I was in the car today at about 11:00am listening to Doug Wright on KSL. He brought this story up on his talk radio program and the engaged in an hour worth of faux outrage:
Sex Survey at D.C. School Sparks Controversy
A Washington, D.C., middle school is under fire after distributing a survey to seventh-graders asking both boys and girls about their sexual orientations and whether they knew how to put on a condom, among other sex-based questions.
The survey, developed by Metro TeenAIDS, a group dedicated to helping young people fight against HIV/AIDS, was intended to raise awareness of sexually transmitted diseases and teach the children how to avoid them,
I read the survey that is linked to the article. It is a little but direct it uses medical terms that Doug would not repeat on the air ie. oral, vaginal, or anal sex. It asked the kids if they knew how to get condoms and if they knew how to put one on themselves or their partners. I did not see anything in the article that my children who live in a nice middle class conservative suburban neighborhood didn't already have some knowledge about. This survey was given to 7th graders. Some kids where as young as 11. I didn't get the outrage because these were similar to the questions my LDS Bishop asked when I was 12. The same Bishop that asked theses questions of my sister when she was 11 and who described the act of masturbation to my younger sister when she was 12.
There was a minor screw up.... they forgot to send the opt out letter home the day before the test.
Okay that was a screw up but there is a reality, to quote a line from the movie Fame "The kids in my neighborhood are into sex much earlier.... about 6am." There is a reality that inner city neighborhood children are exposed to sex much earlier in their lives. There is something about growing up poor in a neighborhood without parental supervision, where drug abuse is high and education is low that causes that dynamic. I knew a young woman who grew up in inner city Chicago. She reported she had consensual sex for the first time when she was 8.
So caller after caller called and expressed their outrage and many said this discussion belongs in the home. But the comment that floored me was the one who said this conversation belonged in the home and maybe with their religious leader ( in Utah that translates to "the Bishop") but this conversation should not have occurred in a health class, with a trained health teacher, because the school is 16 times more likely to have students engage in risk behavior. REALLY? a Bishop is more qualified to ask theses questions than trained aids workers?
The reason we need comprehensive sex education in this state and early is because we are at risk of having stats similar to Washington DC. Conservatives like to tell us there is consequences to behavior.... when your child is dying of aids that was preventable not only are they responsible but so are you for denying them information that could have saved their lives. Instead we opt to pretend that a parent with no formal training has any real expertise to teach the child and that they will. Once they have the disease all the prayers, blessings, or voodoo will do nothing to save them.
I'd like to know from what part of his/her ass the caller pulled "16 times more likely to engage in risky behavior" when it's been proven that comprehensive sex ed reduces the number of STD's and teen pregnancies. Also, when we leave teaching sex ed entirely up to parents, we get 19-year-old women who think they'll get pregnant by kissing (can you imagine a guy taking advantage of that?), children of informed and honest parents being told by ignorant neighbor kids that "penis" is a "bad word" (you're supposed to call it a pickle, according to one of the church kids in our neighborhood).
ReplyDeleteLynne, I guess I didn't make that point clear. It is indeed a fact that the kids in DC are 16 times more likely to engage in risk behavior which is why the school was targeted for the survey. However your point is spot on. In my house my kids know what the proper term for their body parts and they are familiar with the terms anal, oral, vaginal sex. It does not mean that my 10 year old girl doesn't still have her innocence or that my 13 year old boy is a pervert and over sexed nor does it mean we have some freaky sex thing going on in my house. Much of what they pick up is in the school yard. I have three adult children and they will candidly discuss sex not as a dirty thing or an over sharing thing but as a part of their human experience. Sex Education is a public health issue not a moral issue and to withhold information is immoral.
ReplyDeleteI also agree sex education is very important and should start an early age. Many parents wait until their kids are 13-14 y/o before ever mentioning a subject, but most of the kids begin to develop sexual awareness starting form 10 y/o so they have a 3 year gap of drawing their own conclusions about what is going on and this could be very dangerous.
ReplyDelete