In one respect, we are not that far apart. Teens should be taught the biology behind their sexuality, and they should be taught what adults do protect themselves from STDs and unwanted pregnancies. Cover all that, and cover it well.
Where we drift apart is over the message we–as a society–give our teens. For example, do parents approve of their two-year-olds playing in the street? Does society approve of two-year-olds playing in the street?
Do parents approve of their teens having sex? Does society approve of teens having sex?
Should the answer truly be…well, if they use protection…we guess its all right. Or should society be firmly saying, No sex until one can support oneself.
We should encourage teens not to have sex and instruct them about safe sex and provide them with contraceptives so that when they choose to ignore the advice of adults they can do so more safely. Schools should be promoting abstinence and safe sex, not one or the other.
That’s not what I said. I said we need to address the whys of teen abstinence with the students. That does not equate to saying sex-ed equates to encouraging teens to have sex. Leaving them with the impression, “If you do it, use protection” is not the inferred message society should be delivering. Is there anything wrong with society standing up and telling teens, “No” any more than it is wrong with society standing up and saying, “No two-year-olds in the streets!” or, “Children on bikes must wear helmets!” or, “Car seats and seat belts are required for children by law.”
If society can send a concise message about all these things, why not a concise message to teens telling them it is abstinence for them until they are supporting themselves. This in no way hampers schools teaching teenagers the biological facts of sex and how adults protect themselves from STDs and unwanted pregnancies.
Schools shouldn’t be promoting sex at all. Think about it for a minute. Should schools promote sex (either safe or abstinence) among employees? Then why should they be promoting sex (either safe or abstinence) among the students?
Yes, they are, but have you noticed I am conversing with a man?
Over and above that, I have set myself a goal to be more concise and to stay focused. I have some great stories about teen females and sex as well.
Psst! As I’ve gotten the system notification that I have been talking to BlackWolf long enough, maybe you and I can address the feminine part of sex ed as well.
I have no problem whatsoever with schools teaching comprehensive sex-ed, and by comprehensive I mean including abstinence in that education. If you prefer to offer that education in the context of “only ADULTS should avail themselves of methods outside of abstinence” I suppose that’s fine so long as teens are still getting all the information.
Donald and the Religious Right do seem to have a problem with your approach, however, if they are stripping funding from any sex-ed that isn’t abstinence. Society has an obligation to minimize both the rate of unintended pregnancy and the spread of disease; to limit or omit information that assists in that endeavor is socially irresponsible.
Living in California (and sometimes teaching science) I know about what is being taught here. We seem to have very few problems with teaching all aspects of biology here, perhaps because any parent who does not want their child in any part of a science unit can opt their student out. Again, noting conversations in my particular area, parents don’t seem to mind protection being covered–as long as it is abstinence being emphasized. For example, I am not part of a school district that teaches students to put condoms on cucumbers.
Really don’t know what to say to states or Districts who don’t want to teach biology. Kind of leaves out dissecting frogs which I covered last year with sixth graders. We were concentrating more on the digestive system, but the students took note of the other organs as well–and whether they had a female or male frog.
I’m not talking about promoting sex. I’m talking about promoting abstinence and promoting measures that will keep teens safe when they inevitably have sex anyway. Abstinence-only education is as much a failure as Nancy Reagan’s Just Say No campaign.
Akkkk! Would you please stop inserting statements I didn’t make and certainly don’t mean to infer! The context is that many adults engaged in sex use protection against STDs and pregnancy. This includes… Or, check out the family planning aisle in any store or have a talk with your parents about what product(s) they recommend. Meanwhile, we here at school are promoting abstinence until you are old enough to support yourselves. You or your parents views may differ, just as they might differ over wearing seat belts and using bicycle helmets.
Good conversation, BlackWolf, but you tend to expand beyond what I am saying. (I’m getting yet another system message suggesting I’ve been talking with you long enough and should give someone else a chance!)
Grin. No, it’s not. BlackWolf made the point so much more accurately: Schools don’t promote sex (at least not the schools in my area). I have heard of schools who advertise free condoms to those who want to pick one up.
