Yesterday's Sex Fair, sponsored by Tufts VOX, was a welcome event that served to liven up the campus center and confront students with an array of options for a safer and more fulfilling sexual life. It is no secret that last year's fair stirred up considerable controversy and media coverage; nevertheless, event organizers persevered and held the event again. For this, they deserve considerable applause: now more than ever it seems that sex education across the country is being transformed into a study of ideology, rather than science.
Yesterday, in a powerful coincidence, President Bush released his budget for the financial year 2006. This budget included some $205.5 million for abstinence-only sex education, which is an increase of nearly 25 percent over the amount included in the budget for the previous fiscal year. This increase in funding for sex (or rather, sex-free) education comes as part of a budget where various social programs were cut across the board in the name of deficit reduction.
While it is commendable that the President is looking to reduce the national debt burden for future generations, it is questionable that he would propose a spending increase in a set of programs with such a poor track record. Bush spoke of the need for "results" with social programs. Abstinence-only programs do seem to achieve one result: sexually ignorant and ill-prepared children.
A study by Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA) found that some 80 percent of the most popular curricula used by more than two-thirds of federally funded abstinence-only programs contained information that was false, misleading, or distorted. Among the bits of "education" being paid for by taxpayer dollars were statements teaching that half of all gay male teenagers in the United States are HIV positive and that touching a person's genitals "can result in pregnancy." The results? An ongoing study by the Texas Department of Health found that after students at 24 Texas schools participated in abstinence-only education, they were actually more likely to engage in sexual intercourse.
Of course, it is important to emphasize in any sort of sexual education that the safest form of sex is no sex. It is perfectly appropriate for publicly-funded sex-ed to emphasize this fundamental point. However, if teens do choose to engage in sexual activity (and many do), they should be given access to information on how to protect themselves. The increased use of contraceptives, especially barriers, would help decrease the incidence of STIs and unwanted pregnancies. That last point is one the GOP should not take lightly, as the abortion rate has increased from Clinton-era levels under President Bush's watch.
The notion that access to accurate information about safe sex will encourage those unprepared to do the deed is akin to proposing that seatbelts encourage people to drive recklessly: it's nonsense. The Sex Fair did well by bringing accurate and expansive information to a campus that, especially for younger students, may be sexually ill-informed by Bush's agenda. As for funding for inaccurate abstinence-only education, that's something this country should abstain from.
