Now if I had had this for my presentation...

Apr 20, 2009 06:18

I found out that some of the nurses were "offended" by a presentation I did on Comprehensive Sex Education vs Abstinence Only. I didn't think I did anything over the top. In fact, I went out of my way to make certain that I stuck with facts and avoided blowing up the religious basis for abstinence (and pointing out that abstinence isn't aimed at ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 15

reannon April 20 2009, 14:18:48 UTC
Gawd. I gotta ask, are your fellow nurses nuns? Because this isn't the first time they've gotten all huffy about something sexual. Comprehensive vs. abstinence-only sex ed is a serious medical issue, perfectly legitimate, and you avoided the religious aspect so what the hell? *sigh* Then again, when I interview the folks from various groups offering free condoms on COLLEGE campuses (let alone high school) and the resistance they hit... *facepalm* At least the community college that wouldn't allow condom distribution last year changed their minds after massive student annoyance and allowed distribution this year. Welcome to the 21st century!

Reply

lefthand April 21 2009, 03:03:04 UTC
Everytime I have had said anything about the responsibility to teach appropriate sex education, i got penalized rather than having anyone dispute my points. There is no debate about abstinence. It simply doesn't work. While people want to claim that it is 100% effective, the reality is 97% of people have sex before marriage so even if if it is a perfect solution, it isn't applicable to the real world. Losing weight is easy, you just have to stop eating until you reach your dream weight. The problem is, of course, that eating, like sex, is a primary need and people don't just forgo it.

Another thing to consider is whether it is really a good idea to be preventing people from having sex. Are we doing a lot more damage to people by trying to convince them that perfectly natural inclinations are somehow wrong or at very least misguided.

Reply

reannon April 21 2009, 13:41:40 UTC
I think it's going to take at least another generation for truly sex-healthy attitudes to emerge. It is happening, albeit very slowly, but then evolution is usually a slow process. Even in my youth, I was taught to wait until marriage (thank God I didn't) and those of my friends who did usually ended up regretting it. Now, the growing acceptance (outside of the Post-Dispatch message boards) of couples living together without marriage, of babies born to happy unmarried couples, these things point toward better days in the future. Which is why I asked if they were nuns, since I find it astounding a medical professional would be so damn puritanical.

(Where'd you get the 97 percent, btw? I'd like to follow up on that the next time I do a sex ed story for the paper and someone screams stupidity at me.)

Reply

lefthand April 22 2009, 00:23:52 UTC
I was pretty shocked myself. I was even more shocked that they are completely unapologetic about it. Like science backs up their position. Certainly, if you don't have sex your chances of pregnancy and STIs are greatly diminished. The simple fact is, however, that almost no one does wait til marriage and that makes it completely unrealistic as a goal.

That link is somewhere in my journal. I will go look for it sometime because it was a great statistic. It was a study of about 2000 people who were asked if they had sex before marriage. It was a humbling number.

What I can tell you is 89% of men and 92% of women have sex by age 23 (Kinsey Institute) while the average age of men at marriage is 27.4 and women 26.0. (US census 2007). Clearly, the vast majority of people are not waiting until marriage.

Reply


beckyzoole April 20 2009, 14:33:46 UTC
Bwa ha ha ha! They should get a couple of experienced labor & delivery nurses to come in and talk with them about sex. And a social worker or two, the ones who work with 14-year-old pregnant hookers and addicts.

The only person I know who may be more straightforward about sex than you, my friend, is my friend Chava: an Orthodox Jew married to a Rabbi, who works L&D at Barnes-Jewish. (She's also a midwife, working on her MSN so she can become a certified midwife in Missouri.) If she gave that sex education presentation, she would blow their minds.

Reply

ithildae April 20 2009, 15:51:47 UTC
You would be amazed at what _quietude_ is willing to talk about, especially compared to when we were first married. Our children have a pretty sound understanding of what is supposed to happen, and that is should be fun. L&D nurses are an interesting bunch.

Reply


ithildae April 20 2009, 15:58:04 UTC
My only hesitation from full endorsement is that children need to understand that they need to be able to deal with the emotional consequences of sex, as well as the physical. Those can be less enjoyable. Still, give them the full details, and let them figure things out for themselves is a good policy.

Reply

lefthand April 20 2009, 19:21:14 UTC
It is far easier to avoid emotional consequences if you know about them. The interesting thing is that kids who get comprehensive sex education tend to delay first intercourse longer than kids with no sex or abstinence only sex ed. If you really want to help the kids, shouldn't you be the first to implement what is by far the most effective?

fwiw, I privately lay the accountability for all the unwanted children that result from abstinence only education on the steps of the church. Telling someone one to pray for a cure when antibiotics are available are simply bad people.

Reply

ithildae April 20 2009, 22:08:29 UTC
You would need to find a very small comb to find places we actually disagree on method. Our purposes for implementing those methods may differ, but I suspect that the overall goal, healthy, happy, safe children, is the same ( ... )

Reply

lefthand April 21 2009, 02:54:04 UTC
Sadly, if people allow a vicious minority to speak for them, they are complicit. I hear a lot of people who want to explain to me that most religious people aren't like that. They don't, however, shout down these people when they try to forcibly remove other people's rights. This impression is based on actions and to a degree inaction on the part of people who do not have more to say.

I just got popped by someone's beliefs about the world. Not because I did anything wrong, just because I believe different things about the world. People can believe whatever they want. It is when they start telling other people how to live their lives that I get snippy.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up