This semester, I saw the Lab Theatre production of “Spring’s Awakening.” The play was the most sexually graphic play I have ever seen, and more than once I averted my eyes in embarrassment and shock, but the premise of the play was intriguing and relevant to our ultra-conservative state.
The play centered around a group of kids coming of age in early 20th century Germany. Growing up in a society in which the sensitive subject of sex was not broached by anyone in authority, these children were left to fend for themselves when they began to experience foreign thoughts and feelings.
Western society’s attitudes toward sex have changed significantly since the 19th century. Being gay is no longer a punishable crime, and having a child outside of wedlock no longer brands women as irreparable harlots, but like 19th century Germany, there is still a tendency among conservatives to shy away from the difficult issue of sex education.
During the Bush administration, there was a strong push for abstinence-only education in public schools, and I think abstinence education is important and good.
Abstinence is an ideal alternative for developing young minds and bodies, and I wish all middle and high school students were involved with extracurricular activities and turned on by learning that they didn’t need to be turned on by the opposite sex. But this just isn’t reality.
According to a press release by the Centers for Disease Control in 2011, 46 percent of teenagers have had sex.
Obviously, almost half of America’s teenagers are not reaping the benefits of an abstinence-only sex education, and it is wrong for public school systems to withhold education that could protect that half of America’s students from disease and pregnancy.
In our conservative state and much of the south, abstinence-only education is used in many school systems. I hope public policy will eventually reflect the need we have to properly give our youth a more comprehensive sex education.
Janna Gentry is an English education senior.
The Oklahoma Daily is pleased to provide you the opportunity to share your thoughts about this article. We encourage lively debate on the issues of the day, but we ask you refrain from using profanity or other offensive speech, engaging in personal attacks or name-calling, posting advertising, or straying from the topic at hand. To comment, you must be a registered user of OUDaily.com. Thanks for taking the time to offer your thoughts.
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Log in | Register
sniferriple 5 months, 4 weeks ago
I don't see the correlation between extracurricular activities, schoolwork, and high school sexual activity. Kids don't have sex because they're not playing sports or on the academic team. They don't avoid physical relationships because they're too busy studying. Maybe that isn't exactly what you mean, but it seems to be a fairly common assumption that students are sexually active because they lack sufficient distraction, and your statement seems in line with that assumption.
I agree that abstinence, while a practical alternative for some, is not a realistic way to teach students about sex. But I disagree with the implication that extracurricular activities and learning could prevent sexual activity among teenagers.
baconbits 5 months, 3 weeks ago
Be careful when implying that all people prefer the opposite sex