The Johnsonian

    I am writing in response to the article "Selling sex the Proper way."  While I agree that there is a growing problem with careless sex in America and that the media does not seem to help it, I think the problem goes deeper than ignorance about safety.  Therefore, promoting safe sex is not an adequate cure.  Condoms may penetrate the surface of the problem, but they do not tackle the roots.  To reduce the negative effects of premarital sex, problems such as short-mindedness, skewed messages, and lack of moral courage must be addressed.     

         Often, sexual education programs, which promote physical protection, do not address the long-term emotional effects of premarital sex.  Though condoms and other forms of birth control provide some protection from physical consequences, they do not prevent heartaches from broken relationships, reduce the awkwardness of seeing past

partners, or lessen the struggle of entering a new relationship after having a previous sexual partner.  Such experiences are all too common for sexually active people who are taught that physical protection alone makes sex safe.  Sexual education programs should teach the fullness of what sex entails, which includes the physical and emotional impacts on those involved.      

         Another problem for sexual educators to consider is the tendency for many people to follow the crowd.  I am sure that everyone at Winthrop can recall some kind of fad that they have observed in their life.  It takes just one person to show up on campus with a Vera Bradley purse, and before you know it, dozens of students are sporting them.  

Premarital sex is like a fad.  Just as many people want material things because "everyone else has them," many people have premarital sex because "everyone else does. This generalization on sex is commonly given from such places as the media and even the article I am responding to.  It is not only an unfair assumption, but is also degrading.             Promoting the image that 'everyone has sex' merely strengthens the bandwagon effect that has encouraged the growth in and ensuing problems of premarital sex in the first place.  What should be promoted is everyone does not have premarital sex, just as everyone does not own a Vera Bradley purse. There are many people on this campus alone who practice abstinence, and it is time that they received the focus of sexual education programs.  As a result, others could see that abstinence (and it's freedom from negative consequences) is still an acceptable option.  Educational programs that briefly mention abstinence, then plunge into how to apply condoms, disvalue the decision of abstinence and add to the false images that put pressure on people to have premarital sex.              As evidence that programs promoting abstinence can be effective, one can look at the country of Uganda.  Suffering from high rates of HIV/AIDS, the government decided to address the root of the problem.  They discovered that unfaithful military spouses were picking up the virus during deployment and bringing it back to their families.  The government acted by developing an inexpensive program where they stressed abstinence and marital fidelity.  The results?  HIV/AIDS rates fell from 15% in 1991 to 4% in 2004.

         Maybe other countries, like America, can learn a lesson from Uganda.  Instead of promoting the inadequate fix of safe sex and the idea of abstinence as being hysterical optimism, why not emphasize truths?  Like the fact that abstinence is the only birth control that prevents physical and emotional risks of sex.  That people who accept and practice abstinence are not uncommon.  And finally, as shown by the residents of Uganda, that people do respond to moral-based teachings and teachings concerning abstinence can prove effective.  

Article Tools