What Abstinence-Only Sex Ed Does To Parents, Kids And Teen Pregnancy Rates

Photo: Weheartit
Abstinence-Only Sex Education REDUCES Safer Sex Practices

Less sex among teens? NO. Less 'safer sex' among teens? YES. Pretty scary...

Just over a year ago, California Judge Donald Black ruled that abstinence-only sex education:

  • Isn’t actually sex education (preach, sir!).
  • Provides inaccurate information.
  • And doesn’t meet California’s curriculum guidelines.

This could lead one to wonder, "What does abstinence-only education do?"

A while back I put forth a theory I have about some ways I suspect it impacts teens and parents alike — and the whole thing started with a doll.

In the summer of 2013, there was a rash of stories about a baby doll that got some parents all up in arms.

"Why?" you ask.

"Was it unsafe?" No.

"Racist?" No.

"Prohibitively expensive?" Not that I’ve heard.

The big problem with this doll was that, well, it has a penis.

You know, like a human baby boy.

And people were PISSED. The ire was vented across Facebook posts, with folks declaring that the “company makes me sick,” because little girls “don’t need to know about anatomy,” etc., etc., etc.

Barely one week later, a petition started circulating demanding that the Fremont Board of Education remove a book called Your Health Today from schools. Parents were outraged (outraged!) that the book “exposes youth to sexual games, sexual fantasies, sexual bondage with handcuffs, ropes and blindfolds, sexual toys and vibrator devices, and additional instruction that is extremely inappropriate for 13-and-14-year-old youth.“

All accounts indicate that while the book did, in fact, indicate that sex can be enjoyable, none of the information was presented in a salacious or provocative manner. In fact, the book has been described as “the most boring prose imaginable,” and includes lessons explaining that students should only ever do what “they are comfortable doing” — but that wasn’t enough to keep parents from freaking out.

My favorite complaint was about one of my favorite parts of the book — a parent fretting that, “There’s a section that tells you how to talk to your prospective partners about your sexual history. How does that relate to a 14-year-old kid? I don’t see it at all.”

I wish these stories were some kind of sex-negative anomalies, but they're not.

There has been a similar wave of discussion around teaching children the proper anatomical terms for their body parts. That’s right people have been getting upset because their children were given factually correct information about their bodies.

They were, for example, exposed to words like "vagina."

So, what gives? How did people become convinced that accurate education is heinously inappropriate and something to shield their children from, lest their innocence be destroyed.

I have a theory. I blame abstinence-only education.

But not the education of this generation.

I think the parents who think they can shield their children from their own genitals and that they shouldn’t talk to even their teenagers about sex (lest they get ideas) belong to the previous generation — i.e., the first generation presented en masse with abstinence-only education in their schools.

Let’s take a quick history break.

Abstinence-only education started receiving limited federal funding in 1982 through the Adolescent Family Life Act. After the passing of the Welfare Reform Act in 1996 which included a mandate that 50 million dollars yearly be allocated to abstinence-only education, it spread rapidly as cash-strapped schools decided that receiving the funds was more valuable than, you know, teaching kids anything about sex.**

Since then these programs have gone on to teach children that sex is for marriage only, condoms don’t work, there are terrifying made-up diseases, people (especially women) who have had sex are the equivalent of chewed up gum, food that has been passed around, used tape, an emptied tube of toothpaste and other equally nonsensical/disgusting things.

Behold, this cartoon that uses true examples of actual lessons taught in abstinence-only programs.

The thing about abstinence-only education is that its entire aim is to tell kids not to have sex — and by sex, they mean penis in vagina intercourse because that’s all they want kids to know exists in this world — basically by scaring them out of it.

It’s pretty much this scene from Mean Girls:

Except without the condoms. Because according to them, condoms A) don’t work, and B) would apparently be condoning sex.

That’s right. No information is given for in case they do engage in sex (except the chewed up gum thing- whore!) They are not taught about their bodies. They are taught that condoms are ineffective and they are taught that it is super important to not engage in penis-in-vagina intercourse. Because purity.

Fun fact: There has been NO noted decline in teen sexual activity.

However, there HAS been:

It seems folks are also super-fuzzy on consent, with cases coming to light with alarming frequency involving unconscious girls being violated by classmates who think “not no” is the same as “yes." One recent study even showed that teen boys don’t think that anal sex is something they need explicit permission for.

It seems that in addition to teaching our children nothing about sex — except, you know, don’t do it — we are also teaching them nothing about their bodies and how they work and finally nothing about how to communicate with partners.

So, here it is, 35 years after abstinence-only education started rearing its ugly head, and 18 years after it began to spread like wildfire.

The kids who were most likely to get it, those who were in junior high and high school from 1996 on, are around 30-years-old now (though it should be noted that since funding has been in place in some places since 1982, counting from 1996 is playing it conservative). They are now reproducing.

And I believe they are the parents who can’t handle penises on dolls, the people who can’t deal with their kids learning the proper names for parts of their anatomy, and the people who think understanding healthy sexual communication doesn’t relate to 14-year-olds at all. By teaching that generation nothing but negatives — Don’t! It’s bad! — the world has set them up to parent as though the existence of sex, and indeed, their own body parts, is something they can — and should — hide from their children.

So, what’s the answer here?

It’s a tricky one. While I always lobby for comprehensive sex education for children, we’ve been painted into something of a corner here.

We have a generation of adults treating sexual knowledge like it’s plutonium and fighting tooth and nail to keep it from their children. So, I’m thinking we have to start from the top.

Teach the adults.

And it’s important that we don’t simply teach adults how to have sex they enjoy (though that’s awesome). We need to help them undo what their prior education has done.

We need to help them teach their children, who will likely be exposed to similar nonsense in schools.

We need to be the antidote to abstinence-only education.

Right now there is a generation of parents who, when it comes to teaching their kids about sex, are basically like the blind leading the blind.

Let’s be their guide.

P.S. For more on the history of abstinence-only education and how we got here, I recommend these books:

This article was originally published at The Redhead Bedhead. Reprinted with permission from the author.