Somewhat recently I saw this article about Obama's federal funding plans for sex education for teens. During the campaign America more or less realized abstinence only just doesn't work (thanks, Bristol!). No matter who says what, teens are going to have sex, so we might as well show them how condoms work so they don't get pregnant and scabby on top of it.
It's kind of cute, actually.
I believe too many people (adults included) have such a blase view of sex. But I also believe that too many people (adults included) think sex is an act that should be banned except for the two or three times necessary for procreation. Since I'm a believer in the "happy medium theory" I'm all for couples waiting until they're ready to have sex. And though "ready" will vary, I doubt most high schoolers are "ready" for that sort of thing.
On the other hand, what if we told our kids the truth about sex from the very beginning, from the first time they asked where babies come from? What if, rather than blaming the stork or saying God decided it was time, we said something like:
Babies come from the mommy's uterus. The daddy puts his penis in the mommy's vagina and that's how the baby is made. Then it lives in the uterus for 9 months until it's born.I'm reminded of the movie Kindergarten Cop, where the little boy stands up and announces "boys have a penis, girls have a vagina!" If we don't teach kids that their body parts are bad words they won't feel any differently about their penises than their arms or their vaginas than their fingers, and they'll grow up comfortable about their whole body. In sex ed they can then learn how to protect those sensitive body parts for when they inevitably do what those parts are supposed to do.
This budget cut goes hand in hand with Obama's act to reverse the Mexico City Policy his first week in office: both wins. Here's a quote from Rep. Carolyn Maloney regarding our own policy:
"It's about time that evidence-based management - and sanity - return to family planning programs."
Hi,
ReplyDeleteI stumbled across your little corner of the internet, and since I never miss an opportunity to check out snarkiness, browsed for a bit.
You're a pretty good wordsmith, Ma'm (being from the south, that is my obligatory provincialism), and while I've only gone through several of your pieces, I certainly will return in the future.
Your style is clever and direct, and you write with clarity, but I must admit, I had hoped to hear a bit MORE sarcasm - especially sarcasm anchored in your own feelings of indignation, outrage or at least personal animus. I guess what I'm saying is, why not include more personal Lindsay Marie vitriol, and less journalistic balance?
Just a question - it's your blog.
Best, Bob
Hi Bob,
ReplyDeleteThanks for taking a look and leaving a comment! It's true I'm lacking in the snark department... I suppose working to make tone come through better in text would lessen the gap between what I hear in my head and what you read on the internet. As an aspiring (kind of) journalist (or at least a hopeful student) I'm caught somewhere between writing about pretty much anything as I see fit and finding things I can weave around a "journalistic balance." However, as you're the second person to bring up wanting a more personal touch that may be the road I should follow.
Thanks again for visiting and come back often!
LM