In class this week we've been discussing the film Sex and the Holy City. Many of you were angry about the ABC policy and abstinence-only training. Here is a video of abstinence educator Pam Stenzel presenting a talk to a public school in Michigan. She emphasizes the "A" and the "B" -- abstaining and being monogamous. Do you think her talk is effective?
8 comments:
Pam Stenzel was extremly moving in this talk. She really made you think about the LONG term consequences of sex that is not to just one partner. I think that it puts a new spin on the ABC policy, actually for myself being able to see the idea behind it better and more clearly than through just watching the fil Sex and the Hold City. I believe this speech teaches many young women, and men, that sex is only okay if it is practiced in a monagamist way, which in many cases means until marriage and before practicing abstience. However, the C in ABC still plays a key role and I believe Pam should have addressed it, for if abstinse if not an option, then the C Condoms should be the answer, not just the pill like she did make it a point.
Her speech only focuses chastising women and fostering a misogynist attitude in the men towards pregnant women.
She doesn't address how to have safe sex. She doesn't address LGBTQ members. She doesn't address why single parents are in poverty and how we can fix this system that hurts women, men, and children. Instead, she uses fear-mongering tactics to promote abstinence and monogamous sex.
I think her speech could be effective, especially in an abstinence-only area where teens have little or no access to accurate sex education.
I think the only way her talk would be effective is by scaring people into being more cautious about sex. Overall, I don't think her talk was very helpful. Abstinence is an unrealistic approach. And most people are going to have sex with more than one person during their lifetime.
All she talks about is how horrible the consequences of sex are. She comes off very negative and intimidating. She also blames our country's poverty on singe-parent households and teen mothers, I would like to see her proof. You can try and scare kids into not having sex, but chances are, they're still going to have sex. So, you might as well teach them how to do it safely.
This is rediculous. Perhaps she had some bad experiences with sexual partners but I refuse to believe if you've had sex with more than one person you "WILL PAY." I almost had to laugh. She never spoke of the positive side of condoms, she only put down the pill. If you're not smart enough to read the label on ALL birth control that says "this pill does not protect you against std's....etc...." then it's you're fault you slept with someone who is not your trustworthy long term boyfriend. I believe in monogomy, but everything else seemed a little extreme.
I think that her talk was just a little extreme. When she begins talking to the students she is trying to put fear into them, by saying YOU WILL PAY if you have sex with more than one person. All she talks about is the negative outcome of having sex and she tries her best to put down birth control the best way she can. Her speech would have been more effective is she talked more about protection from STD’s because in the real world more and more teens are having sex rather then practicing the ABC policy.
I like although she was a good public speaker most kids in the audience probably left like she was preaching to them. Considering her exact words were"No one who has ever had more than one partner and not paid for it" this is absolutly not true and I think that it really throws off her entire agruement for the rest of the speech. She impliments fear of sex in the kids in the audience instead of really educating them about safe sex.
I think its good that there are educators that go around to schools and talk about abstinence and monogamy. What i dont agree with is our government funded ABC plan that spends 66% of the money on this training and only 33% of the money on condoms, based on a right wing conservative view point. The C is what keeps people alive in these other countries, not our religious beliefs about what the sanctity of marriage is. The world should be a certain way but it isnt, and thats why teaching people about condoms is a much more realistic approach then teaching abstinence.
I think Pam Stenzel is a very good public speaker.I don't think she reached the whole audience but she probably did reach maybe a few of the young students. I do not agree that if you have sex with more then one partner then you will pay. All it takes is that one partner that you did sleep with in the first place. She is right about the pill not protecting you against std's but she really did not go into detail about condoms. With most young students you can talk to them until you turn blue in the face; no matter what you say they will not listen to you. I just hope that the parents are doing their job at home to talk to their kids about sex, pregnancies and diseases.
Post a Comment