I recently went to visit the middle school my daughter will attend in September. I was absolutely shocked to see the walls covered in student-made abstinence posters. Many of them carried slogans that suggested saving virginity like a gift for your one true love. You can only give it away once, you know. Others lamented easy breakage of condoms. If you don't want to get pregnant or get an STI or die of AIDS, just say "no." Do you want to die of AIDS? I don't. So I'm not having sex. It's just that simple. If you say "yes" he'll love you tonight, but he won't respect you tomorrow.
What year is this?
As I walked from poster to poster with my daughter and her friend, we discussed ways to enjoy sexuality beyond PIV sex, pros and cons of different birth control options, and the concept of virginity as a girl's gift to give. All the posters were directed at girls, telling them to stop those crazy boys from trying to get in your pants. None had any suggestions for the poor guy who really doesn't feel ready, but thinks he's less of a man to say no to some hot and horny young girl. That dynamic really does exist. The stereotype of guys wanting it and girls protecting it was heartily reinforced by poster after poster. I was glad the girls picked up on the bias.
One thing that bothers me about abstinence education, one of many, is the idea of making a life-long commitment, and then having sex. What if the sex is really bad, so bad it's unfixable? I think good sex is 50% communication and 50% sheer luck of the draw. If I'm with someone who isn't doing quite what I like, but is open-minded, some discussion can do wonders to improve the situation. That's an easy one. But if I'm with someone who likes things very differently from me, likes it rough when I like it gentle, for instance, or likes it on special occasions when I'd like it daily, then we could potentially talk about it forever and never get anywhere.
This seems superficial, but I believe sexual compatibility is paramount to a good relationship. I don't mean each person wants exactly what the other wants at the exact same time, there's always room for masturbation in a good relationship, but things should work out reasonably well most of the time. In a committed monogamous relationship, if my guy doesn't like art galleries, well I can go with a friend. If he doesn't want to see the movie I want to see, I can find someone who will. If I don't want to go to another death-metal concert, he can call up a buddy. But if I want to have sex sometime, and he doesn't, ever, then I'm shit out of luck. Celibacy by choice is a reasonable, healthy lifestyle. Celibacy by default can lead to some serious resentment.
I think it's more responsible to have sex before making a life-long commitment. If you really want to put all your eggs in one basket, with one person for the rest of your life (a decision I question at the starting box), then at least have a go to make sure it's all good. I suppose if someone really wanted to save themselves for marriage, they could test the waters in a canoe.
I've discovered over the years that canoeing with a partner can generate a pretty good sense of what the sex will be like. Canoeing can be done solo, but it's much nicer with someone else there. Canoeing is different with every new person you're with. Both people in the canoe have to adjust for one another's stroking. Being with someone with a strong, slow, even stroke is very different than being with someone with a quick and excited kind of stroke. But if it's good, soon you get into a nice easy rhythm. Sometimes this happens without even speaking. This is the 50% luck part. Other times, some discussion is necessary: "Stay on your right, a bit harder, not so fast..." Once in the rhythm, then it's smooth sailing. You can go straight to your destination or meander slowly back and forth exploring all the nuances of the scenery.
But sometimes, there's no luck or communication. The worst experience I ever had canoeing was with a guy who, after a bit of discussion, snapped, "Just put down your paddle and let me do everything!" Things weren't much better in bed. At one point I told him, "This isn't quite working for me." His response, "It's worked for every other woman I've met. I don't know what's wrong with you." I clearly should have paid more attention to the lesson in the canoe.
Now, imagine if I had married him!
Tuesday, May 02, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
""Just put down your paddle and let me do everything!" Things weren't much better in bed."
Priceless. :)
Goddam, that's infuriating and disturbing.
I anted to focus on the first part of this: It is absolutely true - and maddening - that so much of what passes for "sex education" focuses on the girl's role. Guys are written off as being entirely penis-driven beings, utterly out of control and not to be held responsible for their actions. And the abstinance crowd is just as bad as the "liberal" crew in this fashion. Boys have no cortex, just gonads.
Every once in a while, when the opportunity presents itself to discuss these issues in a "regular" class like mine, if I say ANYTHING that remotely indicates that "boys" need to somehow control themselves and be responsible (at least half of the equation), the kids will look at me like I just fell off the fruit truck. They just aren't used to hearing that perspective.
quakerdave,
I also wanted to get at the fact that some guys *aren't* that interested, but from these types of posters, they might learn that not being a sex maniac means not being very manly.
I worry about boys who don't have strong sex drives (yet or ever) and feel inadequate because of it, or worse, have sex when they don't want to just to prove something to themselves or others.
Everyone's so radically different, and it would be useful to all students (and people) to be aware of the huge continuum of sexual realities out there.
I get into discussions in classes way beyond the curriculum. But it keeps my numbers up!
And of course, God forbid you might suggest, hey, you can always masturbate! no, really, it's okay! healthy, even!
much less ways in which horny kids might safely sexually connect via "outercourse" and so on. it's NOT ENOUGH that you abstain from potentially physically dangerous activites; you must save all your erotic energy and touch for the one you marry. what the fuck ever.
Goddamn, that canoe analogy is hilarious.
Quakerdave:
Guys are written off as being entirely penis-driven beings, utterly out of control and not to be held responsible for their actions. And the abstinance crowd is just as bad as the "liberal" crew in this fashion. Boys have no cortex, just gonads.
Exactly. I think you'll find that the more patriarchical the culture, the more than men are "written off" as base, animalistic, or simply out of control. That current runs so deep through certain Arab cultures that women and men must be kept segregated at all times, lest a woman's honor (i.e. her freshness seal) be tampered with prior to purchase, er, marriage. And yet, but reducing men to their sexual proclivities, the society gives them license to do what they will as, after all, they have no control over it. For that reason, we must cover our women, hide all hint of sexuality and guarantee that rape is a crime that cannot be proven in court.
What's bizzarre to me is that you'll often find female patriarchical apologists in this country making exactly the same argument. Men, after all, are brutes that need a woman's guiding hand, even as he's dominating her...in Christ's name.
The whole thing is so infuriating.
sage: Exactly! And exactly! And exactly! What about the boys who are obviously struggling with their sexuality, in terms of knowing inside that they are probably gay. I had a kid like this last year. Tall. Really good-looking. Really smart , really skilled socially. The female teachers kept making remarks like, "Boy, he'll make somebody a great husband someday," or "He'll make somebody a great BYfriend next year," and it was so obvious to anybody who had even a ten minute conversation with this kid that he was gay. And that he was FINE with it. He wrote a BEAUTIFUL poem about it at the end of the year, a perfectly formatted SESTINA, of all things. How is this kid supposed to see himself in this sort of "instruction"? It kills me. What if my son "turns out" to be gay? What kind of world are we saying we want?
I know what kind the fundies want, and that's what scares, then frustrates, and finally angers me. Especially as a person who thinks of himself as "religious."
Post a Comment