Quantcast
Connect with us

Abstinence-only folks they have us all fooled

Published

on

It’s a couple of weeks old, but I want to flag this incredibly important expose by Erica Hellerstein at ThinkProgress about how abstinence-only is still around and still being foisted on kids, despite being utterly discredited. Because abstinence-only is a right wing initiative, its proponents are totally immersed in right wing tactics, particularly the tactic of rebranding to fool people into thinking that you’re not what you actually are. They started with “abstinence-focused”, but now are shifting into an even more deceitful phrase, “evidence-based”. (Indeed, “abstinence” is a rebranding effort itself, an attempt to make the concept of “chastity” sound more medical and less what it is, a religious concept.)

ADVERTISEMENT

“Deceitful” is a gentle word for it, actually. A better word would be “lying”.  As Hellerstein points out, the curriculum that uses the “evidence-based” phrasing, Choosing The Best, stretches that definition well past the breaking point.

Though Choosing the Best calls itself “evidence-based” on its website, the curriculum is not included on the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ list of 37 “evidence-based” pregnancy prevention programs, a distinction it quietly notes on its FAQ page. In order to be included on the list, researchers at Mathematica Policy Research, an independent research organization, identify, assess, and analyze studies conducted on programs intended to reduce teen pregnancy rates.

It’s important to remember that the justification for spending money on abstinence programs is that they are a public health initiative. So the question is, do they improve public health by reducing teen pregnancy and STI transmission rates? The answer is a resounding no. Indeed, it’s clear, when you did into the materials, that the authors really aren’t even concerned with public health issues. The curriculum is about pushing a sexist gender ideology and religious dogma about the evils of sex, and the public health stuff is just grafted on there to get funding.

All of which makes it funnier to read the response sent to ThinkProgress when they asked about the studies that have rejected Choosing The Best:

“Students (and teachers) contact us continually to tell us what an incredible and positive difference the CTB program has made in their (or their students’) lives,” a spokeswoman for Choosing the Best said. “Interestingly, if you look at the programs that are currently on the DHHS list of “evidence-based” programs, you’ll find that many of those programs DO NOT HAVE SIGNIFICANT RESULTS BEYOND THE SHORT TERM. In fact, some only have short-term results among subgroups.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Uh, okay? The “short term” means measuring teen pregnancy and STI transmission rates, neither of which Choosing The Best reduces. But it’s clear here that she’s hoping to imply that there’s some kind of long term understanding of….what, exactly, I don’t know. The curriculum was crafted to tell kids to wait until marriage. Since the STI and teen pregnancy rates aren’t affected by it, then clearly they don’t absorb that message. Is the hope that they will just spend the next 10 years fucking and then, right before their wedding, have a change of heart? If so, that’s a pretty weak goal there.

Indeed, this claim that Choosing The Best is focused on the long term is easily disproved by their own materials. “The study found that Choosing the Best had only a short-term impact: For students who were virgins at the pretest, it delayed sexual activity for less than six months,” Hellerstein writes. “Then, they were just as likely as the other students tested to have sex.” This finding, however, is touted by Choosing The Best as some great victory. Hey, they spend 6 months less of their life fucking! Obviously, the goal is to wipe out as much fucking as humanly possible, but any time someone doesn’t get laid, however rare it is, they’re happy about it.

Even though the website makes a big stink out of this finding, the researcher, Dr. Lisa Lieberman, who actually found it thinks it’s no big deal. “They said that Choosing the Best reduces teen sex. I said ‘no, it doesn’t reduce teen sex. … Nobody stopped having sex. It delayed the onset, but it didn’t reduce sex. You can’t say that!,” she told ThinkProgress.

ADVERTISEMENT

Obviously, the “SHORT TERM” thing is just a punt, an attempt to avoid having to talk about things like effectiveness and public health. It’s obvious that Choosing The Best isn’t actually interested in any of that. The program is just about pushing their ideology about sex, and that’s that. It’s not even clear that they care that much if kids listen. Sure, they would like it if they successfully scared some kid out of having sex, but you get the feeling that would only be a bonus for them. Lecturing young people about how their bodies are evil and shameful is its own reward. If said young people blow you off, then you can take satisfaction in railing about how kids these days are no good and going to hell.


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Pandagon

Ch-ch-changes…..

Published

on

After many years and many server changes and finally landing here at Raw Story, which has taken very good care of us, it's time to say goodbye to Pandagon. I've been blogging under this banner for ten years, after Jesse Taylor asked me to join. He, in turn, had been running this joint since he was in college. A lot has changed since then. I became a journalist, moved from Austin to New York and learned to play Dungeons & Dragons. Jesse became a lawyer and, just this past weekend, a married man.

Continue Reading

Pandagon

Carly Fiorina defends her lie with a whole bunch of lies

Published

on

I do like it when Republican candidates sport a resume full of corporate executive work, because it really shows the public how many fools and idiots coast into that position not on merit but on their bullshitting abilities. Donald Trump, Herman Cain, and now we have Carly Fiorina, who just can't understand why her perceived underlings (voters, journalists) won't scurry away, pretending to accept her bullshit like former employees of hers had to do, lest they lost their jobs.

And so it goes that Fiorina, who could make this entire Planned Parenthood controversy go away by saying something like, "I may have misremembered the video, but I still think abortion is wrong," instead is doubling and tripling down. And every time she does, she lies more and more. She was on Meet the Press and, so enamored of the idea that she is perfect and could never do anything wrong, just went to town with the defensive posturing.

Continue Reading
 

Pandagon

Marco Rubio has an astoundingly low opinion of women’s intelligence

Published

on

At RH Reality Check, I covered this story that I wish was getting more press, about how Marco Rubio goes back and forth between suggesting that women who get abortions are greedy monsters who get pregnant for cash:

I just think you’ve created an industry now … a situation where very much, you’ve created an incentive for people not just to look forward to having more abortions, but being able to sell that fetal tissue for purposes—these centers—for purposes of making a profit off it, as you’ve seen in some of these Planned Parenthood affiliates.

Continue Reading
 
 
Help Raw Story Uncover Injustice. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1 and go ad-free.
close-image