Abstinence is the New Feminism (And Other Things I Learned at Harvard)

Show your support.
Buzz this article up.

• Share
• Print View
• Comments

The chastity movement has grown up and gone off to college, which is no wonder, really, since legislators recently decided to focus attention and federal money on keeping unmarried adults abstaining until at least their 29th birthday. The members of Harvard's True Love Revolution, a campus chastity club, are the newest crusaders on the celibacy bandwagon.

While they do not require a purity pledge for entry, True Love Revolution's ideology is closely aligned with the abstinence-only programs that have brought us, just this year, higher teen birth rates and the scary statistic that one in four teen girls have a sexually transmitted infection. The premise of Harvard's True Love Revolution group is the popular myth that discussing and promoting both abstinence and safer sex methods is squarely contradictory, and they employ some of the same misinformation and scare tactics as high school abstinence-only teachers to get that message across - including casting doubt on the effectiveness of condoms and contraception and overstating or inventing the dramatic, horrible consequences of having sex.

When I opened the New York Times Sunday magazine to read about "College Students Who Opt Out of Sex" my six years in the sexual health movement and my prior stint as a ring wearing, pledge taking virgin gave me a pretty good idea of the modus operandi of these groups. But what I didn't expect was Janie Fredell, the young woman who has both John Paul II and John Stuart Mills' Subjugation of Women on her reading list, and who claims abstinence is her version of "the personal is political."

Janie and I seem to have a lot in common. We are both 21 years of age, study government and are iffy about law school, and are both from hotbeds of evangelical fervor - Janie from Colorado Springs, CO and myself from Lubbock, TX. We have both spent an inordinate amount of time during college talking to reporters about sex. And I walked away from the abstinence-only movement for the same reason Janie says she gravitated toward it - in a word, feminism.

Janie Fredell claims she abstains from sex because women "suffer from premarital sex due to a double standard which devalues women for their sexual pasts and glorifies men for theirs." While most feminists would agree that such a double standard exists, and that it is based on gendered stereotypes that cast women as either passive or promiscuous and men as unerringly overly sexual, where Janie and I part ways is in what we can do about it.

The decision to remain abstinent is no less valid, or feminist, than the decision to have responsible, consensual sex - and abstinence in itself is an effective method of prevention against sexually transmitted infections and unwanted pregnancy. What confounds is that although Janie rails against the stereotypes and sexual double standards imposed upon women, she aligns herself with a movement that not only accepts but also relies upon those stereotypes to convince young people to join up. In doing so, she is refusing to challenge the social constructs that plague relations between and among the genders and is instead attacking the act of sex itself - a time-tested tactic that has proven both impractical and ineffective, to say the least.

Sex is inevitable, even for those of us who pledged otherwise, so it seems far more proactive to challenge outdated and harmful notions about each gender's relationship to sex, not necessarily with sexual activity, but by educating both men and women toward positive, healthy expressions of sexuality that neither subjugate nor deny the humanity of either partner. The last thing anyone, male or female, needs on a college campus is a rancorous and harmful debate about the merits of sex or no sex. Instead, someone needs to start an open and honest discussion about sexual health and responsibility that encompasses everything from abstinence to contraception and personal fulfillment and pleasure. Janie Fredell, are you there with me?

Comments

[nov47]

Great and thought provoking.

[swkidder]

Well done, Shelby.

[Sir681]

I wonder just how many of these people advocating abstinence had actually abstained until marriage. A quick Google search on teenage pregnancies in the industrialized world shows that we hold the number one ranking, and also in teenage abortions. We are so wrapped up in trying to control the sex lives of people that we have lost our capacity for rational thought and problem-solving. But, of course, we are Americans, and this is what we do best - make a lot of noise, try to control people, and problems go unsolved. It would be instructive to us to look at those countries with the lowest rates of teenage pregnancies and abortions, see how they achieve those rates and (God forbid) actually learn something from them.

[alexj]

Sexualized content makes it's way into the major forms of media in any free society (and in America at least, it's often spiced with disrespect, angst, and negativity). Nevertheless, several European countries get positive results from focusing on comprehensive education and health resources. Meanwhile, some Americans are obsessed with trying to influence/repress the sexuality of others because they have an idealized concept of what sex must always be (when in reality it's never been limited to marriage or the "29th birthday"). We might expect they'll be reluctant to provide information beyond "don't do it or you'll shrivel up/die of disease or emotional distress".

Along with the HPV vaccine, the keys to greater safety for the "impure" will continue to be limiting the number of partners, STD testing, and the CORRECT use of protection for intercourse. Then there may be a greater risk of serious injury from a car accident than a disease. And we know many people won't abstain from mounting their cars on a daily basis.

[sobsister]

If we don't learn our women will be gone...http://sobsister.com/2008/03/19/us-government-can-you-tell-me-about-the-birds-and-the-bees-now/

[Guitarsandmore]

I suppose there are other things you can do with a pair of shoes, like talk to them, get to know them, make them your friend. You could hug them, kiss them, or just snuggle up with them. But eventually you are going to want to actually wear the shoes and so if comfort and fit are at all important to you then you"re going to need to try them on and walk around a bit.

Then again, if you have held out for twenty one years you might just be the barefoot type.

[irishgawdess]

Brava Shelby!

Congratulations on achieving your goal of going to college to study government. It's wonderful that you've continued advocating for comprehensive sexual education, and are now broadening the scope of the public discourse. A university is a logical forum for such a discussion.

Have you considered making another video that emphasizes the importance of the "positive, healthy expressions of sexuality" that respect the whole person? I know that kids as young as 12 need to learn about the "gray" in between the black and white choices they've been given by their schools and parents. We need to get beyond the "boys will be boys" attitude that is perpetuated in our society, as well the more subtle attitude that girls are responsible for satisfying "their man." From an evolutionary standpoint, yes, a male needed to have sex with many females to ensure the survival of his genes; a woman needed to be more discriminating in her selection of a mate to ensure that she and her child would be provided for during and after her pregnancy. Although we still see shades of this Neanderthal behavior in humans today, our brains have developed sufficiently that we are able to go beyond acting in pure survival mode and make more respectful choices about our behavior.

Thanks for writing about this issue, and I wish you the best in your future endeavors!

[bethinCary]

An article just read: "The Divine Feminine Unveiled" by Elizabeth Debold.
In it ,we see since Victorian times women have been stereotyped as the nurterers and caretakers-at a time when men were the only ones to work- the idea of feminism has not been challenged very much since. In the 60's-the bra-burning, "bitch" mantra- was a little extreme for many women. But now we have created ourselves as objects in a male-dominated culture. This is especially true once women start having sex-because they cross that narrow-door of patriarchal culture as a survival mechanism created in a male-dominated culture.
The Victorian patriarchy shows how women think that women are "good" and innocent (& stay at home), men are the public sphere. Becaue women think of themselves this way-they don't venture inot the public sphere often. But women need to stop seeing themselves this way---thye do not have to be as "gentle,caring, and nurturing"-as a patriarchal system would have. ."Sexy" has been part of the image created and enabled by ourselves (women).. We see ourselves as attractive,desirable, and obliging--when the dark femeinine side is anyhting but sexy...Unfortuantely this is part of ourselves collectively as women-we don't want to look at it. But unless we do recognize our WHOLE of ourselves-we will keep projecting these tendencies onto men and destructively towards other women too--which will keep the polaraization and patriarchy firmly in place another 200 years.

[cylindar]

The debate is interesting but maybe rather unimportant. Those who hate sex will show themselves up for what they are. Those of us who like sex will continue to get some and enjoy it. It is really very hard to try to talk people out of a good sex experience and so I do not think the sex haters will get very far. After all Mother Nature always gets her way. Of course there are always fools out there who think they now better than Mother Nature. What really needs to be done is to promote more research into the prevention of STD's, with abstinence not to be considered as a prevention nor an intelligent approach.

[YouThinkAndTalk]

The truth as I see it is that sex needs to be learned. And I mean not sex as a method of jerking off but sex as a way to enjoy and appreciate each other's bodies. This is how to look at sex, which for some people may include abstinence and for some not, but sex is a vehicle to something.

Imagine if you the first time you took arithmetic was when you had to figure out the family budget!

[Ironfox]

What nonsense, the necessity to " figure out the family budget " is not inate, hard - wired, and a biological imperitive. If sex has to be "learned" then the tens of thousands of generations that have preceeded us must have just been damned lucky. Yes, sex " is a vehicle to something ", it's called procreation.

[klmebane]

sex isn't inate either... sure, our bodies can figure out how to do it, but to do it well and actually ensure that both partners are satisfied is a different matter entirely.

[sternenweber]

you should give your age.
until then I prefer to spare you out from superficial snapbacks.
("that woman is not dead - she is british")

[indypete]

Procreation doesn't need to be learned but satisfying sexuality as a shared experience is something else.

[maryartemis]

I am so curious what the author considers to be "outdated and harmful notions" that need to be challenged. Sounds like she's still on the bandwagon of an old fashioned feminism that convinces women it is cool to have sex with the world.

Now I do believe the stale notions that definitely need to be "out a here" --are the ones that the author proposes. I think they suck. Pun intended. Women these days suffer from no backbone. sorry. Also, --you, as a woman, have an open sexual system - guys have a closed one. Duh. It requires more care because we are the creators.

So, like, what is this about misinformation? Scare tactics? I think THERAPY is more in order for those of you who are still needing to proclaim sexual freedom. The best sexual freedom is the one that puts you in total control - and takes guys out of the driver's seat over your bodies. New feminism puts women in charge of their bodies. [no they are not in charge of their own bodies] We should approach our lives as individuals - alone - and one "gives" oneself ONLY when it is in your best interest - and according to your own best judgment. Hitting home runs belongs to a guy who is really of great character and going to take care of you and your kids, and also, women's incidence of cervical cancer will be lower, too, or maybe, you think that's more MISinformation, too. -

[klmebane]

i believe the misinformations the author was referring to was regarding the lies they tell teens in abstinence classes. they don't give accurate information about sexual health. that is important, because although these kids are young now, eventually they have to become adults and do adult things. crippling them by not giving them all of the info they need to protect themselves makes them less responsible adults.

that may be the best sexual freedom for YOU, but there are many women out there who are in control by seeking their own satisfaction, period. it isn't just about kids or being taken care of... its being able to take care of yourself. sex is fun, and if someone wants to enjoy it, they should be able to do that and know that they have been given every tool available to do it as safely as possible. if they want to abstain, that is their choice too, but to say everyone should abstain ignores the nuances that make people different and want different things.

[justShareandbeNice]

HuffPost's Pick

I read the article in the New York Times Magazine, also. I had all sorts of "intellectual" thoughts when I read it, but what stands out most is when Janie admits she never masturbates: "Oh, God, NO, NO!" she said. And she says when she has sexual urges she just goes for a run. She assumes everyone can do some such thing with their sexual urges. She has a boyfriend and they have conversations instead of sex, she says. And her boyfriend is okay with that. Well, there is nothing wrong with all that for sure, but assuming that this is the template for everyone to follow just shows how much she has blinders on in regards to the real world.

She isn't admitting so many obvious things: 1) people have been having sex at early ages for millenia (like starting in their early teens in many cultures) 2) only a very, very small percentage of people go to college in this world -- beginning a career, then starting a family isn't the order millions of people do things -- again a cultural and socio-economic bias 3) she assumes everyone wants to get married! 4) she completely leaves out LGBT folks 5) she doesn't mention the emotional and physical benefits of having sex, like LEARNING how to have sex -- I think men and women should be offered high quality videos of nice, healthy, loving ways of having sex -- would save a lot of future marriages

and on and

[Veronica]

My politically incorrect take: Could Janie just be a stuck-up prude whose above-average intellect affords her the ability to hide this fact with hairbrained theories of feminism and society?

You're right...her horrified reaction to the very notion of masturbation kind of gives her away...what exactly is anti-feminist about eliminating men as an integral part of sexual gratification for women?

Nothing, that's what.

Janie just needs to get laid, big time.

[Robin1962]

THE WAR IN IRAQ IS HAVING SERIOUS NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON OUR ECONOMY and those who voted for the war (i.e. hillary) should be to blame, in part, for the state of the US economy.

Look how the WAR IN IRAQ is affecting the US economy...

$3,000,000,000� 3 billion dollars PER WEEK! That is the amount America is paying for the Iraq War PER WEEK, money that should have been used here, at home.

Add to this:

Interest. We are financing the war with borrowed money (e.g. treasuries) that carries interest; so in actuality, the war is costing the United States MORE THAN 3 billion dollars PER WEEK.

Higher oil and energy prices. Instability in Iraq is adding roughly 30 dollars per barrel as a premium.

High utility bills. Due to high oil prices, demand shifts to other sources of energy - gas, coal, etc. - and greater demand will raise the equilibrium price of all sources of energy

Our dollar is weak and getting weaker. Since we have a trade deficit and is growing in large part to the rising cost of imported oil, the value of goods and services we import exceeds the value of goods we export. Everything we buy that's made abroad will cost more, Ceteris Peribus, because the dollar is weak.

Lastly, how do you think the world views our country since the argument was made for war? The evidence was weak and circumstantial, yet we rushed into war with Iraq thanks to hillary"s authorization.

[panchovilla]

"The decision to remain abstinent is no less valid, or feminist, than the decision to have responsible, consensual sex - and abstinence in itself is an effective method of prevention against sexually transmitted infections and unwanted pregnancy."

Well, in the very long run, this approach leads to the death of the human race.

[callit]

I was raised to wait until marriage--I lasted until I was 23. I'm now 30 and I still have issues with sex--issues I blame on my abstinence-only education. This education--which simultaneously elevated sex to "the ultimate expression of love" in a marriage and degraded sex into something wrong and perverted outside of marriage--ill-prepared me for the reality of sex, and all its pleasure, pain, and just plain messiness.

I wasn't prepared to talk to partners and doctors about birth control and health issues (thankfully, I got over this). I certainly wasn't prepared to communicate what *I* wanted from a sexual experience--sex was something that men wanted that was mine to "give up" (a type of thinking that is hardly conducive to a pleasurable experience). Ultimately, I wasn't prepared to balance sex with all the other aspects of a successful relationship.

I agree with the abstinence-only crowd on one thing: there is far too much emphasis on sex in our culture. However, I believe that they are just as guilty as the sexualized media they detest: by glorifying sex within marriage and degrading sex outside marriage they give sex too much power. How is anyone supposed to view sex and handle it realistically--as nothing more or less than a basic human experience--if sex is presented in these terms?