A similar situation plays out in high schools across the country: Student:"Can I drink?" Teacher: "No." Student: "Can I use drugs?" Teacher: "No." Student: "Can I have sex?" Teacher: "Well you really shouldn't, but just in case, here is a condom and all the information you could possibly want to know." Our society needs to re-think the mixed message about sex that we are sending our students. The problem of belittling the meaning of sex can be seen nationwide and here at the University.
Recently, The Vagina Monologues came to the University. Now, there is nothing in and of itself wrong with the Vagina Monologues, but there was a serious flaw in how the show was promoted around Grounds. It is a tried and true method -- sex sells. This time, however, the line was crossed, especially for a University located in the historically conservative south.
The first part of the advertising campaign pronounced "Vaginas are coming." Sexual innuendo aside, this message chalked and posted all over Grounds did absolutely nothing to inform the population of the University about the event. It was as though an over-zealous promoter decided to have a good deal of fun by writing 'Vagina' in big letters. One would have hoped that sort of immaturity was left in middle school.
The second part of the ad campaign contained a modicum of information coupled with a large dose of unnecessary jokes. Flyers ranging from "What does a vagina smell like?" to "Lesbian vaginas!" covered a good deal of the Grounds. If only Thomas Jefferson could have been there for such a proud moment.
Once again there is nothing inherently wrong with the monologues themselves, and even making a joke or two can be appreciated. But, if you place yourself in the shoes of a visiting prospective student or an alumnus considering donating money, you realize how this adolescent sense of humor can be undesirable. In addition to alienating potential students and donors, such advertising only serves to help promote sexual behavior that raises teen pregnancy rates and causes a good deal of problems.
What ever happened to the notion that sex was supposed to be a sacred act of love between a married man and woman? With that notion far gone out the window, things that once would be called obscene are being played on broadcast TV and, like it or not, most people are exposed to what basically amounts to pornography on a daily basis. When you live in a world where such practice is commonplace, it is hard to stand up to a hormone-driven teenager and tell them not to give in to their urges. One could say our society has "progressed" to a point of enlightened sexual thought, but that is only if you can measure "progress" in abortions, sexually transmitted diseases and teen pregnancies.
Recently, President Bush has been accused of "putting a U-turn on the sexual revolution" by giving funding to abstinence-only programs. Opponents of such programs admit that sex is "clearly a dangerous activity, both physically and psychologically," but then go on to classify it in an entirely different category than the other common dangerous activities teens have to make decisions about. This idea of engaging in sexual activity because 'everyone is doing it anyway' is simply the wrong way to approach the situation.
Why is it that abstinence-only programs are in place for drugs and alcohol, yet are suddenly out of the question for teenage sexual relations? All three can cause death; all three are hazardous to one's emotional and physical health. There are no "joint rolling programs" to teach students the "safest" way to get high or "drinking seminars" designed for teenagers to learn about how they really shouldn't drink, but in case they want to give into their urges, here is how to do so.
A dangerous faucet of this line of thought is brought to light when proponents of such 'promiscuous education' plans say that teenagers need to know what to do if their sexuality overpowers them. Why would we want to equip our young people to feel comfortable to give into their every urge to do a dangerous thing?
There is a strong difference between sex with a significant other of two years and a drunken hook-up after a frat party, but sexual education that does not promote abstinence is designed to belittle the meaning behind sex and turn it into a safe, easy, evening of recreational activity. This only serves to perpetuate the myth that this culture of randomly hooking up is a safe way to live.If a couple of two years makes a rational decision to have sex, then I sincerely doubt that the content of their sex education is going to affect their choice of contraception.
America is heading down a dark and dangerous path with the idea that sex is only a game and all that matters is instant gratification. Sex is an act of love, and papering grounds with crude jokes, being taught the latest and greatest methods to "protect" yourself for randomly hooking up after a frat party or watching "Joe Millionaire" get some on television only serves to belittle that ideal.
(Daniel Bagley is a Cavalier Daily viewpoint writer.)
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | YesterdayThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | January 9, 2025Every student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
