A Boulder mother says she's concerned that a Boulder Valley School District abstinence presenter is sending girls the wrong message, equating sexual activity with being dirty.
Laura Binegar said she became concerned after her daughter detailed a recent presentation on abstinence given in her health education class at Southern Hills Middle School. Her daughter described an activity where students spit food into water glasses, then were asked if they would rather drink from a clean glass or a dirty one.
"I trusted the school," Binegar said. "They're telling teenage girls that they're dirty and bad. It sounds like it was just awful. I don't understand what the message was."
The presenter, Brad Seng, said the student appears to have misconstrued the talk.
"One of the first things I say is that it's not that sex is bad or is a dirty activity to be engaging in," he said. "That's not it at all. It's about encouraging young people to make healthy lifestyle decisions. Our method is grounded in truth and non-judgmental."
He said he provides information on sexually transmitted diseases from the Centers for Disease Control, as well as information on "the emotional strife when children choose to be sexually active."
The water glass activity, he said, is a way to engage students. He said students drink the water while eating a snack and mixing some of their snack in the water. Then they exchange glasses. He asks them to drink the water, prompting students to say, "No, it looks nasty."
"It's a way to show them that, if they decide to be sexually active outside of a long-term committed relationship, they're putting themselves at risk," he said.
Seng is the abstinence educator for Boulder's Real Choices Pregnancy Care Center. The center describes itself as "a Christian, nonprofit, non-political organization that helps clients find constructive alternatives to abortion."
Seng said he's spoken to classes at Southern Hills for five years. There haven't been any other complaints about his presentations, according to the school principal and the school district.
Along with presenting in Boulder Valley schools, Seng also has talked at the University of Colorado, Colorado State University and private, religious schools.
Altogether, there are 33 approved organizations on the district's health education presenter list. Teachers choose presenters to augment the curriculum, which takes a comprehensive approach to sex education that includes information about abstinence and contraception. Presenters do not charge a fee.
Binegar said inviting a speaker from a Christian organization violates the separation of church and state.
"It's very clear that he's pushing Christ," she said.
But Seng said he understands the boundaries and doesn't bring religion into his talks at public schools.
Binegar took her concerns to Southern Hills Principal Terry Gillach, saying she was told that Seng is a "great guy" and the school would continue to use him as a speaker.
Gillach said he only saw a small part of the presentation but, based on the teacher's description, it was "completely innocuous."
"He never talks about religion," Gillach said. "He talks about abstinence with kids. It's one method of the many other options students have."
The mother of an eighth-grader at Lyons Middle/Senior High School also recently complained about a similar abstinence presentation. The mother said that presenters affiliated with a faith-based nonprofit, Longmont's Life Choices, are teaching a slanted view of reproductive health in her son's health class
---------------
In before someone says parents should have to teach their own kids sex ed (when they themselves might be lacking medical facts) as opposed to 'sex philosophy' (which might be equally skewed) and "But he didn't mention Christ, so it isn't a religious message!
(Ack! Edited for HTML fail. Sorry!)
Seng is the abstinence educator for Boulder's Real Choices Pregnancy Care Center. The center describes itself as "a Christian, nonprofit, non-political organization that helps clients find constructive alternatives to abortion."
Non-political my ass, out of all ways to choose a sex educator, they had to choose one from an anti-abortion place? Then again, I don't expect much considering it's that stupid-ass abstinence "education".
Don't you know if you have sex with more than one person you're a dirty whore? I really cannot see what other message they were attempting to send, besides "if you have sex with more than one person, you are dirty and gross".
Nevermind that abstinence-only sexual education DOES NOT WORK. Evidence shows that abstinence-only programs are linked to higher rates of teen pregnancy and STD infection, since it fails to teach teens how to make SMART decisions.
It seems they put most of the shame on girls and not so much on the boys who are usually the ones who want it so bad.
Sex is a natural, normal part of life and while we should always teach women to respect themselves and their bodies, they should never be made to feel ashamed of sex or themselves - yes, teach them to wait for the right partners, teach them about safe sex and self-respect but likening a woman has sex to a glass of dirty water.
I can't - gross, just gross and so very, very wrong.
There are so many layers and ramifications to slut-shaming, there needs to be a bigger effort to end it.
This fucking school needs to get sued.
Oh, man! Ohhhh, man! If that were my kid, I'd be storming the principal's office and give them a dose of righteous fury. There is no misunderstanding that message.
I don't even have kids and I'm furious!
ugh, so gross -_-
Edited at 2012-04-23 06:09 pm (UTC)
O.o
Man, that takes some serious balls to say, "We're not being judgemental!" and at the same time, telling children, that if they have sex with more than one person, they become tainted.
You say that to cover your own ass. But you are having students DIRTY the water and then likening sexually active teens to the water that has been spat in. How are they NOT supposed to see themselves as dirty? They aren't "misconstruing" the talk, you are backpedaling like whoa.
I also want to know where you get this "emotional strife" info from, since your STD info comes from the CDC.
And I don't think that religiously-affiliated organizations should be contracted to provide sexual education in schools, paid or not.
Edited at 2012-04-23 06:46 pm (UTC)
Exactly. It's uproarious.
/13+ years of Catholic sex ed
/Stop laughing
Edited at 2012-04-23 10:26 pm (UTC)
Gillach said he only saw a small part of the presentation but, based on the teacher's description, it was 'completely innocuous.'"
.... of all the sloppy, haphazard "we go for brunch on weekends" crap...
"This chewed chewing gum, that's YOU if you have sex before you get married. That's how your husband will see you."
"See this pristine white rose? Now watch me dip it in black ink. See that? See how gross that is? That's you if you have sex outside of marriage."
Of course, that was in church. In school I got normal sex ed.
Time to find one who doesn't, then.
I mean, it adds even more bullshit---have sex, and you deserve for your husband to think you're crap? Gee, I wonder what effect that has on victims of domestic abuse?
(Actually I read some novel wherein this got presented to a group of Southern Baptist girls---they were told a story of a fiance who pressured his girlfriend for sex leading up to the wedding, and she gave in on the last night, and then at church he said he couldn't marry someone who
trusted him enough to take him at his wordhad sex before marriage, and left her at the altar in front of everyone, and the girls who heard it all agreed that it was so lucky that she found out he was an asshole instead of marrying him---imagine all the trouble she saved herself.)No, dumbass. The only time "putting oneself at risk" is ever a factor is when it concerned UNPROTECTED SEX.
But you dont teach those parts, do you.
Edited at 2012-04-23 08:17 pm (UTC)
Man, this is making my ninth-grade sex ed class, watching the football coach put a condom on a banana, look enlightened and progressive. I guess it was. We did a compare and contrast of various contraceptives, they flat-out listed alternatives to PIV intercourse we might want to consider, and they did an exercise about gendered insults and what was wrong with them.
This was 20 years ago, BTW.
I cannot imagine the effect on me if I had only had the latter.
In hindsight, it was kind of misinformed about various aspects of homosexuality, and downright transphobic at points, and several decades out of date about contraceptive technology, but it presented sex as human and normal, and thankfully that got me past a mess from high school and church. (Ugh, I can still remember the day I learned that "adultery" didn't mean "rape." Not. Happy.)