/OT

The very idea that schools should be in the business of reinforcing ignorance instead of improving knowledge is a violation of basic American ideals. Abstinence-only is part of a larger right wing strategy of defining the mission of public education as propagandistic—who cares if you teach them things that are enriching or even fucking correct? The schools are there to preach conservative, white, Christian cultural superiority to a captive audience, in this view. After all, it’s not just abstinence-only that’s part of the agenda. It’s also teaching creationism in schools, and teaching a propagandistic view of history that whitewashes issues like slavery (and that the South seceded over it) and the Indian genocide.

Here we come to one of the great abyssal gulfs between the rightie way of looking at things and the leftie way of looking at things. According to the leftie way of looking at things, the purpose of education, sexual or otherwise, is to impart knowledge. But according to the rightie way of looking at things, the purpose of an education, sexual or otherwise, is to hand down the lore of the tribe. And accuracy qua accuracy is of no importance in terms of tribal lore: tribal lore can be accurate but it does not have to be. All tribal lore has to do to rate validity as tribal lore is be suitably characteristic of the group that generates it.

Hence the tense desperation with which righties and lefties address one another on questions like these. The leftie rhetorical plea tends to be: “But if you don’t teach them any facts, how do you expect them to know what to do when presented with a problem?” To which the countervailing rightie rhetorical rejoinder usually is: “But if you don’t teach them any appropriate attitudes (’if you don’t teach them what’s right’), how do you expect them to act in a way that befits their ancestry or upbringing? How do you expect them to know what’s suitable to their people?”

Each of these two questions, unfortunately, is unanswerable in terms of the other. The real problem, I am convinced, is that, notwithstanding the propaganda to the contrary, lefties prize individual life whereas righties more or less don’t. In terms of individual life, it’s important to be able to dodge an unplanned pregnancy, an STD, an ill-judged youthful marriage. But groups only survive as groups if they retain those characteristics which distinguish them from other groups. Consequently, in terms of the tribe, the group, the superorganism, it may be expedient that the young marry early and that many children be produced, and it may not be too great a tragedy if a few experimenters contract diseases. All these things may be desireable in order to mold a greater group cohesiveness, if for no other reason.

Which is turn is about producing another generation of idiots who get boners at the idea of more imperialistic war-mongering, well up until they’re a few years in and realize it’s stupid, you know, after it’s too late to do anything short of damage control.

Exactly. The favored tribal lore is deployed so as to produce a favored tribal type. Which is why the Spartans brought their boys up in barracks but the Athenians didn’t let their sons out of school until they were 20.

It’s just sad. But, I’m glad I’ve got the knowledge base to be able to do such teaching..

It may be the repressed Midwesterner in me but, yeah. Of course, since I was raised by repressed Midwesterners, that may have something to do with it.

On the other hand, leaving an open box of condoms that magically replenishes itself in a drawer of the most public of the family’s bathrooms is probably something I could handle. That, and leaving interesting books (not just “Our Bodies, Our Selves,” but stuff like “The Good Vibrations Guide to Sex”) on easy to reach shelves.

I know this could never be part of the political debate, but for the record, I don’t think there’s a damn thing wrong, intrinsically, with teenagers having consensual sex. I started having sex at 15 with my boyfriend, with whom I stayed together nearly 5 years and then split amicably as we grew up and moved in different directions. It was a wonderful, healthy experience, in large part because I didn’t believe that it was wrong or dirty and I was on the pill. No disastrous consequences, either physical, emotional, or criminal. We’re both well-adjusted adults in strong relationships now, over a decade later. Ditto for friends of mine whose relationships didn’t last as long, as long as they didn’t feel guilty or dirty about the sex.

What can be wrong with teens having sex is when they’re emotionally unprepared or ambivalent about it; when there’s force involved; and when they don’t have the tools or maturity to protect themselves from disease or unwanted pregnancy. Schools can’t do much about maturity, but they can do a lot of about the physical consequences. And the only bad consequences I saw were with girls who thought they were REALLY, REALLY SLUTTY for doing it. Not their fault at all, but it led to serious issues for them. (Including the tendency to think that they were, like, totally going to marry the guy they first had sex with during their sophomore year. When that didn’t work out, it tended to be crushing, because that had been what made them feel like they weren’t *actually* slutty.)

What can be wrong with teens having sex is when they’re emotionally unprepared or ambivalent about it; when there’s force involved; and when they don’t have the tools or maturity to protect themselves from disease or unwanted pregnancy. Schools can’t do much about maturity, but they can do a lot of about the physical consequences. And the only bad consequences I saw were with girls who thought they were REALLY, REALLY SLUTTY for doing it. Not their fault at all, but it led to serious issues for them. (Including the tendency to think that they were, like, totally going to marry the guy they first had sex with during their sophomore year. When that didn’t work out, it tended to be crushing, because that had been what made them feel like they weren’t *actually* slutty.)