Alan Keyes attacked him for it back in 2004, but Barack Obama stressed again at a Planned Parenthood event that "it's the right thing" to provide "age-appropriate sex education, science-based sex education in the schools." So what does age-appropriate sex ed mean for kindergartners?
When Obama's campaign was asked by ABC News to explain what kind of
sex education Obama considers "age appropriate" for kindergarteners,
the Obama campaign pointed to an Oct. 6, 2004 story from the Daily
Herald in which Obama had "moved to clarify" in his Senate campaign
that he "does not support teaching explicit sex education to children
in kindergarten. . . The legislation in question was a state Senate
measure last year that aimed to update Illinois' sex education
standards with 'medically accurate' information . . . 'Nobody's
suggesting that kindergartners are going to be getting information
about sex in the way that we think about it,' Obama said. 'If they ask
a teacher 'where do babies come from,' that providing information that
the fact is that it's not a stork is probably not an unhealthy thing.
Although again, that's going to be determined on a case by case basis
by local communities and local school boards.'"
I'd say at least there was an opt-out provision for parents, but I can't imagine at the age of 5 being told that the stork is not the real bearer of babies, or anyone at school even broaching the subject of sex! I realize Obama isn't necessarily advocating for full sex ed to little children, but even bringing up the topic seems a little uncalled for--and in what terms do you explain it to kids?
I went to the Gap website and could only find this bikini, which I don't find too inappropriate. But what Dust my Broom describes is quite disturbing!
This reminds me of the little girls I've seen back home in California wearing spaghetti-strap shirts with their bra straps showing. We're talking second-graders who have no need for bras yet. When will parents get the picture that little girls should not be dressing like this?
I recently was in Warsaw, Poland for the World Congress of
Families IV. The Howard Center for
Family, Religion, and Society
sponsored five college students as Young Leaders Fellows, which was an
incredible opportunity to meet other students who are passionate about
strengthening the family. I was in the
middle of paper-writing and final exams, but the experience was completely worth
it. The conference was spread over three
jam-packed days at Warsaw’s infamous Palace of Culture and Science and it had
over 3,000 attendees!
The conference was organized into various themes, including
“The Natural Family and the
Future of Nations” and “Faith and Family: The Vital Bond.” The speakers repeated an alarming
statistic—the replacement rate in Europe, in Poland, in the U.S., and many
other places is negative! That
means that more people are dying than are being born. The speeches encouraged having large families, bemoaned the high
rate of divorce, particularly in the U.S., and emphasized good parenting. While I myself do not desire a large family
(I come from a two-kid house, and I just can’t imagine having so many children,
but I suppose I’ll cross that bridge when I come to it), I did see value in
what they had to say. Immodesty
certainly has led to a lot of the crises discussed at the conference. I can’t possibly expound on all of these
issues succinctly, and I think many of the posts on this blog have dealt with
these themes before, such as immodest sexual behavior’s role in broken homes
and the need for real role models for kids. I had already heard most of what was said at the conference, but the
best part was being in an auditorium with 3,000 other people who agreed!
My favorite speaker was the incredibly poised Christine
Vollmer, who is the President of the Alliance for the Family. She spoke about being a modern woman, how women want to be women but at
the same time, wanting to have it at
all. It is certainly a struggle I
recognize, as I am about to enter the real world and will eventually be
confronted with the challenge of balancing family and career.
It was quite inspiring seeing so many youth there. The Palace was teeming with Polish university students. I talked to one who said that he is chastised by his classmates for being a pro-life, pro-marriage, pro-family activist. Sorta parallels my experience at Harvard, which is alarming, considering that Poland is a predominantly Catholic—and devoutly so—country. I had heard that Polish people were still faithful members of the Catholic Church, and wasn’t convinced until I saw about 30 people receiving communion outside of a church on Sunday night because it was too full inside. Anyway, if students aren’t concerned about low birth rates and the decline of marriage, it’s possible that in one generation all this good work might be forgotten. I’m not sure how shocking the statistics have to be for young people to start paying attention. What will make people start to care about this issue?
I recently celebrated the completion of my 100-page thesis with my spring break, the last of my undergraduate career. While my peers were partying all night in Mexico, the Dominican Republic, and Bermuda, I escaped with my roommate to the charm of the Low Countries. My trip to the Netherlands and Belgium was relaxing but busy—I visited Amsterdam, Brussels, and Bruges, in addition to a few other cities. I did many clichéd touristy things. I saw works by Van Gogh, Van Eyck, and Vermeer (two of my favorite paintings are his: "Girl with a Pearl Earring" and "The Milkmaid"). I rode a bike along a canal through the Belgian countryside, passing cows, sheep, and windmills. I ate plenty of pancakes, waffles, Belgian chocolates, and Flemish fries.
Of course, if I were going to do all the things tourists do, I couldn’t visit Amsterdam without going to the Red Light District. The Netherlands is famous for its laissez-faire policies. There are “coffee shops” throughout the country where you can get a joint with your cup of coffee. Amsterdam’s Red Light District is the most notorious symbol of freedom-loving Holland. To locals, the Red Light District is just another industry. My guidebook calls the women "entrepreneurs," and they belong to a union and are loosely regulated by the government.
Despite warnings from other people, I visited the Red Light District at night, when the neon lights were shining and all the drug-sellers and sleazy men were out. I’m not sure what I expected, but part of me was disappointed. I had imagined everyone to be dressed as in Moulin Rouge, but was surprised to find that most were attractive young women wearing little more than bikinis. My roommate and I walked through trying to be as non-touristy as possible, and although we did not dare take any pictures, we sure didn’t blend in well with the scene.
The most amusing part of the night was when we walked past a sex show, only to have a bouncer yell at us, “Come on, girls, this will be educational!” I couldn’t help but laugh. This is the very same rhetoric used by the organizers of the Female Sexuality seminar and the Female Orgasms workshop at Harvard. (The syllabus of FemSex includes visits to strip clubs and porn viewing nights.) I wonder if they’d organize a trip to Amsterdam’s Red Light District for "educational purposes"if they could?
I left the Red Light District with a sense of sadness, and I have to say I felt sorry for the women there. It’s the most egregious display of the commercialization of sex, and no matter how much money these women are making, it can't make up for their lost dignity. If I could go into every shop and give them all the money in the world to stop, I would. I wish I had another way to convince them to give up that lifestyle.
Oh, I also saw a shirt in Belgium with the line “Vows are spoken to be broken.” How sad!
Needless to say, I prefer flower gardens and museums to the other "traditional" Amsterdam attractions.
A few weeks ago, I received several emails about a special event taking place at Harvard. I immediately thought that I should post about it on here, but because I was in the middle of my senior thesis--which I finally turned in on Friday!--I was too absorbed in the world of writing and not sleeping much. But I figured it's a good idea for you to see one of the emails yourselves:
Hooking Up: Hot Hints for a Great Sex Life
With Amber Madison, author and sex-columnist
Thursday, March 1 at 7pm
Ticknor Lounge (Boylston Hall)
Want to know more about...how to give and receive pleasure? how to communicate your desires? how to make sure that you and your partner get what you want and need from one another? Do you have questions about sex or sexuality that you've never had answered?
You won't want to miss this!
Join us for a scintillating and sexy talk with AMBER MADISON, author of the recently released book "HOOKING UP: AN ALL OUT GUIDE TO SEX AND SEXUALITY" before her appearance on The Today Show the following day.
Amber will share helpful advice and crucial information about having a gratifying sexual life now, or later! You'll be able to submit questions anonymously to Amber, and she will answer them during the session.
Come enjoy a comfortable environment for:
-- sexxxxxy suggestions
-- chocolate covered strawberries, HOT chocolate, and other snacks
-- prizes (including Amber's book) and other great "stuff"
ALL students of every gender identity and sexual orientation are welcome! Mark your calendar!
When I saw this email, I rolled my eyes and thought, oh great, another one of these sex talks put on by some campus groups. WRONG! I only had to read further to see the official sponsors of the event:
The Center for Wellness and Health Communication, the Bureau of Study Counsel, the Harvard College Women's Center, the Office of Sexual Assault Prevention and Response, and the Freshman Dean's Office
Those of you who do not attend Harvard don't know much about these groups, but in case it isn't clear, these aren't student groups. They're official college organizations. I couldn't believe the Freshman Dean's Office felt this was an appropriate event to sponsor. And the Bureau of Study Counsel? How could this tie in to good studying habits? I wrote a letter to the heads of each of these groups, along with the Dean of Harvard College, expressing my confusion as to why these groups proactively sought to host a sex talk by Amber Madison (whose book, by the way, is disturbing in many respects).
This is part of the reply I and others who wrote letters received:
Contrary to the assumptions stated in your letters, it is very much within the
mission of each of our offices to provide students with accurate information about
sexual health, agency, and well-being, and to encourage them to use that
information to make healthy, self-directed choices for themselves. Access to
information about sexual health, decision-making, and well-being is an integral
part of adulthood, and our role as educators is to enable all students who wish to
learn about their own development to have access to accurate, meaningful information...
Given your concerns, I hope that it is reassuring to know that Amber is going to emphasize the importance of respect and mutual decision making in sexuality, including setting self-determined boundaries effectively, communicating effectively and safely, and paying attention to one's partner's needs and wishes. These are all indispensable features of a healthy adult sexual life, whether they are employed now or not until much later. We are not advocating sexual activity for anyone who does not feel ready. We are advocating empowered knowledge and personal agency on this issue, which is completely in line with each of our office's goals....
Finally, as you know, being part of an educational community means that not
every program and event is of interest to (or in line with the moral values of)
every student from every background. It is nonetheless our responsibility as
educators who are knowledgeable about student development to address needs
when they are evident, and to make information and dialogue opportunities
available to those who wish to have it, entrusting them to decide for themselves—
not based on others' moral beliefs-- what is best for them.
Thanks again for sharing your concerns. We appreciate student feedback and hope these clarifications are helpful.
I have to catch a plane early in the morning, so I must keep my comments brief, and I'd love for you all to give me your analysis of the reply. One thing I must say that bothered me--she repeatedly brings up not imposing our morality on other people (I and others had suggested the College host an event on abstinence or at least an event where students with all different perspectives could speak), but I never said one word about morality. She assumed that I was trying to impose my moral views on others--but what was the College doing?
Your thoughts and comments would be much appreciated!
In the midst of the beginning of the second year of FemSex, an awesome new group has been founded at Harvard. True Love Revolution is "dedicated to the promotion of premarital sexual abstinence."
While I haven't been involved in the planning of this group (a girl can't do everything!), I am excited that they are filling a niche that is so needed on this campus. This past week, they plastered the campus with posters and sent all the freshman girls personally addressed Valentines with mini chocolates attached. My favorite activity was handing out flyers with the Top 10 Reasons to Wait Until Marriage outside of a mandatory freshman seminar on sex and rape. I'll keep you updated on what else they're up to this year!
TLR got its inspiration from the Anscombe Society, which was co-founded by our very own Cassy DeBenedetto! Make sure to check out the Anscombe conference happening soon!
A friend of mine sent me this wonderful article by Dawn Eden, a former groupie who had scores of casual sex encounters, then realized the harm she was doing to herself and became chaste. It is a fascinating read, and tremendously encouraging.
Here are a few of my favorite quotes from the article:
But in all that casual sex, there was one moment I learnt to dread more than any other. I dreaded it not out of fear that the sex would be bad, but out of fear that it would be good. If the sex was good, then, even if I knew in my heart that the relationship wouldn’t work, I would still feel as though the act had bonded me with my sex partner in a deeper way than we had been bonded before. It’s in the nature of sex to awaken deep emotions within us, emotions that are unwelcome when one is trying to keep it light.
Women are built for bonding. We are vessels and we seek to be filled. For that reason, however much we try and convince ourselves that it isn’t so, sex will always leave us feeling empty unless we are certain that we are loved, that the act is part of a bigger picture that we are loved for our whole selves not just our bodies.
The misguided, hedonistic philosophy which urges young women into this kind of behaviour harms both men and women; but it is particularly damaging to women, as it pressures them to subvert their deepest emotional desires. The champions of the sexual revolution are cynical. They know in their tin hearts that casual sex doesn’t make women happy. That’s why they feel the need continually to promote it.
The author is very insightful--and she has a great blog called the Dawn Patrol! Her book, The Thrill of the Chaste came out this past December. I can't remember if she has been mentioned on this blog before, but she certainly deserves a shout-out!
Here's some more interesting stuff related to Dawn Eden:
I've been busying myself with my Linguistics thesis, which is on the revitalization of the Hawaiian language. In November I got to go to Hawai‘i to do some research (on Harvard’s dime, not bad, eh?). I am pretty much done with my leadership positions in extracurriculars, so I have a bit more time on my hands. Now that I don’t have to go to meeting after meeting, I’m not quite sure what to do with myself! Well, I know I should be working on my thesis, but instead, I’ve resorted to reading every blog and newspaper I can get my hands on to avoid doing real work. Having a thesis to write is like permanently having a paper due the next day, because I know that I never truly have free time—I could always be working on my thesis!
Fortunately, my enthusiasm for my thesis topic was renewed when I went to Hilo on the Big Island of Hawai‘i to conduct interviews and visit schools. I was getting kinda tired of my topic because over here in New England the Hawaiian language has about zero significance. But going back there and seeing the passion that people have for redeveloping the lifestyle of the past was so inspiring! The old Hawaiian culture is quite traditional, which is refreshing considering the current unfortunate problems Native Hawaiians have with meth, alcoholism, and teenage pregnancy. The thing that I appreciate most about Hawaiian-language revival is the emphasis placed on family learning. The people who started the movement hoped to bring the language back into the domain of the home, and so parents have been taking classes at night while their children attend immersion schools. They are very involved in their children’s schooling. I was so impressed that I wrote an article about the responsibility of the family in this movement.
And actually, my mother was so inspired by the immersion schools’ focus on family involvement that she and my father have decided to take all the money they would normally spend on Christmas presents for our family and donate it to the revitalization movement. Although that means less presents under the Christmas tree (or perhaps I should say palm tree, as we will be spending Christmas in Hawai‘i!) for me, I am very proud of my mother for throwing materialism out the window and giving money to a good cause.
What are some other good causes you all think could use donations this holiday season?
I know we have some younger readers of this blog, so only read this if you're over 18. If you are under 18, maybe now's a good time to catch up on Terrence Howard.
For everyone else, you'll recall that last year I wrote about a female orgasm seminar at Harvard. Apparently Brown is in on the "fun" as well.
I'm disappointed that feminism means to these people only that men need to learn how to please women sexually. I'm sorry, but to me there are much more important issues at hand, like ensuring basic rights for women around the world who don't get to vote, can't go out in public alone, and are forced to be silent. I also think the seminar was all-too-casual.
I wonder if the presenter from Planned Parenthood discussed STDs, safe sex, commitment, responsibility, etc. It seems that the workshop was focused only on one aspect of sex--pleasure. I dare say a more radical feminist approach would look at how men can respect, support, and love women.
In the newest edition of The Harvard Salient, I have an article about the Harvard College Women's Center, which just opened this fall. I have talked a little before on this blog about my opposition to the Women's Center, and now I'm reprinting here a shortened version. I wrote an assessment of the Women's Center thus far. While I'm not entirely disappointed by what I've seen thus far, I am still quite wary of the Center.
Anyway, I would love to hear your thoughts and opinions about women's centers in general. Did/do you have one at your college? If so, what was/is it like? I am interested in hearing about other centers. Here's part of the mission statement from Yale's own Women's Center:
"We work to break down societal gender structures and roles and to ensure every woman’s right to reproductive freedom, a voice, freedom of sexuality, a full range of health and social services, and economic, political and educational equality.
"The Yale Women’s Center seeks to enable all students on campus to find their feminist voices and to begin to identify them as an intrinsic part of them."
And here is my review of Harvard's:
"A Woman's Review of the Women's Center"
After much controversy over the past year, the Harvard College Women’s Center (HCWC) opened this fall. Most students felt that the greater need was for a student center where everyone would be able to interact, yet the College did not solicit the input of the average Harvard student in creating plans for a new Women’s Center. A name like “Women’s Center” immediately alienates half the Harvard population; only some curious men, perhaps lured by the promise of free printing, copying, and food, will venture into a land that has officially and exclusively been claimed in the name of women. Finally, the administration has offered only a hazy glimpse into what types of programming the Women’s Center would even offer—further puzzling those who attempt to discover exactly what void this new campus addition will fill.
Now that we have—despite our best efforts—a Women’s Center, we must assess what the HCWC has and has not accomplished since its grand opening a little more than a month ago. The physical space the Women’s Center occupies is surprisingly bright and comfortable for a Canaday basement. The central location certainly contributes to its appeal, which is in stark contrast to the new Student Organization Center at Hilles, located in the far-off Quad. The sofas are comfortable and the convenient access to computers, a printer, and a copy machine extends a warm welcome to the Harvard campus. The interns and staff are always cheerful and willing to help confused patrons.
A few things about the Center are immediately unsettling, however. The prominent display of condoms and dental dams is shocking, but not because of their presence—I’ve come to expect Harvard’s habit of throwing contraceptives at us, confident that we will behave responsibly, winking slyly at their implicit endorsement of sex. Rather, the condom bowl seated next to office supplies insinuates that sex is a casual, non-private matter no less mundane than using a stapler. Anyone looking for free protection is thus prevented from being discreet—contravening the conventional wisdom of placing most condom boxes in basement laundry rooms, out of the reach of prying eyes looking for the latest gossip.
While waiting to buy a planner from RUS, which has predictably set up camp in the Center, I was able to peruse the hundreds of titles displayed on the bookshelves. I came across such classics as Our Bodies, Ourselves and Naomi Wolf’s Promiscuities. I was dismayed to find not one book promoting an alternative view and a nobler notion of womanhood. I have a few books to recommend: Wendy Shalit’s A Return to Modesty, Phyllis Schlafly’s Feminist Fantasies, The Eagle Forum’s Equal Pay for Unequal Work, and especially Kate O’Beirne’s Women Who Make the World Worse: and How Their Radical Feminist Assault is Ruining our Schools, Families, Military, and Sports. I make these recommendations not in jest, but rather to suggest that if the Women’s Center genuinely wants to represent the points of view of all women at Harvard, then they need to extend their literature beyond Women, Gender, and Sexuality coursepacks and three books produced by the Kensington Ladies’ Erotica Society.
The Women’s Center has promised both to create original programming and to assist women-focused student groups with their own events. So far, the only non-student group program that I know was held there was a meditation workshop hosted by someone who provides the same services at the Bureau of Study Counsel—thus the program was not that original. If there have been other programs, then the Women’s Center has not adequately advertised them and should focus on reaching out more to the campus at large. I have seen “Co-sponsored by the Harvard College Women’s Center” slapped onto posters for an event featuring Katz of the Athens Boys Choir, a transgendered man who specializes in spoken word. Another event, hosted by Students for Choice and co-sponsored by the Women’s Center, naturally, featured Katha Pollitt, feminist and “prochoice badass.” The Women’s Center is also commendably co-sponsoring “Stopping for Directions: A Conversation about Career, Family and Success,” an event that may actually be of help to college-aged women.
According to Shirley Lemus Hufstedler ’07, an intern at the Women’s Center who attended a recent meeting of social conservatives within the Harvard Republican Club, the Women’s Center neither created nor funded these activities, but instead co-sponsored them because of their focus on gender. Hufstedler eloquently defended the HCWC to a group of skeptics, explaining that the Center is still getting organized and is doing more co-sponsorships than original programming. But how does adding the Women’s Center stamp of approval to a group’s event help it? Why would an organization want a co-sponsorship if the Center is not going to provide assistance in the form of resources (and not just space to hold an event)? The Women’s Center should instead be soliciting input from students on what they want to see, not the other way around.
Hufstedler and another intern are responsible for student-group outreach. Efforts to reach out to student organizations are praiseworthy, but perhaps not enough to break the apparent and natural bond between RUS and the HCWC. A meeting between HCWC interns and RUS early into the semester set a sour tone for the direction of the Women’s Center. A vague email advertisement for the meeting—who was hosting the meeting? RUS or the Women’s Center?—hinted that these two will be all-too-close bedfellows. (“What do you want to achieve from the Women’s Center? Are you feeling enraged about offensively critical op-eds? Confused? Under attack?”) The overwhelming presence of RUS and pro-feminist materials in the Center is more than a little disconcerting.
I realize that the HCWC is still in the stages of infancy and is working on developing programs and getting more input from student groups, but I do not think my expectations are unrealistic. Instead of, or perhaps in addition to, holding meditation seminars and hosting Female Sexuality meetings, the Women’s Center ought to implement programs that have life applications for women, such as cooking, child-rearing, finances, and work-family balance.
It looks like the Women’s Center is here to stay, at least for now. As someone who is ideologically opposed to the Center, I am an unlikely source of advice. No one asked me for it, but if the Center is not going anywhere for a while, then women wary of the feminist overtones often present in college Women’s Centers across the country deserve the opportunity to benefit from the resources provided as well. The only problem is that these resources need to be helpful to the average female Harvard undergraduate (and in the long run, when the College decides the establishment of a student center is a worthy pursuit, to Harvard men too). I fear that due to a spirit of collegiate feminism gone awry this will not happen. I challenge the Women’s Center to prove me wrong.
