by Rose O'Malley, Program Assistant
and Julia Kaye, Health Policy Associate
National Women's Law Center
A recent article in the New Yorker by Margaret Talbot examines the divide in America between conservative evangelical communities that condemn premarital sex while accepting teen pregnancy, and more socially liberal couples that accept teen sex, but would be dismayed by their teen daughters' pregnancies; and the effects that these beliefs are having on modern teenagers.
A lot of what is discussed, we already know: religious belief and abstinence don't always go together; evangelical teens who sign virginity pledges do not necessarily keep them; abstinence-only education does not lead to lower pregnancy rates--but it does lead to serious misinformation about birth control; young marriages spurred by accidental pregnancy aren't known for their longevity; and teens everywhere, regardless of race, creed or background, are asking questions about sex.
But not necessarily getting answers, at least not honest ones. The article addresses the fact that many "red state" teens believe the abstinence movement's claim that condoms don't protect against HIV or other sexually transmitted diseases, but the scope of teen confusion about sexual issues is actually much broader. A recent study by L.L. Wynn, Angel M. Foster and James Trussell showed that an alarming number of people, (not necessarily only those who've received abstinence-only education) who e-mailed questions to the Emergency Contraception (EC) website "Not-2-Late.com" were ignorant of some of the most basic aspects of sex, such as what activities could and could not lead to pregnancy, when one could get pregnant and how hormonal birth control, including EC, worked. The study identified some of the ways that U.S. policy and health practices are inculcating teens with misinformation around sex; some subtle (i.e., the fact that Catholic hospitals that adhere to the Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services are required to administer pregnancy tests to rape victims before offering them EC, thus inaccurately suggesting that EC could interfere with an established pregnancy) and not-so-subtle (i.e., abstinence-only education--need we say more?). When the U.S. government is subsidizing programs that teach incomplete or misleading information about sex and condoning unnecessary and inappropriate public health practices, it's unsurprising that teens are left confused about their bodies, sex, and how best to protect themselves.
The Talbot article also addresses the new "middle-class morality." According to Mark Regnerus, author of "Forbidden Fruit: Sex and Religion in the Lives of American Teenagers," there's a growing population of upper- and middle-class teenagers who are accepting of premarital sex, as well as contraception and abortion, but too concerned about their futures to pursue it without serious forethought and preparation. He writes: "They perceive a bright future for themselves, one with college, advanced degrees, a career, and a family. Simply put, too much seems at stake. Sexual intercourse is not worth the risks."
In other words, these socially liberal, economically privileged teen girls are being told--perhaps unlike their more conservative sisters--that their futures hold more for them than motherhood and marriage. The consequences of unprotected sex could seriously derail their plans, as opposed to those young women who assume that teen pregnancy is merely accelerating the inevitable.
But it's troubling that, as Regnerus says, these teens think that unprotected sex is, "...not just unwise anymore; it's wrong." Where does this put the upper- or middle-class girl who gets pregnant? After all, no form of birth control is 100 percent effective, and sometimes...stuff happens. Abortion is an important option for women facing unintended pregnancies, but often still carries a stigma (though Regnerus does point out that these communities tend to be accepting of abortion). And while the young woman who chooses to become a teen mother may not be condemned by her peers for engaging in premarital sex per se, she may be looked down on for getting pregnant, for being stupid, for "ruining her future." Is this judgment really any better?
Obviously sexuality is complicated, being a teenager is complicated, and the combination of the two can seem downright confounding. But if anything, Talbot's article brings home the fact that there are more than two sides to this issue; it is not just red versus blue, religious versus secular, good virgins versus promiscuous bad girls. While the abstinence movement should realize that a sense of possibility may guide teens' sexual decisions more than misinformation or fear, all sides need to see that judgment of either sexual activity or the consequences, as opposed to tolerance of different life choices, is ultimately harmful to young women.
*(Though the essay references "red" sex and "blue" sex, we aren't talking about Democrats and Republicans here. The main distinction is between social conservatives and social liberals; proponents of abstinence-only education and those who support comprehensive sex ed. Party affiliation is, if anything, an afterthought.)
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Red Sex, Blue Sex, Bad Sex, Good Sex*.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/10179
Great article - love the Seussian title.
When I got EC at Planned Parenthood, they gave me a pregnancy test before giving me the pills - this is standard practice at a health care facility and is not intended to misinform or mislead anybody.
While EC will not harm an existing pregnancy, there is no point in administering the pills (and spending $75 and/or clinic resources) if a person is already pregnant. I believe it's also a way to legally cover their ass if a person receives EC while pregnant - they can't be held responsible if something goes wrong during the pregnancy (i.e. claims that "the EC made me miscarry.")
Good article though - read it a few days ago. And good critique.
That's funny. There was a team at my DC pub quiz called "Red Sex, Blue Sex" this week. Maybe someone from NWLC was playing?
I get what you're saying and find these tensions really interesting. But I grew up in a household like that (the liberal wealthy 'sex is fine, just be careful: you have all this potential etc.' angle, not the 'premarital sex is a sin' one). And at least from my experience we shouldn't conflate the message that 'unprotected sex is not just unwise but wrong' with the message that 'getting pregnant as a teenager is wrong.' My family would have been FAR more upset if I'd gotten pregnant while blithely having unprotected sex or screwing up my birth control methods than if, at say 17, I'd gotten pregnant while faithfully taking my pill and using condoms. I understand that some families might simply not believe their sons and daughters regarding the impeccability of their birth control use, but mine would have. In other words, it is quite possible to a) believe that taking an easily-avoidable risk with your health and your adolescent freedom to pursue your academic goals without the responsibilities of other big choices (and, potentially, parenting) is irresponsible and self-destructive ("wrong"), while b) not moralizing or being awful when it comes to a sometimes-birth-control-fails pregnancy.
"she may be looked down on for getting pregnant, for being stupid, for "ruining her future." Is this judgment really any better?"
No it is not. I won't say I hear all feminist blogs saying this but all too often I hear "she's ruing her life" "she's throwing away her future" on feminist sites anytime a teen pregnancy story comes up. How can those comments be seen as anything but anti-woman?Instead of saying your future depends on your determination and will these types of comments reinforces the idea that your success in life relies on when and if you decide to have a baby. Shaming a girl into getting an abortion is just as bad as shaming her into going through with her pregnancy.
okay, so a corallary question-how does one avoid sending this message when talking to a daughter about safer sex and protection? I'm thinking more before pregnancy, because the way to avoid sending the message that pregnancy is a moral failure after pregnancy has already happened seems simple(at least to me)-support her, no matter what. but, beforehand, how does a parent impress the importance of protection during sex on a daughter or son without making pregnancy seem like a moral failure? How do you separate the message of "this will make your life harder, and be something difficult to deal with" from saying that your moral worth depends on when you have a baby? Maybe I've been too raised with this morality, but I think, veryannoyed, that you can't really deny that it is more difficult as a teen parent for both yourself and your child. nor is having an abortion as a teen an easy thing. How can a parent or trusted adult figure teach that, while maintaining that either of those might be the best option for this particular girl? It seems like a fine line to walk, I'd love to know if anyone here has done that and what they said.
As an upper-middle-class white teenager still in high school, I agree with most of the statements outlined in the article about girls in my situation. While girls in my high school are not looked down on for having sex, especially while in a relationship, pregnancy is still taboo. Getting pregnant while at such a young age is considered "trashy" and not something that "good girls" do. So while is is heartening to see friends' attitudes change concerning sex, it is still very depressing to hear people refer to girls as "white trash" for getting pregnant. And there is definitely still the attitude of "you're making a big mistake." Most of the girls I know are very careful when it comes to vaginal sex, and a lot more are having oral sex because it is "safer," and no chance of pregnancy.
In my own personal experience, when my friend and her boyfriend had oral sex at age sixteen the attitude was basically "congratulations!" When a few months later they had sex for the first time, we were still happy for her, but we became more cautious, and always mentioned safety.
The thing is, oral sex has become so normalized that it is no longer a big deal. I've gotten to the point where I just assume that all the seniors and every else in a relationship has done it. While I realize this might not be the most healthy attitude, I decided it's less judgmental than the alternative, which is to constantly be surprised at the acts my friends are engaging in.
Overall, I believe that while the stigmatization of pregnancy can be harmful for some girls, it actually works really well in encouraging educated girls to have safe sex, because they want to avoid getting pregnant.