a little later, but not never

Well, it's been about 9 months, so naturally the next fetus of sex education controversy is on its way out of the oven. After all, teen pregnancy is on the rise.

The latest study, however, takes us on a somewhat different genetic path than the previous siblings in this family. Just as Obama reduced/eliminated funding for abstinence-focused education, research is now suggesting that abstinence education actually worked to curb sexual activity in a group of middle schoolers in Philly.

No, that's not a typo. I said abstinence education was effective.

In the past, I've been pretty clear that I take major issue with a lot of these "just say no" approaches to sex ed. A product of this attitude myself, I especially take issue with many of the religious groups and guilt-laden misinformation that gets infused into many of these programs.

But there's a key difference with these new findings. As pointed out by a New York Times article, and again by their staff editorial today, the program urged students to delay sexual activity until the student felt more mature. This is quite the departure from many program's "if you pop the balloon the angels will cry" approach. As Quinn clearly demonstrates on "Glee", this is not the way to go.

I've always believed that sex ed HAS to be more than either of the two extremes, neither "jesus is watching" nor "take a handful of condoms and here's some pictures of clamydia." As a newcomer to the education scene, I'm constantly told to not just spoonfeed my students the answers, but to teach them how to think. It's not always about the right answer; it's how you get to that answer that really has any consequence.

I'm still not ready to throw all my tax dollars back into the abstinence bucket (although it might be a better choice than spending them on a Superbowl commercial. Grrr.). But I think the conversation is finally headed in the right direction.

battle of intelligences (I mean, sexes)

In my Interpersonal Communications class on Friday, we had a sort of battle of the sexes session. It involved the women on one side of the room and the men on the other, and we asked each other "questions" about relationships, dating, social norms, etc. There were two questions/statements I felt should be taken beyond the classroom. (As a disclaimer, I was pretty underwhelmed by the depth of questions people came up with. Just because it's Christian school doesn't mean we don't have the same issues as everyone else).

1. "Why do girls that claim they're feminists and all for women power and stuff still want to be courted and expect the guy to pay for everything? Isn't that hypocritical?"

I also point out that the male student said the word "feminist" as if it were synonymous with a child molester's name. I've heard two responses to this so far. First, that feminism means something different to every person who would label themselves as such, and it can't be assumed that all "feminists" believe all traditional roles should be eradicated. But the second, and my favorite of the two, came from my friend Jasmine: "They expect us to take care of EVERYTHING ELSE for the rest of the relationship (kids, the house, schedules, etc) so they can throw us a bone for a few months and pay for dinner." Well said.

2. This wasn't a question, but rather a study my professor shared about what men and women are attracted to. For men, it was first and foremost physical characteristics. For women, it was the "potential for monetary security." Here is my response, for both generalizations: phooey.

UPDATED: You can't get AIDS from sex ed class

In response to the announcement of the HIV/AIDS rate, city officials have announced a new awareness campaign. Check out the story here.

In recent days, there has been somewhat of a rumble about HIV/AIDS rates rising, specifically in the Washington D.C. area. The Washington Post reported yesterday that the metro area has the highest infection rate in the nation, with 3 percent of the city's population carrying the disease.

I know Alyssa will back me up when I say that AIDS is not something we should consider a "foreign" issue, in the sense that it's only a problem in sub-Saharan Africa, or underdeveloped nation. According to the article, the D.C. rate is higher than parts of West Africa, and is "on par with Uganda and some parts of Kenya."

It's stories like these that make me terrified for abstinence-based sex education. A reactionary blog post (also from The Washington Post, what can I say it's my favorite news site) used the article as motivation to "re-educate" readers about how to prevent the spread of AIDS. Yes, abstinence was included on the list. However, I believe that a choice for abstinence should be motivated by positive attributes, rather than fear of consequences (pregnancy, disease, religious stigma, etc).

And AIDS education is something women need to take a stronger role in. I hope that most of my generation is beyond the myth of HIV/AIDS being a "gay" disease. According to the CDC, AIDS is the No. 1 cause of death in African-American females ages 25-34, and in 2005, Women accounted for 26% of the estimated 37,163 diagnoses of the disease for adults and adolescents. Also interesting is the site's study was that women were slightly less likely than men to receive prescriptions for the most effective treatments for HIV infection. There's even a separate AIDS awareness day for women and girls (March 10, as opposed to the international awareness day on December 1).

These numbers are too high. I'm saddened at the idea that in a country with every educational opportunity at our fingertips, we would allow our friends, colleagues, family, or even strangers to walk around in ignorance. Educate yourself, and those around you, so that this preventable disease can be eradicated.

Here are some resources for more information:

AIDS.gov: the government website on the disease
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: statistics on the disease in the United States, as well as materials on education and prevention
Face AIDS: a student organization that works to fight AIDS in Africa (shout out to the Seattle U. chapter)
United Nations: a special General Assembly session on HIV/AIDS