Tuesday, January 17, 2006

don't read this unless you want to start throwing things.

it's a collection of passages from state-approved abstinence-only sex ed curricula. it's from harper's, excerpted from information collected for a congressional report in 2004. it's scary, absolutely scary.

my favourite (and, by favourite, i mean most disturbing) part of the excerpts is the one that reads:

5 Major Needs of Women:
Affection, Conversation, Honesty and Openness, Financial Support, Family Commitment

5 Major Needs of Men:
Sexual Fulfillment, Recreational Companionship, Physical Attractiveness, Admiration, Domestic Support


i'm not saying that all of these, or any of these, are bad things per se. what i'm saying is that i have a problem with insinuating that these things are things that men can only get from women, or that women can only get from men. as in...financial support is great, but i don't want to rely on anyone but myself for it. or...family commitment is great if you're into that settling-down-and-having-a-family sort of thing, but i don't think it's an inherent womanly need: no matter what your gender, if you want to start a family, everyone involved should be committed to it, but it's not unnatural not to want one. and...don't get me started on men needing domestic support. again, if you're starting a household, whoever is starting it needs to divvy up the responsibility accordingly. but, don't insinuate in my sex-ed program that the men have to make the money and the women have to provide the "domestic support." there's nothing that has to be inherently womanly about cooking and cleaning.

i could keep ranting all night about this, but i have to go to mock trial practice. besides, it would probably do no good, because i can already feel the aneurysm coming on.

No comments: