education, yes. I had assumed it was a standard part of sex education in Denmark, but this may not be the case.
I frankly don't believe your statement that love is a cultural concept. The way we express it may be, and the language to discuss it may be but I don't see any reason at all to believe that love is cultural concept. And it's all rather irrelevant since we do have a concept of love in our culture, and the language to discuss it.
Sex does not equal or necessitate love and vice versa.
Hell yes! However, I don't think sex education should be trying to prepare people for relationships not just sex.
I notice that while being dismissive of my post you have not attempted to explain why love would be part of, much less necessary for an IDEAL sex education program.
Because sex education is about preparing children for their later sex lives, and most people will face choices about sex within that context. Of course, children should understand that sex needn't take place within that context and that there's nothing wrong with that but that doesn't mean that the usual context should be dismissed.
Also, according to YOUR definition, it would seem that one should not be helping people overcome hangups against homosexuality.
Now you're just applying things completely out of context.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by Silent H, posted 05-19-2006 3:06 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by Silent H, posted 05-19-2006 9:25 AM Dr Jack has not replied
 Message 179 by kongstad, posted 05-19-2006 10:25 AM Dr Jack has not replied

RickJB
Member (Idle past 4990 days)
Posts: 917
From: London, UK
Joined: 04-14-2006


Message 168 of 306 (313435)
05-19-2006 5:02 AM
Reply to: Message 166 by Silent H
05-19-2006 4:25 AM


**Sigh**
Holmes, I just made the observation that attempts to meld the both the scientific and the cultural HAVE been made.
I have no further interest in dissecting this with you.
Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by Silent H, posted 05-19-2006 4:25 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 175 by Silent H, posted 05-19-2006 8:38 AM RickJB has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 169 of 306 (313446)
05-19-2006 6:30 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by NosyNed
05-16-2006 12:28 PM


Re: Who's in Charge?
Abstinence only does NOT work.
Just why doesn't it work, in your words?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by NosyNed, posted 05-16-2006 12:28 PM NosyNed has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by Dr Jack, posted 05-19-2006 6:50 AM riVeRraT has replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 170 of 306 (313447)
05-19-2006 6:50 AM
Reply to: Message 169 by riVeRraT
05-19-2006 6:30 AM


Re: Who's in Charge?
Are you asking why it doesn't work, or why we think it doesn't work?
One is a matter of speculation, the other a matter of fact.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by riVeRraT, posted 05-19-2006 6:30 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by riVeRraT, posted 05-19-2006 6:55 AM Dr Jack has not replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 171 of 306 (313449)
05-19-2006 6:55 AM
Reply to: Message 170 by Dr Jack
05-19-2006 6:50 AM


Re: Who's in Charge?
I was asking Nosy specifically, but feel free to post your thoughts.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by Dr Jack, posted 05-19-2006 6:50 AM Dr Jack has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by CK, posted 05-19-2006 7:12 AM riVeRraT has replied

CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 172 of 306 (313451)
05-19-2006 7:12 AM
Reply to: Message 171 by riVeRraT
05-19-2006 6:55 AM


Re: Who's in Charge?
Ok from reading the research into this area, it seems to me that the following is what happens.
First - does Abstinece-only education stop teenagers having sex?
Well - yes seems to be the answer.. but only in the short-term it's a delaying tactic*.
So that's a good thing right?
Well yes and no - when they do have sex, because they have little or no education about protection, they are more likely to have unprotected sex and this means that the rates of STDs are either the same as other teenagers or actually higher (depending on the study you quote).
The other problem is teenagers on those programs are more likely to engange in underprotected anal sex - because this is not seen as "real sex" and therefore they are still virgins.
* even that claim is doubtful - a survey of schools in Texas found that:
quote:
The study showed about 23 percent of ninth-grade girls, typically 13 to 14 years old, had sex before receiving abstinence education. After taking the course, 29 percent of the girls in the same group said they had had sex.
Boys in the tenth grade, about 14 to 15 years old, showed a more marked increase, from 24 percent to 39 percent, after receiving abstinence education.
MSN | Outlook, Office, Skype, Bing, Breaking News, and Latest Videos

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by riVeRraT, posted 05-19-2006 6:55 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 246 by riVeRraT, posted 05-21-2006 7:44 AM CK has not replied

Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 173 of 306 (313455)
05-19-2006 7:35 AM


For those with the relevant academic access there is an interesting review of work on Abstinence only education programs in the Journal of adolescent health (Santelli, et al., 2006).
TTFN,
WK

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by CK, posted 05-19-2006 7:52 AM Wounded King has not replied

CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 174 of 306 (313457)
05-19-2006 7:52 AM
Reply to: Message 173 by Wounded King
05-19-2006 7:35 AM


Some interesting bits from cited study
quote:
Although federal AOE funding language requires teaching that sexual activity outside of the context of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological effects, there are no scientific data suggesting that consensual sex between adolescents is harmful.
quote:
In contrast to the positive impact in delaying sexual intercourse seen with some comprehensive sexuality programs, Kirby found no scientific evidence that abstinence-only programs demonstrate efficacy in delaying initiation of sexual intercourse.
quote:
Add Health data suggest that many teens who intend to be abstinent fail to do so, and that when abstainers do initiate intercourse, many fail to protect themselves by using contraception [49] and [50]. Bearman and colleagues have examined the virginity pledge movement; they estimate that over 2.5 million adolescents have taken public “virginity pledges.” They found that pledgers were more likely to delay initiation of intercourse, 18 months on average for adolescents aged 12-18 years. However, those pledgers who failed at abstinence were less likely to use contraception after they did initiate sexual intercourse. At six-year follow-up, the prevalence of STIs (chlamydia, gonorrhea, trichomoniasis, and human papillomavirus [HPV]) was similar among those taking the abstinence pledge and non-pledgers [50].
quote:
Abstinence-only sex education classes are unlikely to meet the health needs of GLBTQ youth, as they largely ignore issues surrounding homosexuality (except when discussing transmission of HIV/AIDS), and often stigmatize homosexuality as deviant and unnatural behavior [70]. Homophobia contributes to health problems such as suicide, feelings of isolation and loneliness, HIV infection, substance abuse, and violence among GLBTQ youth [71] and [72].
I know we normally frown upon simple cut and pastes but many readers will be unable to access this material - this is intended to give them an idea of what the thrust of the work is. Others who have access, please attempt to correct any bias I may have demonstrated.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by Wounded King, posted 05-19-2006 7:35 AM Wounded King has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by Silent H, posted 05-19-2006 9:55 AM CK has not replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 175 of 306 (313470)
05-19-2006 8:38 AM
Reply to: Message 168 by RickJB
05-19-2006 5:02 AM


Holmes, I just made the observation that attempts to meld the both the scientific and the cultural HAVE been made.
I agree that attempts have been made, but my point is that they are arguably not productive in efforts to promote sexual education nor advance actual sexual education. This would seem to be a particularly relevant point in this discussion.
Let me approach this from a different angle to make my point clearer. Faith has a rather specific and strong cultural belief system. Her criticism has been that purely mechanistic explanations in sex ed plays into the hands of, if not advances, a different cultural/moral belief system than her own.
Your response to Faith was essentially to address or allay her fears on this by arguing that sex ed does and would involve discussions of cultural sexual issues. In your response you mentioned things like relationships, marriage, divorce, and self-respect.
While that may seem straightforward to you, the question would arise how that could actually help what Faith is worrying about. I would pretty well guarantee Faith's concepts of what relationships, marriage, divorce, and self-respect differ radically from many, including yourself. Not to say she is in a minority opinion, just that there are many different points of views on all of these subjects and some quite polarized.
For certain we can bring a teacher in who can speak to the FACTS of how the body works and how it interacts with the environment. This is imparting a skill set wholly independent of culture and moral position on how one SHOULD or MIGHT BEST use their body. That skill set will be useful to one of your cultural paradigm or Faith's.
What we cannot do is bring in a teacher who can speak to the FACTS of how sex fits or should fit into one's life and society. No one can be knowledgeable of what is an objectively appropriate way to handle sexual situations, because there arent any. First of all societies contain a diversity of opinions on those issues. Second those opinions always change over time. Third a teacher is just a single person who cannot be any better placed, and may very well be more poorly placed than a parent, to let a child know how to handle situations. The teacher may know biology better but its unlikely they have a better lock on morality and culture.
My guess would be that many would want children educated to be positive and accepting of gays or being gay. Many others would not. Indeed Faith would likely not. Your position would actually create a greater threat to her beliefs, and her ability to raise her children according to her cultural beliefs regarding selfrespect an sexuality. Or in a contrasting way if we let the strictest moral code define what gets taught, you probably wouldn't be too happy.
But let me ask, if we allowed sex ed to be taught with a cultural component and a fundemantalist gov't came to power and so began teaching ITS cultural component, would you be satisfied? If your answer is yes, then you would essentially accept Faith's argument and abstinence only education. If no, then you would logically have to accept my argument that cultural artifacts be left out of sexual education.
In short, to the degree one believes that instructing cultural and moral issues belong in sexual education, one must allow for the validity of abstinence only education. To the degree that one believes instruction is for sexual and sexual health information alone, teaching cultural and moral issues are superfluous and potentially counterproductive.

holmes {in temp decloak from lurker mode}
"What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by RickJB, posted 05-19-2006 5:02 AM RickJB has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 182 by RickJB, posted 05-19-2006 10:46 AM Silent H has not replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 176 of 306 (313480)
05-19-2006 9:25 AM
Reply to: Message 167 by Dr Jack
05-19-2006 4:51 AM


Re: lemme get this straight
That is what was reported in a BBC news story.., but this may not be the case.
If that is the case, it is either not uniform policy, or it is very very recent.
I frankly don't believe your statement that love is a cultural concept... I don't see any reason at all to believe that love is cultural concept.
This does not make sense to me. If the term "love" does not translate into another culture's language, that sort of suggests love is a cultural concept, doesn't it? This argument of yours looks suspiciously like the condescending argument "they all believe in God and Jesus even if they don't understand it yet and call it Buddha."
Really, other cultures do not understand sex or relationships in the same way those in the west do. Thus matters relating to relationships have nothing to do with promoting information regarding sex and sexual health. Heck, why don't you tell me what love is and what it has to do with sex that everyone agrees to, even if not using the same language and expression.
And it's all rather irrelevant since we do have a concept of love in our culture, and the language to discuss it.
Really? You mean you don't have immigrants from other nations where you live? Okay, well that really doesn't matter as I was addressing the assertion that the IDEAL sex education program would involve such concepts.
Sex education is something that is going on all around the world and MUST be promoted around the world given the current health crisis from HIV. Abstinence only education is actually being advanced along that front from the Bush administration. I am equally not impressed with calls to teach people to understand cultural sexual roles as feminist-Xian doctrine dictates (or any OTHER culture including mine) as a rider to sexual health information. Heheheh... I have an interesting real world anecdote from a failed sex ed mission regarding that. Maybe next time.
I don't think sex education should be trying to prepare people for relationships not just sex.
Was that a typo? You meant to say you DO think it should prepare people for relationships, right? If not, then we have no disagreement and cultural concepts are superfluous.
Assuming you meant they should prepare people for relationships... how on earth can you teach or prepare anyone for how to be in a relationship? What teacher is not as fallible as anyone else in that regard? There is no objective answers on how relationships can and should be lived. If there were we'd have uniform agreement on that subject.
It seems to me that is simply an attempt at cultural indoctrination by a ruling group over all others, especially social minorities that might disagree. Parents and others within one's direct community are the most important sources of information of that kind. I do believe sex ed teachers should encourage people to discuss those issues with family and friends, but telling them what sex is about is sufficient for sexual health.
Because sex education is about preparing children for their later sex lives... Of course, children should understand that sex needn't take place within that context and that there's nothing wrong with that but that doesn't mean that the usual context should be dismissed.
But that itself is biased thinking. Doesn't Faith have a right to raise her kids to think sex, or certain sex acts, and relationships are NOT correct and are forms of disrespect where you think otherwise? I don't see how you can have a sex education curricula which involves relationships that will not be contrary to one culture or another, even within the same nation. The question of infidelity and masturbation itself is culturally loaded when discussing relationships.
Now you're just applying things completely out of context.
Notice I said, it would SEEM. If I was wrong could you explain why it was not meaning what it appeared to me to be meaning.

holmes {in temp decloak from lurker mode}
"What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by Dr Jack, posted 05-19-2006 4:51 AM Dr Jack has not replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 177 of 306 (313486)
05-19-2006 9:55 AM
Reply to: Message 174 by CK
05-19-2006 7:52 AM


Re: Some interesting bits from cited study
I found this to be an interesting inconsistency...
there are no scientific data suggesting that consensual sex between adolescents is harmful.
yeah, and yet felt bound to repeat the current cultural mantra...
the positive impact in delaying sexual intercourse
Delaying sex does nothing to increase sex health. Instituting good sexual health skills does, regardless of age.
I might note that they apparently reversed themselves regarding evidence of abstinence program success to say...
Bearman and colleagues have examined the virginity pledge movement; they estimate that over 2.5 million adolescents have taken public “virginity pledges.” They found that pledgers were more likely to delay initiation of intercourse
This suggests Faith is correct that it might be method of implementation which is the issue of failures to achieve abstinence successes, rather than the fact that any program is teaching abstinence only.
However, your quotes highlight what I think most of us are trying to get across, regarding sexual health itself...
when abstainers do initiate intercourse, many fail to protect themselves by using contraception [49] and [50]... those pledgers who failed at abstinence were less likely to use contraception after they did initiate sexual intercourse. At six-year follow-up, the prevalence of STIs (chlamydia, gonorrhea, trichomoniasis, and human papillomavirus [HPV]) was similar among those taking the abstinence pledge and non-pledgers [50].
Thus the health of good Xians who happen to fail is put in greater jeopardy. And that of course would hold true for those that might actually get married before having sex.
Then again they revert to supporting cultural causes...
classes are unlikely to meet the health needs of GLBTQ youth, as they largely ignore issues surrounding homosexuality (except when discussing transmission of HIV/AIDS), and often stigmatize homosexuality as deviant and unnatural behavior [70]. Homophobia contributes to health problems such as suicide, feelings of isolation and loneliness, HIV infection, substance abuse, and violence among GLBTQ youth [71] and [72].
While I get that a course stigmatizing gays is not useful, I don't see why a course in sex ed would need to deal with "issues surrounding homsexuality". Indeed the only useful info would be the kind of info this quote dismisses.
Conservatives have a right to expect their children do not get instructed that certain lifestyles are acceptable. It is doubtful that liberals are going to expect or accept kids be taught curricula reducing stigma of children that have sex at young ages, or are children of prostitutes, or use pornography regardless of isolation and loneliness they might feel.
Dealing with the effects of social homophobia has nothing to do with sexual education, that is purely psycho-social and NOT inherent to sexual activity. Indeed one might never have such a sex act at all and still feel the pressure. If anything it is a civics or psych issue.
Edited by holmes, : transposition

holmes {in temp decloak from lurker mode}
"What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by CK, posted 05-19-2006 7:52 AM CK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by Wounded King, posted 05-19-2006 10:17 AM Silent H has replied

Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 178 of 306 (313489)
05-19-2006 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 177 by Silent H
05-19-2006 9:55 AM


Re: Some interesting bits from cited study
I might note that they apparently reversed themselves regarding evidence of abstinence program success to say...
I don't think there is neccessarily any discrepancy. Their initial statement was with regard to those taught through Abstinence only programs and the second with regard to those who had actively taken a public 'Virginity Pledge'. So an abstinence only eductation program does not appear to change the initiation of intercourse but taking part in a pledge scheme does. Perhaps those who take pledges are also those who would have waited longer before initiating intercourse anyway and all the pledge programs are doing is identifying a more abstinent subset of the teenage population.
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by Silent H, posted 05-19-2006 9:55 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 186 by Silent H, posted 05-19-2006 4:30 PM Wounded King has not replied

kongstad
Member (Idle past 2869 days)
Posts: 175
From: Copenhagen, Denmark
Joined: 02-24-2004


Message 179 of 306 (313491)
05-19-2006 10:25 AM
Reply to: Message 167 by Dr Jack
05-19-2006 4:51 AM


Re: lemme get this straight
There is no mandated curriculum in primary school in Denmark.
There is a set of goals for each subject taught. After finishing 9th grade there is a common test for everyone, not an exam since you cannot fail 9th grade.
The teacher and the school itself has a lot of leeway in determining curriculum, and sex ed is one the areas where there is little standardisation.
Some years ago there was an uproar when a teacher used a porn magazine in her sex ed classes.
Some moves are being made to introduce standardised sex ed material that the teachers can use, which is lacking today, where even the seminars usually do not teach sex ed to the people who are educating themselves to become teachers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by Dr Jack, posted 05-19-2006 4:51 AM Dr Jack has not replied

SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 5833 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 180 of 306 (313497)
05-19-2006 10:36 AM
Reply to: Message 140 by Faith
05-18-2006 12:42 PM


Re: My view confirmed in spades
Ha ha ha ha ha. THAT's the Sexual Freedom Mantra itself. Ha ha. There you have it. Why bother saying anything else? This is the crux of the matter. It's the driving force these days. The abstinence-only people are the only ones who see the handwriting on the wall and hope to head off the coming disaster but there are too few of them and their view is unpopular. {abe: Oh they may be going about it wrong, I don't know as I haven't studied the programs, but the goal is the only one that can save the culture in the long run}
Actually sex is not the problem.... Unprotected sex is the problem.
Unchecked population growth is one of the biggest problems faced by the human race. Abstinence only sex education actually makes population growth problems worse because people don't use contraception as much.
Look at what is happening in Africa. Abstinence based AIDS programs have been an unmitigated disaster and have actually made the problem worse in some areas.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by Faith, posted 05-18-2006 12:42 PM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 187 by Silent H, posted 05-19-2006 4:47 PM SuperNintendo Chalmers has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024