|
Edited on Tue Feb-19-08 05:43 PM by AspieGrrl
Here's the article I wrote for the school newspaper, that's going to be on the front page in a week or two. I'm totally having a Sally Field moment right now - "You like me! You really like me!"
I'm actually quite proud of how it turned out. It was definietly a more difficult one to write.
It doesn't have a title at the moment - I'm relying on the copy editors for that. Teehee.
I edited out the last names of the two students I interviewed, for privacy reasons.
Enjoy!
They say sex sells, and sex education, although quite a small part of one’s high school experience, is always a hot topic for discussion.
Much media attention has been given lately to “abstinence-only” sex education, which means that contraceptives and safer sex are not talked about. The only method of safer sex, its advocates say, is abstaining from sex altogether until marriage. Such sex-ed programs take place in schools in certain U.S. states, including South Carolina, Mississippi and North Dakota. These programs often have a religious (often Christian) bent, and have been widely criticized for spreading false information, in fact, up to 80% of the time; it has been reported that one program taught that condoms cause cancer; another allegedly taught that HIV can be transmitted through skin-to-skin contact. (Both are false, in case you were wondering).
Other states, and many Canadian provinces, including Ontario, are obligated to provide “comprehensive”, medically accurate sex education. But how comprehensive, exactly, it is varies widely between geographic areas and school boards.
The Toronto District School board, like many other school boards, practices what could be known as an “abstinence-plus” program, meaning that although it teaches about safer sex, it emphasizes abstaining from sex as the only 100% reliable way to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. It also devotes a considerable amount of time to the emotional consequences of sex.
The curriculum states that “By the end of the course, students will… explain the consequences of sexual decisions on the individual, family, and community.” This is considered one of the central expectations of the course – and for some, the emphasis on negative consequences can be problematic.
“Most of it is prevention-focused,” says Chanelle Gallant, activist and former manager of sex shop Good For Her. “It completely misses pleasure – the exact reason people have sex.”
However, the thought of teens having sex – and perhaps, actually enjoying it, is considered disturbing by many. “(The public’s attitude) mostly falls into two camps. One is terror, and the other is that teens are fetishized.”, Gallant says. The “purity” movement – which is a substantial force behind abstinence-only sex ed, involves virginity pledges where teens (usually girls) pledge to not have sex until they are married. However, statistics show that teens often break these pledges – and when they do, they are more likely to have risky, unprotected sex. In fact, around 88 percent of those who take virginity pledges end up having sex prior to marriage. Also, there is no proof that comprehensive sex education increases the amount of sexually active teens, or decreases the age at which teens, on average, first have sex.
Still, the million dollar question is – how comprehensive is “comprehensive”?
“I feel that the material thought was extremely simple and straight forward; I feel that it didn't go into depth very much,” says grade 9 student Filip M. “In fact, I felt as if it was more of a review of what I had learned before.”
Recently, the Ontario curriculum has come under fire for not including any reference to homosexuality, bisexuality, or transgender. An article published in Ottawa-based gay and lesbian newspaper Capital Xtra states that there is absolutely no requirement for teachers to mention gender and sexual diversity – even though sex education in Catholic school briefly touches on the subject. “Regardless of the school system, gay sex ed is sorely lacking, and neither system has a curriculum devoted to providing information about gays — or safe sex for gays — on an equal level within the classroom,” the article says.
Even with the information that is being provided, misinformation still runs rampant.
I remember, in grade 8, being told that being on birth control for extended periods of time could leave you infertile. One girl reported being told that having sex under the age of 18 puts you at an increased risk for cervical cancer – because of the stress on one’s “underdeveloped” body. (There is no scientific evidence for either of these, by the way). Coupled with the misinformation presented by friends and the media, this can be a dangerous combination. “I believe teens get most of their information about sex from their friends. Through both lewd jokes and their so-called 'experiences', an incomplete and probably erroneous picture, but a picture nonetheless, about sex forms,” says M.
However, even though the system may be flawed, there are often many positive things to be learned through at least partially comprehensive sex education. “My experience with sex ed has been pretty good,” says Alexis E.S., another grade 9 student. It was really awkward at first especially in high school because you don't know any one but as you become more comfortable with the people around you it gets less awkward.”
So, what would an ideal sex ed class be like?
“One that was designed by teenagers with their needs in mind, and one that talked about things that affect them,” says Gallant.
M. agrees. “Focus more on contraceptives and ethics surrounding pregnancy/abortion rather than actual reproduction, because that is a unit in science.”
“I would change the negative stigma attached to it,” says E.S. “Lots of people think sex ed stinks but it's a great thing to have.”
If the shit hits the fan over this article... I'll let you all know. :P
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
