What Does "Abstinence" Mean To You?
by Lorraine Kenny, American Civil Liberties Union
December 1, 2008 - 8:00am (Print)
Pop quiz. No looking at your notes. In which organization's educational materials did the following sentence appear?
"Almost everyone can agree that abstinence is the only way to 100 percent protect against unintended pregnancy and STDs."
- The Abstinence Clearinghouse
- The National Abstinence Education Association
- The Heritage Foundation
- None of the above
If you answered "none of the above," go to the head of the class. The sentence appeared in advocacy materials that we here at the ACLU developed for the purpose of ending government funding of ineffective, ideologically driven abstinence-only-until-marriage programming.
The above exercise should give
you pause; it stopped us in our tracks. What is the likelihood we're
going to win this battle to get real information about sexual health
into teenagers' hands if we continue to mimic our opponents' language?
I'd like to say that we got
to this epiphany on our own, but we didn't. It took the team of cognitive
linguists at Real
Reason to help
us see that those of us who advocate for better sex education may unwittingly
be undermining our mission by the very language we use.
To help us become better sex ed advocates, Real Reason took a close look at how Americans understand sex and sexuality; the images of sex and sexuality that proponents of abstinence-only programming use to push their agenda; and the language used by advocates for comprehensive approaches that provide accurate information and skills to help teens live healthy lives now and in the future.
Real Reason considered several
key concepts operating in the debate over sexuality education, including
sexuality, education, government, and development.
For brevity's sake, let's look at the most dominant in this context:
sexuality. After combing through mountains of material on sexuality
education- from fact sheets and speeches made by advocates on both
sides of the debate to legal briefs, blogs, television transcripts,
and special linguistic databases - Real Reason identified two prominent
cultural models of sexuality influencing the debate:
1) sexuality as an undesirable, contaminating substance, and
2)
sexuality as EXTERNAL FORCE, specifically, an OPPONENT.
In the first, sexuality is something you suddenly and unfortunately "come into contact" with, not something that has always been a natural part of who you are. It's seen through the lenses of pure and impure, good and bad: think "dirty" jokes, "filthy" language, "polluted" young minds, and even the virgin/whore dichotomy.
As for the second pairing,
think of all of those stereotypes of lust-driven adolescents, the victims
of their raging hormones. In this frame, sexuality is a threat to our
self-control that needs to be reined in; there's always the risk of
being "overcome" by desire or "giving in" to temptation.
These models not only operate
in our opponents' materials, but in ours as well. Sometimes we evoke
them in a defensive manner. Other times we adopt them uncritically -
for example, when we use the term "abstinence" to show that we too
think teens should wait to have sex. Because of its connection to the
EXTERNAL FORCE model of sexuality, we do ourselves and the young people
we care about no favors by using the term abstinence.
While we believe that it's
important to talk about how, why and when to decide not
to have sex, using the term "abstinence" concedes too much. It invokes
a belief system that casts sex as fundamentally negative (along with
the other harmful things from which one commonly abstains, like drugs,
excessive alcohol, and overeating). It implies that refraining from
sex is about danger, not giving in, and teeth-gritting, painful self-denial.
Instead of saying, "Abstinence is a healthy choice for young people," a more productive way of getting our message across might be to use the phrase "waiting to have sex is..." Instead of saying, "Abstaining from sex is the only 100 percent effective method," we could say, "Deciding not to have sex is..." By rephrasing these sentences, we not only refuse to frame the debate in our opponents' terms, we also begin to recognize teenagers as thoughtful and capable decision makers, laying the groundwork for them to make healthy choices.
Turning our messaging around may be challenging. Still, the tide is with us: parents support comprehensive sex education and research shows that it's effective. So stay tuned. In the coming months, we will continue working with Real Reason to more fully develop our vision of sexuality education and to bring forward an alternate cultural model that we hope will help secure the world we want -- not one where sex is a dirty substance or an aggressive outside force, but one in which we accept sex and sexuality as part of life, something that makes us human, and allows us to experience deep connections with other people. Our ultimate goal is to link this vision with policies that support and enhance human sexuality and human relationships.
Abstinence only works until the next time.
Where can we get a copy of this report?
Thanks for your query. We are in the process of finalizing this work, so there is no report available at this time. You might check back on the ACLU's Web site in the beginning of next year. www.aclu.org/reproductiverights.
To me, abstinence means not doing something at all. I don't consider abstinence from sexuality to be the only 100% safe method of avoiding pregnancy, because I consider acts like mutual masturbation and phone/cyber sex to count as sex, and you can't get STIs (including embryos) from that if you're careful not to mix bodily fluids.
I suppose you could say "abstinence from oral, vaginal or anal intercourse and needle use and contact with blood," but that's a mouthful and not what I think of you just say "abstinence."
It bothers me that people don't talk more about creative options that involve having sex with a partner without mixing body fluids.
I think there is a fundamental disconnect between the way we use the word abstinence. The abstinence-only-until-marriage movement in faith communities uses abstinence as a religious practice. The reproductive health community uses it in a public health context which loses all the religious connotation.
While I agree that both the religious right and the secular left have used similar negative language in their materials when discussing sex, "Abstinence is a healthy choice" seems like a great thing to be saying! It suggests it is a choice a teen makes, and defines it as healthy - not restrictive or permenant. It is most likely based on core values held deeply by that teenager and supported by a community. Why is that bad?
The deeper issue seems to be the use of "sex" without distinguishing between sexuality and mature sexual behaviors. Using "sex" as a catch-all ensnares the discussion in the rhetorical trap of letting behaviors define sexuality. Abstinence gets reduced to a defensive behavior centered only on intercourse, instead of a practice of virtue in relationships where certain aspects of one's sexuality are explored as are other behaviors at various stages.
It may be true that religious and public health uses of the word are different, but the word still implies, as the article has explained, that sex is something inherently bad that must be resisted and opposed. (But I do agree that we should be more specific in what we mean by "sex".)
When I think of someone making the choice not to have sex for their own reasons, I don't think "abstinence". I think "celibacy" or sometimes not a word at all, but a basic concept. "Abstinence" to me means something that you never do because it's always bad. It means teens were lied to and threatened and told "that sex is the most awful, dirty thing on the face of the earth and you should save it for someone you love" (to quote Butch Hancock). Abstinence implies suppression and ignorance.
An article I read a while ago made a good point: Sexual Intelligence: Who Can Discuss Sex Without Discussing Damage? It's amazing how many people can't seem to talk about sex without jumping to horror stories, and it inhibits actual, healthy discussions about sex. Nowhere is this more common than in abstinence-only curricula.
