Sad but true

This week the Boston Globe smugly called for defunding of "abstinence only" sex ed. Maybe they have a tiny point, but here's my response:

Teaching a 14 year old girl how to become "My First Sexual Conquest" for an immature football player is hardly conducive to anyone’s health, mental or otherwise. Yet this is the flagship accomplishment of "scientific" sex education. I’m sure proponents of abstinence are more genuinely disappointed in "abstinence only" programs than activists like Julie F. Kay. But what is $200 million compared to the budget of even one teen movie that teaches boys that to "become a man" is to ask a girl for sex without promising anything—much less lifelong commitment—in return? A few micrometers of latex fail to turn this utterly selfish male act into anything remotely approaching responsible human sexuality. As a wide variety of authors have noted, from Mary Pipher to Wendy Shalit, the real beneficiaries of sexual "freedom" are not girls who give in to pressure, but rather boys who can’t handle the obligation of controlling their sexuality (except with the occasional condom). In fact they, and their enablers such as Ms. Kay, have become slaves to our basest instincts: conquest and domination. And Ms. Kay calls her resignation in the face of this horror "science"?

Refs: for Pipher: http://www.committment.com/ophelia.html
for Wendy Shalit, my hero: http://blogs.modestlyyours.net/modestly_yours/wendy_shalit/index.html