Sexperts Under Fire

| 14 Comments

Abstinence-only education is a failure. Study after study has found that teenagers who receive abstinence-only education are no less likely to have sex as other teenagers, but are less likely to use protection when they do.

Now it appears that the prudes who brought us abstinence-only education in middle and high schools are targeting universities. According to the Atlanta Journal and Constitution, several Georgia politicians and religious right activists have become upset that the University System of Georgia has faculty members who are experts in human sexual behavior and diseases. These culture warriors are now making a bunch of noise to get the faculty members fired, while citing budget issues. As expected, these politicians are ignorant of academia, public policy, public health, history, and the law.

14 Comments

Experts!? A university dared have EXPERTS? Good God. What will the prudes find next? BOOKS?

That’s just reprehensible. It’s so hard for me to bend my mind away from a rational perspective far enough to even begin to see things from the point of view of these nuts. I’m (almost) speechless.

What luck! My site will be down for about 30 minutes later tonight as they do some maintenance to the network in my building.

Ah…come on now - what do you expect from Georgia? It is, after all, low hanging fruit in the orchard of right wing wackdom…

Georgia was nearly a blue state last election, its hardly the low hanging right wing fruit.

I should mention that the complaints of these couple of legislators went nowhere, and the House Higher Education Committee actually organized a hearing for the scientists to show up the ignorant boobs.

Georgia was nearly a blue state last election…

Indeed, and it’s quite exciting! As for the low hanging fruit, Oklahoma actually became redder over the past four years. :(

As a dues paying, carding carrying, prude I would like to register a strong protest of this incorrect association of my kind with abstinence only sex education. Just because we can’t get any doesn’t mean that we want teen pregnancies and STDs.

Reed A. Cartwright said:

Georgia was nearly a blue state last election, its hardly the low hanging right wing fruit.

I should mention that the complaints of these couple of legislators went nowhere, and the House Higher Education Committee actually organized a hearing for the scientists to show up the ignorant boobs.

Hope you’re correct, but being the pessimist that I am .…

This is academic freedom under the Christians, yes?

Abstinence-only education is a failure. Study after study has found that teenagers who receive abstinence-only education are no less likely to have sex as other teenagers, but are less likely to use protection when they do.

This is mis-leading. The correct measure is what is the rate of STD’s, pregnancies, and/or emotional or psychological problems related to pre-marital sex among teenagers who practice abstinence 100% of the time. Without even needing a reseach study, I can tell you the answer is ZERO. No other method of birth control or disease prevention comes close.

Its not the least bit surprising that teens who had abstinence only sex-ed have sex at roughly the same rate as other teens. What would you expect when, even with the best sex-ed programs possible, you’re only presenting for an hour or two a week up against a 24/7 media culture that promotes, sells, encourages and depicts sex at every opportunity. The problem does not lie in abstinence only sex-ed; the problem lies in a media culture aimed directly at teens that misleads teens about sex and sexuality.

Without even needing a reseach study

that’s why nobody has any respect for you, ducky.

Ichthyic

Without even needing a reseach study

that’s why nobody has any respect for you, ducky.

And you have clearly missed the point entirely!

The usual nonsense. All that would be required to prevent STDs and unwanted pregnancy and all sorts of other problems would be for us to return to the Good Old Days, except that the Good Old Days never happened. That is, we must change everything about western society, persuade everybody not only to subscribe to, but actually to enact, a code of strict abstinence from sex with anybody but their legally wedded spouse, and enforce that with censorship and blue laws and whatever else it takes.

It ain’t gonna happen. It actually can’t happen, but if there were ever a real attempt to make it happen, the attempted “cure” would be much worse than the disease, for all that it would be completely ineffective. Iran, anybody? The Taliban?

Any true conservative solution would be small, work at an individual level, be of proven effectiveness, would not require an increase in government power, and would be cost neutral or better. This description is best fitted by full factual education and freely available contraception. The alternative is to argue for ignorance and repression, which is a shameful and disgraceful thing to do in itself.

The hilarious aspect of this is that the people who are in effect advocating a huge increase in government power and intrusion into private lives would usually describe themselves as conservatives. You have to laugh.

Donald M said:

This is mis-leading. The correct measure is what is the rate of STD’s, pregnancies, and/or emotional or psychological problems related to pre-marital sex among teenagers who practice abstinence 100% of the time. Without even needing a reseach study, I can tell you the answer is ZERO. No other method of birth control or disease prevention comes close.

If you used such a measure, then you would no longer be testing the effectiveness of teaching abstinence-only. In judging the effect of a curriculum, students are grouped based on the curriculum they received, and those groups are compared.

Imagine you are doing a taste test between fox piss and pepsi but exclude everyone that drinks less than a pint of either. Clearly the people who can stand to drink pints of fox piss and pepsi, will report that they both taste great. But if you include everyone who couldn’t finish their pints, then you’d probably have a different result, one more representative of the reactions people have to drinking fox piss and pepsi.

Excluding members of either group based on whether “the program stuck” changes the results and provides mis-leading support. It’s no wonder the abstinence-only activists use it.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Reed A. Cartwright published on February 10, 2009 11:31 AM.

Darwin is already dead, and we know it was the previous entry in this blog.

We should fund scientific research - a response. is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Categories

Archives

Author Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.361

Site Meter