Talk to Your Kids About Sex, and Don't Leave Out the Good Stuff

People are talking about "Talk to Me," a national PSA urging parents to "speak up" about the virtues of abstaining until marriage. (The PSA is put out by 4parents.gov, a division of the Department of Health and Human Services, and can be viewed HERE). People are talking about the discomfort of watching child actors hired by an Abstinence-Only contingent turn their dewy eyes to the camera and say things like "Tell me what you want from me." Notwithstanding the creepy undertones, this PSA has set us back another ten years from instituting practical sex education that actually prepares and protects kids. Luckily the Voice of Reason has a DV cam and a cache of talented kids at their disposal to make this hilarious parody:

(Video originally released on funnyordie.com, here)

Comments

[PeteBogs]

who does that blonde girl think she is, Davy Crockett?

[Qbear]

How about the batsh*t crazy fundies can bet their kids life on abstinence-only NONSENCE that failed in 85% of Senior High School girls...bu­t they have NO RIGHT betting anone else's kid's life.

[emncaity]

Followup to earlier (because of space restrictions):

Nobody on this forum is more anti-right-wing than I am. But if you want progressives to keep losing elections, then keep characterizing the concerns of millions of parents as "creepy," naive, or hopelessly outdated. Keep posing this world view where anybody who advocates abstinence is an antiquated moron. Keep acting like progressivism's purpose is to promote self-indulgence, and ridicule anybody who's in favor of self-control as creepy and stupid and old.

Keep doing that, and the only elections we'll win will be the occasional palate-cleanser like '06 and possibly '08, where Republicans go so far off the tracks that even an ignorant and market-men­tality-poi­soned electorate can't miss it. Most years, the majority of the electorate will prefer what they believe is the adult party--a little dry and restrictive, maybe, not much fun, but they get you all the way to Disneyland without breaking down or running out of money--to the party of Uncle Rick the Stoner, the self-indulgent condom king who thinks people talk way too much about self-control. You can keep believing that centrist voters don't look at it that way, but they do. Hell, maybe you're even--gasp!--wrong on some issues. Maybe even this one.

[emncaity]

Straight info in sex ed is a good thing, and most religious people I know think so too, even the ones who also believe promoting abstinence isn't so bad.

See, I don't want you telling my kids it's OK to have sex because they're going to anyway, as long as they, you know, really feel a commitment to the other person and all.

Yeah, it'd be terrible to promote an ideal where the only person to see (for instance) your daughter in that way, to have ever been in that intimate situation, is the person who has committed his/her life to her. How retarded is that? Better we should promote the ideal where as long as "nobody gets hurt," no pregnancies result, and it's consensual, it's just dandy. Where you try this one, that one, another one, then eventually settle on one (maybe) and agree not to think about all those other people you've both slept with. That is a beautiful world, all right.

[DarenTx]

What exactly are the virtues of abstinence until marriage? I had responsible sex before marriage like most people. I suspect my sons and my daughter will too.

So long as you have done your job as a parent and talked to your kids about responsible sex I don't see the problem.

But if your sex talk amounted to "Don't do that" I could see where you could have issues.

[emncaity]

Really? You think there's _nothing_ good about abstinence until marriage? You're just fine with your sons and daughter indulging similarly--so fine with it that you see literally nothing good in the alternative?

I mean, glad you had a good time and all, but that doesn't mean your way (which I recognize is the prevailing ethic) is the best or only way.

I do agree that talk ought to be far more than "don't do that" or "don't do it because a rule says so." Either there's a good substantive reason for it or there isn't. (See message immediately before yours.)

[TAFL]

I see nothing good in "abstinence until marriage" as a general guideline. Indeed, urging such rot on others is both asinine and arrogant; it is a highly personal decision and none of anybody else's business.

I expect my children to have sex at times of their choosing, whether married or not. My concerns are, first, whether they protect themselves from disease and unwanted pregnancy when they choose to do so, and two, whether they're carefully considering when and with whom it would be good for them to do so.

There is no "good, substantive" reason for abstinence until marriage. Even were there, to keep children ignorant about sex is simply evil--it's morally wrong any way you try to rationalize it.

[OneWoman]

No, I really can not think of a good reason to wait until marriage. Our partners do not own our sexuality. It's not something we give them; it's something we SHARE with them.

Humans are designed to be sexual creatures. There is a reason why women have a menstrual cycle and not an estrus cycle; and let's not forget the clitoris: the ONLY part of the human body that serves no function other than for pleasure. Sex, in my opinion, is a beautiful thing. I simply do not understand people's hang-ups about it.

[Dandy12]

Of course sexual activity can derail teens and infringe upon their futures. Always has and always will... However, there is no need to do further damage with laying guilt and preventing dissemination of knowledge.

[Malkintent]

States with the highest number of conservative Christians have by far the highest divorce rates, as well as the highest teen pregnancy rates. Meanwhile, liberal Massachusettes has the lowest divorce rate. Some food for thought...

[mpgarr]

That was a great video--it does more to get at the real heart of the matter than what the "abstinence only crowd" puts out with their BS spin---

But--being real and all with the stuff that comes from the Christofacist crowd has nothing to do with reality---they come up with some notion on a subject and it doesn't matter if it makes one whit of sense---they stick with it to the bitter end--

Because they are: "Totally Batshit Crazy!" (and stupid too)

[Pdubya]

Mom, is a dirty Sanchez a crooked politician?

[xenubarb]

What really crisps my bacon is that public money is funding these idiotic messages of imposed ignorance.

We learned about sex in health class, including birth control methods. This "just say no" attitude persists, and the kids who lack information and self control will be the losers.

And lucky grandma will get to help raise the children of children. Yay!

[JD-28]

If it can be done wrong, backward and ignorant, it is probably being done by knee-jerk, right-wing, evangelical "values" voters in the red states, or what we used to call the confederacy.

[longislandlol]

Marry your best friend --- talk about sex alot- experiment- then marry this best friend-- and abstinence becomes just a word-- spiritually sex is sweetened when it becomes less of an act- and more of spiritual love- if for some people; they need to be married 1st to experience this spiritual love-- that's fine for them- for others-- keep up your quest to marry or live with your best friend and keep the faith...

[PeteBogs]

this must be from Canada... I detect accents...

[DRaymond]

The thing about the abstinence-only folks that gets me is when DO we teach them? We approach nearly every other subject in school as providing knowledge that they are going to use for their entire life. The typical student has no immediate need to know about american history do they? If your strategy is to have ignorant teenagers don't be surprized if you also wind up with ignorant adults.

[GoreSavingPlanetForJesus]

I've never met an unhappy person who waited until marriage. They seem quite proud of it.

It's sad to live in a culture where practicing any type of self control is mocked by those without self control. Those are the idiots who will respond and say we are suppressing their natural needs and desires

I personally know 2 girls here in Orlando that are sad stories from lack of abstinence. One girl has 4 kids (3 fathers) the other has 5 kids (5 different fathers).

Pathetic.

[alguien]

and were they taught methods of birth control and what it all means? or were they taught abstinence only and given no instruction on birth control at all?

the whole story isn't given in that one paragraph.

[GoreSavingPlanetForJesus]

Every birth control has a failure rate.

Abstinence has never failed.

Pretty clear to me that the method that is 100% safe is the choice. But, once again, that would mean self-control, which upsets people who have no self control.

[dawlishgal]

Seems to me that if a person has his/her life under control, both abstinence and use of birth control methods come easier. There are always going to be people whose lives are out of control, and these people are the very ones who ought to be taught to wait until they are ready to make the committment of time and money that parenting takes. But few of them WILL wait...tha­t is just a fact of life, so they, for sure, need education in birth control.

What is wrong with teaching both self-control AND birth control methods? People, especially women, ought to realize that they have choices. And they should also receive an education in their own psysiology, so they know when the point is coming that they had better either stop or use birth control if they don't want to become pregnant. (Luckily, I had a mother who told me the exact truth about stuff like this).

BTW, it isn't "lack of abstinence" that causes pregnancies, it is HAVING UNPROTECTED SEX. Somebody can be abstinent for DECADES, yet become pregnant after a single slip-up. Another person can use birth control methods responsibly, be sexually active for decades and never have an unwanted or unplanned child.

[emncaity]

Um, yes, in fact, it is "lack of abstinence," aka indulgence, aka having sex, that results in pregnancies. The fact that there is a remedy to the consequences doesn't change the fact that the first cause of pregnancy is having sex. Sheesh.

E.g.: Which is the cause of the fire, the irresponsible smoker in bed or the absence of a fire extinguisher?

[sqweels]

You've never heard that going for years without getting laid can make a person unhappy?

It's perfectly reasonable to ask young people to wait untuil they are 18 before becoming sexually active. And to wait until they are in an established relationship and have gotten ahold of some birth control. There's your self-control.

But it's NOT reasonable to expect them to go for years or decades beyond that witout any sexual fulfillment. Damn straight you're suppressing their natural needs and desires.

I'm 44 and I've never been married. Do you really expect me to be a 44 year-old virgin?

[Hobarticus]

Maybe, but it's even sadder to live in a culture where the facts about said "self-control" are twisted to push an agenda. The "abstinence-only" snake oil industry (and that's exactly what it is - no more, no less) has been feeding off the gov't on pseudo-science and moralistic feel-good claptrap, when young people in abstinence-ed programs are no more likely to refrain from sex than their counterparts. These programs feed students false information about pregnancy and birth control, in a time when the wrong information can kill people. And people still stand by these snake-oil salesmen? THAT's pathetic.