Wednesday, December 28, 2011

'Abstinence-plus' emerging in more Texas schools

From the Houston Chronicle:

A shift is occurring in Texas as more school districts move from abstinence-only programs to a comprehensive approach that teaches about condoms and other contraceptives, according to an advocacy group's study of state data.

In 2007, about 4 percent of the state's school districts used comprehensive programs, according to a study by the Texas Freedom Network Education Fund, a research group that supports the comprehensive approach known as abstinence-plus. A more recent analysis, based on data from a Texas Education Agency health education survey, found that nearly 25 percent of school districts had abstinence-plus programs in 2010.

"That's a huge increase in a three-year period," said Kathy Miller, president of the education fund. "The quiet revolution is taking place at the local level."


And

National studies, including a 2007 study mandated by Congress, have shown that abstinence-only programs do not stop teens from having sex, research center director Susan Tortolero said. But federal funding over the past decade has supported abstinence-only programs, and Texas has led the nation in receiving those dollars.

That might change under President Barack Obama, who has poured more federal money into evidence-based, abstinence-plus programs.


More here.

I'm not sure, but I think "abstinence plus" is just a Puritan friendly moniker for comprehensive sex education, or more simply, sex education. And I say that because "abstinence based" sex ed isn't really much more than wishful-thinking oriented anti-sex propaganda when it comes to teaching teens how the real world functions in terms of sexual behavior. That is, "abstinence based" sex education isn't sex education at all, and was an extraordinarily bad idea from the get-go.

It's good to hear that we may very well be moving beyond this really stupid chapter in the culture wars, and toward some semblance of responsibility and ethics when it comes to teaching youth about sexuality.

For that matter, why are people so disturbed by the notion of teens doing exactly what their parents did when they were teens? I'm not joking about this, either: for decades now, virtually all Americans have lost their virginity by the time they turn eighteen, which means that nervous Puritanical parents who support this abstinence bullshit are totally taking the "what's good for me, but not for thee" line with their kids. And I call bullshit on that. Seriously. When I was getting certified to teach, I remember a class discussion on exactly this issue, and among my fellow teachers-in-training were several who just straight up asserted that "teenagers have no business having sex." They were very emotional about the topic, so I didn't really try to mix it up with them, which is something I've regretted for years. I mean, what could they say? That teens are immature? Well, sure, but so what? We let them drive, for god's sake, and that's dangerous for society, not simply for teens themselves. Indeed, we let teens, who are the worst drivers out there, run the roads because it is convenient for their parents, and no other reason. By the same token, we have adopted this dangerous abstinence shit for essentially the same reason: parents worry about their little baby teenagers getting it on in the back seat, so we teach them abstinence to calm parental fears.

It is ironic, indeed, that we give teens access to automobiles, the best place by far for teen sex, while tut-tutting them about sex in school. It's all so fucking stupid.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$