Ev'ry sperm is saaaacred...
Jan. 16th, 2003 12:47 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
electriclandThis has been preying on my mind since ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
elissa_carey posted it...
It's this kind of thinking that leads one to call Bush and his pals "anti-choice". Guess what? I'd love for abortion to be obsolete. I'd love it. I don't know any reasonable person who wouldn't. But relying on abstinence and adoption as the alternatives ain't gonna cut it.
Ah well, you know what the Monty Python boys say:
Granted, not totally apropos this thought since it refers to official Catholic opposition to birth control. But I adore that scene, and any excuse to quote Monty Python...
elissa_carey posted it..."My administration has championed compassionate alternatives to abortion, such as helping women in crisis through maternity group homes, encouraging adoption, promoting abstinence education, and passing laws requiring parental notification and waiting periods for minors," Bush said. - Bush declares National Sanctity of Human Life DayYeah, y'know what? I'd have a whole lot more respect for National Sanctity of Human Life day if I could find the word "contraception" in that sentence up there. (Or wait, this is W we're talking about -- make that "birth control". Either way.)
It's this kind of thinking that leads one to call Bush and his pals "anti-choice". Guess what? I'd love for abortion to be obsolete. I'd love it. I don't know any reasonable person who wouldn't. But relying on abstinence and adoption as the alternatives ain't gonna cut it.
Ah well, you know what the Monty Python boys say:
Every sperm is sacred.and also:
Every sperm is great.
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.
MRS. BLACKITT: Hmm. Well, why do they have so many children?
MR. BLACKITT: Because... every time they have sexual intercourse, they have to have a baby.
MRS. BLACKITT: But it's the same with us, Harry.
MR. BLACKITT: What do you mean?
MRS. BLACKITT: Well, I mean, we've got two children, and we've had sexual intercourse twice.
Granted, not totally apropos this thought since it refers to official Catholic opposition to birth control. But I adore that scene, and any excuse to quote Monty Python...
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-01-16 11:06 am (UTC)The hypocrisy of most ultra-conservatives is that while they are prepared to brown-beat, terrify and physically and psychologically assault women to "save" the lives of unborn children, they are more than willing to abandon those children, once born, to inadequate, criminally underfunded social services, health care and public schools, while pumping money in jails, police services and, in the United States, executions.
Bush v.2.0, who is trumpeting his "National Sanctity of Human Life Day" put 152 people to death as Governor of Texas. Where was Mr. Bush's compassion for those human lives?
It would appear that to Mr. Bush, human life is only sacred when he says it is. Ironic since, as a good Born-Again Christian, Mr. Bush is surely familiar with the Sermon on the Mount, from the Gospel According to Matthew, Chapter Five, verse 7, "Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy."
Or perhaps Mr. Bush needs to ask his spiritual advisor, Billy Graham, about Matthew 5, verses 38-45:
38 ¶ Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
39 but I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
...
43 ¶ Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy.
44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
45 that ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven.
If human life is sacred, it is sacred everywhere.
True, the official Catholic stance on pre-marital sex and birth control are out-of-step with contemporary sexual mores. While I vacilate on whether or not this is a bad thing, generally I believe that certain aspects of Catholic teachings on sexuality (i.e. as a form of intimacy reserved for a committed monogamous relationship between two adults) are healthy and, perhaps, a necessary anodyne to the commercialization of sex and sexuality in our culture.
Where this particular brand of conservatism fails, however, is that most teachings on abstinence do not actually address sex, sexuality or sexcual feelings. Simply saying "don't do it" does not adequately prepare anyone for dealing with sexual issues in today's society. I agree with you that teachings on abstinence must be combined with a thorough course on birth control and sexually transmitted diseases. Ignorance protects no one.
Do I need a Soapbox?
Date: 2003-01-16 02:24 pm (UTC)Like you, Kath, I am disturbed by the right-wing hypocrisy on this issue. Like you, Robin, the whole issue gets my dander up. I FIRMLY believe in the value of contraception - erm, birth control. In my mind, much of the social justice work done by/in the name of the Catholic church is severely undermined by their refusal to promote -- in fact, by their negative portrayal of -- birth control. Furthermore, I do agree that the church has important messages about relationships and the role that sex can play in a committed relationship. But they don't have it all perfect yet, and the desire to be so dogmatic about it -- "you must do this" -- troubles me. On CBC Radio's Ideas (http://radio.cbc.ca/programs/ideas/) last week, they were quoting Simone Weil. I really liked her take on dogma, which is basically that dogma should be questionned, looked at intellectually, and then, IF you reach a point at which it transcends intellect, accepted as such. It makes good sense to me.
It struck me as particularly compelling to learn two things on the recent Life and Times bio of Pope John Paul II. When he was still in Poland, he wrote a progressive and influential text encouraging Catholics to consider women's pleasure in sex (clearly in the context of marriage, of course). Then, a few years later, he was instrumental in the drafting of Humanae Vitae, the document condemning contraception. This struck me as a troubling contradiction. I have yet to watch the second half of the documentary it's on tape. but I haven't gotten to it yet which will address the 90s and Pope John Paul's growing dogmatism, but I know that I certainly have issues on the stance he continues to take on contraception -- and on the fact that he does not seem open to frank discussion about the issue from within the church. This seems to be a dramatic step away from his earlier attempts in Poland to facilitate honest conversations on issues of sexuality, relationships and family.
Anyway, my two cents. Not nearly so well researched as Kath's response. And lacking the Monty Python punch of Robin's initial foray into the issue, but there you go!
Stepping off the soapbox!
And, on a totally unrelated, but nonetheless important issue. In going to the Ideas (http://cbc.ca/ideas/) site I learned they are doing a show on Buffy next week!!! :D Buffyworld (http://radio.cbc.ca/programs/ideas/buffy/) will air January 23 -- that's Thursday, methinks. Usually ideas is at 9PM. And there is an interview with Marti Noxon at the program link.
P.
Re: Do I need a Soapbox?
Date: 2003-01-16 03:19 pm (UTC)Yeah, sister!
I was thinking more about this as I walked off to get some comic books, food, coffee and Midol (in about that order.) If I was a parent, I would definitely want my daughter (interesting, I think about having a daughter and not a son--meditation for another time) I would definitely want her to be thoroughly educated about birth control, sexually transmitted diseases and the related consequences of sexual behaviour. I'm also not sure I'd want to be the one doing the educating...like *eek*. However, this is one of those challenges of parenting, right?
Anyway, I understand the problem this presents for Catholic educators: how do you teach these things that children and young adults need to know without appearing to condone the behaviour.
I never went to Catholic high school and left my parochial school before sex ed so I don't know how it was handled there. At UTS, we were taught about our periods and birth control and I learned to use a condom (with a banana) at a sex-ed/AIDS prevention talk held during one of our career days (it was a little odd but that was UTS for you.) I was fourteen then, and while I wasn't sexually active, I'd been menstruating for two years and I felt the "Introduction to Your Menstrual Cycle" talk helplessly out-of-date. Like, maybe they should have given us the 411 on the subject when we were 11 or 12 and the info would have done us some good. That was Grade 10, BTW. I think they covered sex ed the next year (I'd changed schools by then) at which point I know for a fact that that talk was redundant for about half the class.
Sex these days is like Pandora's box...you only have to open the lid without taking precaution's once to screw yourself for life. And there are far worse things that can happen than an unplanned pregnancy. Half of all new HIV infections in the US (and Canada, no doubt) are in youth under 25 years of age.
In part, I think there is a general reluctance in western society to accept teens as sexual beings. Given our generally fucked up sexual mores, it's not surprising that most people don't want to think about their 12 year-old daughter (or son) discovering her erogenous zones.
*sigh*
Nevertheless, ignoring it doesn't make it go away.
I dunno, Paula, I think your soap box is better than mine.
As for JPII, I am incapable of discussing His Holiness rationally: I start to stutter and spit and fume. Bah, my relationship with the Catholic Church is not currently in a good place. I think this particular Pope has done a great deal of damage to the Church by undermining the progressive course his predecessors, Pope John and Pope Paul (I can't remember the numbers) set the Church upon with Vatican II. I think he has severly wounded the Church's humanist spirit in the name of pointless adherence to dogma. In attmepting to make the Church a bulwark against the forces of modernism and rationalism, he had turned it into a relic.
And that's not even getting into the whole abuse scandal in North America.
Gah.
Re: Do I need a Soapbox?
Date: 2003-01-16 03:46 pm (UTC)*Evil grin*
P.
See, this is why I love my friends.
Date: 2003-01-16 03:49 pm (UTC)I believe it's absolutely essential that sex ed cover not just the mechanics and the scare-you-off possible health consequences, but... oh, I don't know. The emotional consequences, I guess. Eventually, everyone needs to become a functioning adult with a healthy acceptance of their own sexuality. I think very, very few parents or educators do a good job of that at present -- at least judging by my own experience. (Mind you we're doing such a great job on smoking and eating disorders and dropping out of high school, why should sex be any different?) I DON'T think having sex at 14 is healthy, but denying that teenagers (or people generally) are sexual beings -- saying a cheery "Just choose abstinence!" with no guidance on why or how -- is simply idiotic and doomed to failure.
I loathe the "sex is dirty and evil and you mustn't even think about doing it until you're married, at which point it's wonderful and depending on your religion, possibly sanctified" mentality. I hate the double standard that persists to this day -- women bear all the burden and all the consequences and all the blame for being sexual, men get a nudge-nudge wink-wink isn't-he-a-stud. Advertising and the media are saturated with sex, but somehow people are expected to be immune to it.
Argh. As you can see, my thinking on this topic is a tad incoherent. Makes my frontal lobes throb, in fact.
See, this is why I love my friends.
Date: 2003-01-16 04:07 pm (UTC)I believe it's absolutely essential that sex ed cover not just the mechanics and the scare-you-off possible health consequences, but... oh, I don't know. The emotional consequences, I guess. Eventually, everyone needs to become a functioning adult with a healthy acceptance of their own sexuality. I think very, very few parents or educators do a good job of that at present -- at least judging by my own experience. (Mind you we're doing such a great job on smoking and eating disorders and dropping out of high school, why should sex be any different?) I DON'T think having sex at 14 is healthy, but denying that teenagers (or people generally) are sexual beings -- saying a cheery "Just choose abstinence!" with no guidance on why or how -- is simply idiotic and doomed to failure.
I loathe the "sex is dirty and evil and you mustn't even think about doing it until you're married, at which point it's wonderful and depending on your religion, possibly sanctified" mentality. I hate the double standard that persists to this day -- women bear all the burden and all the consequences and all the blame for being sexual, men get a nudge-nudge wink-wink isn't-he-a-stud. Advertising and the media are saturated with sex, but somehow people are expected to be immune to it.
Argh. As you can see, my thinking on this topic is a tad incoherent. Makes my frontal lobes throb, in fact.
(LJ continues to ignore me. Probably my last 2 attempts to post this comment are sitting on a server right now waiting for a script to run... at least judging by my day, this is all too possible. Trying again.)
Re: See, this is why I love my friends.
Date: 2003-01-16 04:34 pm (UTC)Having sex at 14 is definitely unhealthy but I'd far rather we teach 12 year-olds sex ed and sexual behaviour and give one or two ideas they might not otherwise have had (an argument I find unlikely in the extreme...nobody ever said diddly-squat about sex to my friend's dachshund and from time to time he humped everything in sight--the disturbing part was that he had been neutered. Anyway, if memory serves, being 13 is much the same--except for being neutered.) than to continue to let kids fall through the cracks.
The saddest part, is that the kids most at risk are the hardest to reach. My mother taught Parenting at East Toronto for a couple of years (yes, we ribbed the hell out of her for that one.) She told us about one student in her class who was a really bright, with-it kid. They did the sex-ed, the parenting units where you had to take care of an egg or some damn thing, the whole she-bang. And the next year, she turns up at school pregnant.
She and my mom met in the hall, and my mom recalls saying something like "Oh, Charmaine... we went through birth control and everything in class." And she replied, "Well, Ms. Halloran, my man's sperm is just too powerful."
In her social group, going out and getting pregnant is just what you do--for girls its a way of snagging your guy and for guys its a way of proving your "manhood" (sure, fine, whatever.)
If 'Parenting' (or "trust me, you don't want to be a parent-ing") classes aren't getting the message across, telling kids to be abstinent will? Yeah, sure, fine, whatever</>.
As for the "sex is dirty and evil and you mustn't even think about doing it until you're married, at which point it's wonderful and depending on your religion, possibly sanctified" mentality, to be fair to those who do believe in waiting until they're married, I think the mindset is more along the lines of "this is something I want to share only with the person I'm going to spend the rest of my life with." Now whether or not that's a realistic point of view is another question.
But, to play devil's advocate on this point once more, I think the "virgin" movement in the States places responsibility and blame on both sexes equally.
In the end, what we're really lacking is any sort of education about sexuality, not in terms of preference, but about sexual behaviour and impulses and intimacy and the nature of a healthy sexual relationship. For all that she creeps me out, Sex with Sue, is an example of what I'm talking about. A lot of what she does (from the three minute stretches of her show I catch before she starts grossing me out...yeah, issues. I know.) is give advice about how to communicate to your partner about sex. Now, she's also too "if it feels good try it at least once" for my taste but then, not everyone likes vanilla...;]
Re: See, this is why I love my friends.
Date: 2003-01-16 04:36 pm (UTC)And so it proved to be.
I'd delete the comment but I'm a little scared to -- who knows what else might happen?
Re: See, this is why I love my friends.
Date: 2003-01-16 05:08 pm (UTC)Totally with you on that one. I'm not criticizing people who choose not to have sex until they're married. If that's what works for you, great. I mean, IMO there is only one good reason to have sex:
Because you have thought hard about it, and you want to.
That's it, that's all. Now granted, you can want to have sex for a bunch of really horrible reasons. But you shouldn't have sex because everyone else is, or you feel like an idiot for not having sex, or you think it'll make you cooler, or your boyfriend will love you better, or you're doing someone a favour. /preaching to the choir
On the death-penalty thing... again IMO, nobody says it better than the master:
"He deserves death."
"Deserves it! I daresay he does. Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them ? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends."
-- J. R. R. Tolkien - The Lord of the Rings
Gone and depressed myself now. Thoughts of war ever-present, etc.
One more stab at the topic
Date: 2003-01-16 05:33 pm (UTC)I think the gap that is not addressed in most sex ed (at least in my day... I have read some stories that suggest that in some places, maybe, possibly, for the lucky few, they're getting better at this) is WHY it's maybe not such a great idea to have sex early, particularly without precautions (listen to me -- "precautions" -- how very '50s). Maybe because adults are so very reluctant to talk to kids about this kind of thing, they don't address it AT ALL -- stick to the terrible things that could happen to you if you have unprotected sex, that should be safe enough. There's a cognitive gap.
Damn, still not managing to say what I want to say. Ah well. Maybe tomorrow (Powerpoints done, yay!)
For further reading, a few relevant My Messy Bedroom columns (Josey is the greatest!):
Adolescent Sex (http://www.mymessybedroom.com/columnshow.asp?id=2401)
"I asked my sister if she talks to her 15-year-old son about sex. "I just told him I'm here if he wants to talk about anything," she answered. He's never come to talk to her about anything."
Can I come? (http://www.mymessybedroom.com/columnshow.asp?id=2419)
"I was at a workshop called "The Body Erotic," run by Montreal psychotherapist and generally cool chick Alison Carpenter. Thanks to a feature the conservative local daily newspaper ran on Carpenter's workshops, this group was a far cry from the primarily lesbian, feminist "I'm so open about my sexuality, I went topless at the Gay Pride parade and carry a dildo in my pocket" ultra-cool set she's used to."
Holy Fuck! (http://www.mymessybedroom.com/columnshow.asp?id=2393)
"I sat in a religion class at McGill University this week listening to a discussion on the pros and cons of pornography. Mrs Demoe would have popped her girdle hearing a student wonder whether watching porn with her boyfriend would really improve her sex life."
Mental Challenge (http://www.mymessybedroom.com/columnshow.asp?id=35)
"Turns out the biggest roadblock to implementing sex-ed programs for the mentally ill is the general assumption that mentally ill people don't have sex."
Sex Trade (http://www.mymessybedroom.com/columnshow.asp?id=11)
"Bridget Sinclair and Chi Nguyen say educators are missing the mark when they talk to young people about sex."
Virgin Again (http://www.mymessybedroom.com/columnshow.asp?id=2271)
"It's official. I am now a card-carrying secondary virgin. Stop laughing, I'm serious. I've decided to re-save myself for marriage."
Re: See, this is why I love my friends.
Date: 2003-01-16 07:29 pm (UTC)I agree with you pretty much completely, although I have to say as a male who doesn't go around sowing his oats (I'm not that good at it, for one thing, but I digress), it bothers me that I get crap when I choose to be single, not date and not seek out sex. I've had co-workers look at me like I'm some sort of freak because I admit I'm happy not dating and being on my own (not always, but I am used to it). Of course if I was one of those Lotharios out their keeping track of my conquests I'd be considered some sort of sleaze. Ack!
We can only talk about sex, it seems, if it is part of some sort joke in a sitcom. And of course the person who admits to being a virgin in said sitcom is always the butt of jokes, even by their closet friends.
Sex is everywhere, in advertising for things that don't have anything to do with sex, and yet if you actually show it, it's considered perverted and degrading, and yet violence in a film by some veteran Hollywood director is art.
Your body starts changing in your early teens (sometimes earlier) but you're not supposed be a sexual being until you're 18 and by your early 20s your relatives are bugging all the time wondering when you're going to get married and have kids.
For all our advances in information technology, the human race still sucks when it comes to communicating important ideas and concepts to the masses or on a one on one basis. It's amazing we function as society at all.
I have no idea if this made sense at all. I could probably better explain how to dynamically partition an IBM AS400, but I have to live with that I guess.
Just lurking about...
Date: 2003-01-17 12:46 am (UTC)Anyways, I digress... the thing that I wanted to ask you lot was why do you think parents are loath to talk about this sort of thing? Is it a feeling that sex is inately dirty? Is it that they don't want to see their little baby as a sexual being just yet? Which leads to the inevitable Freudian closet full of laughs and giggles about incest... Or is it just something that we as a society feel unequiped to deal with?
I dunno why this seems important to me but after digging through I just felt like asking... The other thing that made me stop and think was, at what age did I feel start to feel sexual. Cause I know for damn sure it was long before 18. ~shrug~ oh well, its grows late. Hope I didn't cause offence :)
Re: Just lurking about...
Date: 2003-01-17 06:07 am (UTC)Partly, the Irish-Catholic, "the only emotion we're comfortable with is anger" culture my father was raised in was to blame but, apart from buying me tampons when I was around 12 in advance of the inevitable, my mom never discussed it with me either. I suppose she thought she would answer my questions, if I had any but, to this day, I never asked and she never told.
But to get back to my original comment, I think in the case of my parents, there was an assumption that I was smart/responsible enough either not to have sex or to be careful when I did. Maybe if I'd been more obviously boy-crazy as a teen, they would have brought up the subject but I was your typical shy tomboy and I suppose they figured it was a problem they'd worry about when it happenned. For the record, not the approach you should take with kids, becuase it does lead to the impression that sex is something that shouldn't be discussed and contributes to that shame response you talk about Bryght.
Um, gotta work now.
Re: See, this is why I love my friends.
Date: 2003-01-17 09:54 am (UTC)Re: Just lurking about...
Date: 2003-01-17 10:00 am (UTC)Why are parents reluctant to talk about it? Probably all the reasons you mentioned, plus embarrassment maybe? (Possibly mutual embarrassment -- I mean, ew, I think we can all agree OUR parents NEVER had sex. Well, maybe just the X number of times [insert number of children here]. I remember shutting my mother down pretty firmly the one and only time she brought the subject up.)
Part of it probably has to do with age -- when our parents were our age I don't think there was anything like the level of comfort discussing sex in public that there is now. I don't know if my grandparents talked frankly to my parents about sex... somehow I have a hard time picturing it (although ew again, now that image is something that's gonna haunt me for a while). Sex education as such has only been around for a relatively short time. Sue Johansen, who Cranky mentioned earlier, was one of the pioneers as far as I know.
Meeting, gotta run. Your mother sounds very cool.
Re: Just lurking about...
Date: 2003-01-17 12:40 pm (UTC)First was when I first started dating. I mention the date to my parents, and my mom offers to buy me condoms in a panicky tone of voice. I'd never even kissed a woman by that point, and I'd only known the date in question for about a day. I remember thinking my mom was being rather irrational.
The second was less than a year ago! (I was 22!) "Is she on the pill? Are you using condoms? You should always use both. BOTH!" she says with a slurred harshness that betrays the number of drinks she's had.
Go mom.
Re: Just lurking about...
Date: 2003-01-17 04:58 pm (UTC)Well, is there anything you'd like to know? ;-)
Re: Just lurking about...
Date: 2003-01-17 05:22 pm (UTC)I think your Mom saw that as an investment in grandchildren more than anything else... makes me wonder how I'll react if one of my eventual-theoretical-perhaps children turns out to be gay... cause it seems to be a fairly major issue for parents...
Re: Just lurking about...
Date: 2003-01-17 05:27 pm (UTC)The other thing that I would say is sex is really not about smarts... you say that there is an assumption that kids are smart enough to figure it out for themselves... and something about that niggles at me, cause I've never been all that smart when it came to sex and in fact sex seems to me to be about as far removed from smart logical type stuff as anything can be. I dunno, perhaps I'm just seeing something that you didn't mean to be there... and stuff :P
Re: Do I need a Soapbox?
Date: 2003-01-26 03:34 pm (UTC)I just read some of your insights tonight for the first time. Pretty great discussions. I just have one little thing to ask about John Paul II. I have never heard about his involvement in drafting humanae vitae. Pope Paul VI wrote this encyclical. The section about contraception was written against the advice of the commission who had been put together to examine the issue and meet and talk with Catholics across the world. Not too surprising that this was the last encyclical he wrote.
I have never heard of John Paul II being involved in the writing of this document.
Mel