Moral supporters

I really connected with Susan Auerbach’s article Parents as Moral Supporters and Advocates (2007). While I was reading the section on moral supporters I could not help but think about my dad. Throughout my entire high school career my dad was by my side telling me about college. A lot like the father from a portrait of Jose on page 13, my dad would tell me I was smart. He would motivate me by using himself and his job as the motivator: “Tia, you don’t want to end up like me working third shift, breaking your back just to make ends meet. That’s why you need to get good grades and go to college. You want a better life for yourself. You don’t want to end up like me”. Many of our conversations about school and work still go like this today. He is the dad that is the supporter behind the scenes—he was very hands off when it came to the paperwork surrounding the college application process. He really didn’t know anything about college outside of knowing I needed to go to better myself. My dad never went to my school for college information or went to tours at colleges with me, and he most certainly had no idea what a FAFSA was. Most of the leg work was done by my mother who had been to college herself. My dad was primarily a moral and emotional supporter. I don’t think this was a bad thing. He gave me what I needed; he gave me an example of what life not to live, and that was motivation enough. He also let me make my own decisions, but made sure I knew what he thought about school. He supported and pushed for college, but he wasn’t involved in the selection process or paperwork. Although it would have been easier talking about school with him if he knew what was involved in the application process, my sisters and mother who had been to college were able to help me and were real advocators. They had knowledge about what I had to do and were able to help me figure everything out. I can see how one type of support is better or more valuable than the other, but both types are important.  

Abstinence: harmful or helpful?

   When did sex education become all about abstinence? I was not taught about abstinence in school, but rather shown pictures of grotesque STDs and videos of women giving birth. This was all the sex education I needed—those images have scarred me for life. I was taught the facts about having unprotected sex, being promiscuous, and the aftermath associated with both cases for men and women alike. Abstinence was not a subject that was talked much about because my health teachers knew that it did no good. They knew that teaching healthy sexuality and protection would benefit us the most. Unlike abstinence only until marriage (AOUM) programs, sex education classes are directed in a way that is more informational, not fear based. While I was reading Michelle Fine’s and Sara McClelland’s article Sexuality Education and Desire: Still Missing after all these Years I was shocked by the way AOUM is taught. The students are primarily told that if you have sex before marriage you will die—you will have sex and die. This is an outrageous claim. I also think the threat of impending doom makes them curious. Moreover, aren’t things more interesting when they are dangerous? Aren’t we more intrigued by things we are told not to do? I definitely think this is the case for the most part. Another thing about the AOUM program is that the students are lied to. They are lied to about the claim of death as well as non-marital sex always leading to disease and social problems. Like the article, I believe that teaching students about healthy adult sexuality is key. Lying to the students about death, disease, and other problems is cruel and wrong. Furthermore, AOUM programs are not proven to prevent sexual relations more than regular sex education classes. There is no use in lying to students about sex, it is much better to teach them about healthy sexuality and protection—teaching fear and lies is immoral.