The Trouble With Sex in America

                                                                                                  

     Sex is alive and well in America.  You never have far to look far to find it.  Our society is saturated with it.  Movies, magazines, billboards, t.v. shows, advertising, even Disney pop stars reek of it.  And yet, in spite of the proliferation of sexual imagery and activity, America still attempts to maintain antiquated, puritanical sexual ideals.

     Unfortunately, as so often happens, our behavior doesn't quite manage to live up to the ideals we espouse.  And so, while our children's innocence is stolen from them earlier and earlier, our teens make promises that they can never be expected to keep while being fed a steady diet of sexual imagery and innuendo and our adults gorge themselves on every variation of the act they can imagine, we all busy ourselves trying to maintain the facade of purity.

    We talk the talk, but don't walk the walk.  We send mixed messages to our young people, perpetuate the idea of sex as some sort of guilty pleasure and let our own confused and twisted ideas about sex influence important government policies that end up being misguided, unethical and downright harmful.

     How is it that in this highly developed, highly educated society we can be so screwed up when it comes to sex?  It has to do with our history. Our sexual inhibitions can be traced right back to the Puritans from whom many of us descended.  The refusal to acknowledge our sexual natures leads to repression and, as any good Freudian can tell you, that leads to trouble.

     Repressing what comes naturally leads us to look for other ways to express and fulfill our urges.  Quite often, we redirect these energies into other activities that aren't always healthy or functional.  It can lead to plenty of dysfunction and the impact extends beyond each of us as individuals.  Our actions effect others and the impact of this ripple effect is most damaging when we let our crazy ideas about sex influence public policy decisions.

     Interestingly, many of our most vocal proponents of conservative sexual views seem to have difficulty living up to their own standards.  Think of the numerous sex scandals involving conservative politicians and Christian fundamentalists.  It makes you wonder, doesn't it, why they are so hell-bent on controlling our sex lives?  Are they really projecting their own failure to control sexual impulses onto us?  Is their position on so much public policy dealing with issues of sexuality really a thinly veiled attempt to restrain their own behavior?  Hmmmm...it's worth considering.

     Meanwhile consider this; important legislation is often under attack by those politicians and lobbyists who hold these puritanical and outdated views.  And the impact of their attacks is being felt throughout our country and the world as a whole.  For example, medical researchers have developed a wonderful new vaccine that, in human studies, proved to be 100% effective in preventing cervical cancer caused by HPV.

    This is a major breakthrough.  Cervical cancer could be very nearly eliminated if everyone had access to this new vaccine.  Think of all of the women who would be spared the pain and suffering and death associated with this disease.  Who wouldn't want their daughter or sister or future mom to have this protection?

     Well, Christian conservatives wouldn't.  Their logic?  Since HPV is transmitted through sexual contact, they see the threat of being infected with HPV and eventually developing cervical cancer as a wonderful deterrent to pre-marital sex.  Why, if we remove this awesome deterrent they argue, our young people will engage in sex with reckless abandon!

     This is serious folks. According to specialists in the field of human development, teenagers typically fancy themselves to rather invincible.  It's natural for them to feel this way.  As a result, teens are very susceptible to getting into all kinds of things that have very negative potential consequences no matter how well you've brought them up or how dangerous the consequences.  Things like cigarettes, drugs and yes, even sex seem very exciting and teenagers don't really recognize or take seriously the potential dangers.  So do we really believe that worries of HPV and cervical cancer are on their minds when they are in the back seat with their hormones surging? 

     Not only is the threat of a disease twenty years in the future not a deterrent but, even if it were, would we want to sentence thousands of women to death just to help us to keep our daughters virgins?  How cruel and unethical is it to withhold medical advances that could prevent countless deaths and huge amounts of suffering just because we think it might encourage teens (most of whom are already having sex) to have sex?

     How about abstinence-only sex education?  Our current conservative administration favors sex ed programs that teach abstinence and only abstinence.  If you mention condoms, birth control pills or anything else, no funding for you.  Consequently we are spending millions of tax dollars each year on programs that tell kids all will be well if they just don't have sex.  They are given no instruction on how to protect themselves if they do slip up and give in to temptation.  How well do you think this is working?

     Well, we have the same rate of teen sex as do other developed nations, but our kids are also more likely to engage in risky sex acts (oral and anal sex), our girls are 4-5 times more likely to become pregnant in their teens and have a baby or an abortion, and we have 70 times the rate of gonorrhea as most other developed countries.  So, abstinence only programs do not prevent teens from having sex, they just make it more likely that they will get infected or pregnant when they do.  Wonderful...millions of dollars down the drain and even more unwanted babies being born and abortions being performed. 

     How about AIDS?  In countries where AIDS is leaving scores of children orphans, we have conservatives Christian organizations telling people that sex is a sin and that contraception and barrier methods like condoms are not to be used because they go against God's wishes. Instead of a package of condoms, these folks are being handed Bibles.  Are these the kinds of "Faith-Based Initiatives" that our tax dollars should be wasted on? 

    This brings us to stem-cell research.  Okay, so it's not about sex, per se.  But it seems to fit in here somehow.  Our conservative president has, in his infinite wisdom (that's sarcasm, by the way), decided that the American Government shouldn't fund stem cell research.  Based on his own religious views and those of many others conservatives, he has decided for all of us that stem cell research is immoral.  Never mind that many of our citizens do not share his religious views and that we are supposed to have a clear separation of church and state here in America; he and his pals have decided that the thousands of diseases that might be cured through the manipulation of stem cells are not worth the risk of the wrath of God for destroying a 3-day-old embryo.

     Keep mind that a 3-day-old embryo consists of about 150 cells that have not yet begun to differentiate themselves.  There is no heart, no brain, no neurons to feel pain.  In fact, the fly you just swatted without giving it a second thought, has about 100,000 cells in his squashed little brain alone.   A brain-dead human being has billions of cells, a heart, a brain and many other parts.  But we will harvest the organs from brain-dead human without any guilt to help others who are sick and dying.  But a blastocyst, all 150 undifferentiated cells, trumps the sick and the dying.  Somehow, this potential human being is more valuable to us than a living human being who is suffering and dying, a person we know and love, someone's mother, or child.  The stem cells that could be harvested from that blastocyst could save my mother's life or your 5 year old daughter's, but never mind that - there might be a soul in that embryo and, for some reason, that soul is more worthy than my mother's soul or your daughter's soul.  Is this rational?

     What are we thinking?  Or have we simply suspended rational thought and given in to irrational fears of sexual depravity and God's wrath?  Our conservative politicians and conservative Christians promote themselves as the keepers of morality, those who give voice to and try to protect that which is good and right.  Why is it then, that their positions on so many issues lead to guilt, punishment, suffering and death for so many?  Moral reasoning and compassion lead us to other positions and conclusions on these issues. 

     What guidance should we seek when we are dealing with issues of this magnitude; issues that have such an enormous impact on so many?  Should we look to conservative rhetoric and dogma, or should we rely on human compassion and moral reasoning?  You be the judge.

Comments

[asrai]

I still haven't figured out why sex has become the target in the whole debate. What is so God-awful about this physical pleasure that we have to make sure NO ONE IS DOING IT outside a monogomous MARRIED relationship. Why the hell is that the standard? Especially when our culture is so oversexual, and especially towards young girls. See: parents for ethical marketing and packaging girlhood.
As John Steward said a few weeks back "Treating teenagers like they don't have functioning genitals isn't working out so well." But, putting them on display for men to ogle is perfectly rational (and I'm not citing Miley Cryus's pictures here. I'm citing Disney princesses, and Bratz dolls and well, the general culture when it looks at the female form).
Great blog. Looking forward to reading more.

[Lori]

Asrai,

Thanks for the great synopsis...that's it in a nutshell. We've got a weird dichotomy going in this country, don't we? It's about time we grew up and started recognizing and dealing with reality instead of trying so hard to create some hyper-moral fantasy land.

[Shilpan]

Lori -

I have two teenage daughters. Reading this is frightening for a father like me who believes in stricter code of conduct when it comes to virginity before marriage. Thanks for sharing the dark side of the issue rather well.

Shilpan

[Lori]

Shilpan,

You're welcome. You know, I try to instill a "wait until you're married" philosophy in my children as well. I believe that, ideally, we would all wait until marriage, be faithful to our spouses etc. But I also know that as human beings who are imperfect, we aren't always able to live up to those ideals. I think that we, and our children, should be knowledgeable and prepared just in case.

[Mike Haubrich, FCD]

Well, Christian conservatives wouldn't. Their logic? Since HPV is transmitted through sexual contact, they see the threat of being infected with HPV and eventually developing cervical cancer as a wonderful deterrent to pre-marital sex. Why, if we remove this awesome deterrent they argue, our young people will engage in sex with reckless abandon!

I was really stunned by this objection when I first heard it. I just can't imagine anyone at that age nearly ready to have sex and then changing her mind because of the possibly of cervical cancer.

[Lori]

Mike,

That's exactly my point. This kind of logic is stunning...illogical, in fact. This is the same logic behind abstinence-only sex ed. It's assumed that if we tell young people that they can protect themselves against pregnancy or STD's that they will then choose to have sex when they were hardly thinking about it before we let the cat out of the bag. It's nonsense, but people do think this way and unfortunately many of those people have clout when it comes to legislation.