Wednesday, December 05, 2007

The Gym Class Heroes said, “We have to take our clothes off to have a good time,” but my teacher keeps pushing this abstinence thing?

While hip activists listen to WHYY traveling in their cars, my dirty little secret is that I enjoy singing along to the music of the masses on WPST. This week, my unhealthy obsession with pop music paid off, as I became inspired by the ordinarily obnoxious Gym Class Heroes…

“So here’s the thing,” apparently today, “we have to take our clothes off to have a good time,” according to the Gym Class Heroes. “Oh no,” but I thought Jermaine Stewart said that “we don't have to take our clothes off” in the mid-80s. Two decades ago, “we could dance and party all night” and “get to know each other better, slow & easily.” In the light of the AIDS epidemic, even pop artists were preaching about having sex only within the context of a committed relationship. Now, musicians (if we can even call them that) are singing about “good clean fun” in the form of one night stands at clubs.

Now, I know the Gym Class Heroes aren’t beckoning to their steady girlfriend or wife when they say, “What do you say let's exit stage left so me and you can possibly reconvene and play some naked peekaboo?” Through such songs as these, young males are learning how to sweet talk a woman out of her pants for some backroom, uncomplicated fun. But things can get pretty complicated when you don’t know how to protect yourself…

Today, millions of federal dollars are being spent on abstinence-only education annually. In public schools everywhere, kids are being taught to feel guilty about sex and to not use condoms because they “don’t work.” But I thought condoms were highly effective, even as high as 98%, if used consistently and correctly… Unfortunately, it’s a vicious cycle: Abstinence-only programs teach that condoms are ineffective, they don’t show kids how to properly use a condom, improper use of condoms or lack of condom use can’t protect youth, and then the abstinence-only advocates get the condom failure rates they’re looking for and come out on top (no pun intended).

Listen up: Kids are taking their clothes off and partying all night to have a good time. It is absolutely irresponsible to preach abstinence-only. Adolescents need adults to give them the tools needed to protect themselves from unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Although AIDS is no longer the death sentence it once was, even the writers of Boston Legal know that “one time unprotected sex can kill you” and “a condom can save you.” Why isn’t every child in the world taught this?

Stephanie Chando, Duvall Project Intern

Labels: , , ,

2 Comments:

Anonymous Alan said...

The Gov. of VA recently turned down ALL "abstinence only" funding so that his state can concentrate on COMPREHENSIVE sex ed. Way to go Gov!

“Abstinence only” sex education doesn’t have even a slim chance of being effective - by age 44, 95% of all Americans have had premarital sex. Basicly, every one of us!

http://www.publichealthreports.org/userfiles/122_1/12_PHR122-1_73-78.pdf

This study is from the The Guttmacher Institute, a VERY good source for REAL information on this issue.

4:55 PM  
Anonymous Alan said...

Here is a very comprehensive, well designed study that shows the failure of "Abstinence only" sex education compared to comprhensive sex education

http://www.mathematica-mpr.com/welfare/abstinence.asp

5:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home