Opportunities in Abstinence Training

If things are not working out as planned, you might want to consider a career in the expanding field of abstinence education. The need is staggering: four out of five random people I surveyed on the street thought abstinence training is something you do with your mid-section in the gym. Plus, unlike any of the rest of the coaching industry – career coaching, life coaching, sales training, etc. – this form of training is generously subsidized by the federal government, and has been since President Clinton signed the welfare reform bill of 1996, which provided abstinence training for impoverished women (though not, alas, for him.)

It’s not rocket science, either. In fact, there’ve been men in my life who were naturals at abstinence training without the slightest formal preparation: One renounced dental hygiene; another developed a passion for Frank Sinatra – leading me in each case to embrace abstinence without any regret. In yet another case, marriage alone was enough to induce that sanctified state.

Most people, though, require a bit of training to get into the abstinence training business, so I went to the website of WAIT Training to look at the sample curriculum for an abstinence course. The suggested syllabus contained a lot about love, marriage and STD’s—none of it terribly technical – until I got to the part about how to explain the difference between the sexes, where the following demonstration was suggested:

Bring to class frozen waffles and a bowl of spaghetti noodles without sauce. Using these as visual aides, explain how research has found that men’s brains are more like the waffle, in that their design allows them to more easily compartmentalize information. Women’s minds, on the other hand are more interrelated due to increased brain connectors.

Maybe my spaghetti brain wasn’t up to this challenge, but it did seem to imply that sex would involve a mixing of waffles and pasta, possibly with maple syrup for lubrication. Disgusting, yes, but no doubt a surefire recipe for abstinence.

My next step was to call Joneen Mackenzie, executive director of WAIT (which is an acronym for Why Am I Tempted?) to further pin down the requirements for becoming an abstinence trainer. Her program admits only college-educated people, but they can be of any age or sex. “Do they have to be abstinent themselves?” I asked. Not at all, she assured me, proudly confessing to being “like an animal” with her husband. How about gays? Well, yes, they could teach abstinence to gay teenagers. So – no barriers at all, and you can become a Certified Abstinence Trainer after only two days of training.

There is, however, one shadow hanging over the abstinence training industry. A study commissioned by Congress revealed in April that abstinence training doesn’t work: Students exposed to such training turn out to be no less likely to have sex than those who are not, leading some to question the over $100 million the Federal government spends on it annually. Mackenzie dismissed the study out of hand, saying it had been undertaken before serious abstinence training really got off the ground.

But there’s a deeper problem with abstinence training as currently conducted: It’s being wasted on kids. What better way to make sex a big deal than to tell a kid they can’t have any for years, and then only after spending $25,000 on champagne and bridesmaid dresses? Furthermore, kids have become more sophisticated thanks to programs like DARE (Drug Abuse Resistance Education), the website of which currently proclaims that “Cannabis can double chances of psychotic illness” and “Just one cigarette can lead to addiction.” If you’ve known honor students who smoke marijuana, why should you believe that teen sex leads inevitably to heartbreak and oozing genital sores?

Here’s my advice for the abstinence training industry and any novice abstinence trainers: First, leave the teenagers alone and focus on the vast neglected demographic of middle-aged and elderly people, including the married. Many of them have thought they just weren’t getting any, so imagine how happy they will be to see their lifestyle affirmed as a noble, pro-active, choice! Think of the market for silver chastity rings (see ) in nursing homes and other long term care facilities!

Secondly, and I realize that this may be more controversial: The abstinent training profession should be restricted to abstinent people. Would you undergo computer training with someone who hasn’t touched a computer since 1987? Would you hire a flabby, out-of-shape, personal fitness trainer? No, nor do I think you should study abstinence with someone who behaves “like an animal” in bed.

Abstinence may be easier to achieve than you realize. Contrary to the assumptions of the framers of welfare reform, poverty – or at least sudden downward mobility – can lead to the rapid exit of significant others. You should welcome their departure and, if you are heterosexual, take it as an opportunity to withdraw into your own gender-appropriate Tupperware compartment – spaghetti or waffle.

Comments

[Steve St-Laurent]

Sweet! Just the tonic needed after cleaning [and sanitizing] my in box of the overnight accumulation of "She'll worship you," "Stop being the little guy" and sundry megawad detritus. Good morning and thanks, Barbara.

[paperpusher666]

As you approach the tunnel in Baltimore on I-95, there is a billboard that says: "Virgin: It's not a dirty word anymore". I believe that it has been there for at least three years. It looks like it has been printed in spray paint, but that's just the design.

Abstinence that one chooses is a good thing. Abstinence due to unattractive personal appearance, habits, or hygiene is just sad.

[Chickensh*tEagle]

Don't laugh! If the Silver Ring Thing fails, the Golden Dong Thong come next!

[gaby]

Abstinence Trainer! The jobs created in this country are becoming weirder and more useless by the minute. Can I guess it is also low pay?

[paperpusher666]

If one becomes an abstinence trainer (somehow I think that they should be issued riding crops), it might well be volunteer labor.

Mature professions, who are people who enter the priesthood or convent after the age of 30 or so, are the lifeblood of the Catholic priesthood and convents in the U.S. currently. In a lot of ways, it is a better deal for the Catholic Church. People know who they are with more certainty, and they have completed their education.

[lc2]

Great essay.

In all seriousness though ... the problem remains of how to reconcile our raging hormones w/our hope that women will not get pregnant before their 30s and and will in fact, act like men and farm out childcare to less-lucky and lesser-paid women. The fact that the WAIT model embraces such a ridiculous and reductionist view of gender sensibilities doesn't surprise me b'c people tend to fall back on outmoded stereotypes in times like this. But the question remains: with advanced nutrition and earlier puberty, kids are desirous at a younger and younger age ... yet are supposed to find a way to suppress that desire. Why Am I Tempted? Hormones, dummy.

Add in unreliable/unsafe birth control methods, sex-saturated media, etc. .... and I think one can easily see that if abstinence and delayed childbearing is the goal, programs like WAIT have got their work cut out for them.

[LTC Advocate]

HI there, I stumbled across your blog and must say I found it to be very,very interesting. Here's something you may find interesting....it deals with long term care options :)
http://www.help4longtermcare.com/ltcbook.html

[Monica]

The governement could save money by simply mandating virginity for certain things that people may need, such as admission to university. To make it fair for the truly deserving and motivated, one or several ways to redeem themselves, such as marriage, military service or several years of hardship of some way, such as a few years in a strict institution (maybe a kind of school or convent) could be provided. That way, young people would think twice before having sex.

That would also solve some problems related to unemployment and poor results in school. How? By reducing the number of females who get a higher education and compete for jobs, or for jobs at higher levels. That's because male virginity is hard to prove and would probably not be an issue, but female virginity would.

I am aware that there are cases when the hymen is broken some other way or the woman is born without, but they are exceptions, and those people would just have to use the opportunities offered to anybody else who is not a virgin. As for repairing the hymen surgically, that's not cheap. People who can afford that can probably afford the risks related to sex anyway.

[Lily H.]

Abstinence education for the poor? I can't think of anything more of an anti-aphrodisiac than being poor! The instant you reveal to a potential partner you're financially challenged, you'll need a stopwatch to see how fast they exit the scene to find someone else less constrained.
As such, I should be granted a license to teach this class by sheer experience (or in this case, lack of) and years logged in on the abstinence treadmill. And Barbara's right about WHO should be teaching the abstinence courses. I know someone who's been married for over ten years and has been abstinent since the wedding. My own stepmother slept on the sofa while my dad kept the bedroom, and believe me, she was just as happy as a clam to not have the pretense of sex just because she was married to my dad. By definition, Mom would have been a great teacher! Too bad she's passed on.
Can you picture the job interview for this position? If it were me, I'd have to come clean and declare I hadn't indulged since the Clinton administration (and a whole year before welfare reform, at that).
Yep, big government strikes out once again.
Hmm...think I'll need a gun, a whip and a chair for this position? Well, okay, maybe the whip might be too suggestive, the chair might tempt me to just sit and daydream, so I guess the gun will be the only tool that will compel anyone to pay attention to this latest travesty. Good lord!

[Chickensh*tEagle]

This takes me way, way back to Star Trek, The Motion Picture. Lieutennant Ilia tells her former lover, "My oath of celibacy is on record." I wondered who the hell would want to record people's oaths of celibacy.

Finally I get it. There's no shortage of people who want to feel they're doing the Lord's work and will pay money for a certificate that says they are. That's really the business to be in.

[BW]

Hmph. I thought they'd been preaching Abstenence for 200 years. Works great, don't it?

[Anarcissie]

Monica: '... That's because male virginity is hard to prove and would probably not be an issue, but female virginity would. ...'

You could lock the young men up in monasteries. Of course, a good many of them would have sex with each other, but that could be solved by solitary confinement and chastity belts.

[Andrea]

To be a teenager is to hear a long series of statements that, summarized, essentially mean "You're more trouble than you're worth." They hear that college is too expensive but that they have to go. They hear that their lessons and sports take up too much time but that they have to become talented. They hear that they're disrespectful, lazy, directionless, and all together going to the dogs. Then they're supposed to say "Thanks for the advice. We'll get right on that."

So then a teenager finds another teenager who is as sick of hearing how terrible teenagers are as he or she is, and they get together and find some kind of love and acceptance in each other's company. That feeling is as powerful a feeling as "true love", and is it any surprise it ends up in a physical act that creates feelings more powerful than almost any other?

Until we somehow collectively acknowledge that teenagers are what they are: genuine, passionate, loving, idealistic and ready to move mountains to make the world a better place, we can't ask them to give up that little island of happiness in an otherwise unforgiving world. Or rather, we can ask it, but we can't expect them to listen.

[A Canadian]

What ever happened to parents talking to their children about the "birds and the bees" and cautioning them about the risks associated with sex and encouraging them to use protection/birth control? Proposing chastity is not an option these days. Many parents refuse to acknowledge that their teens may be sexually active, just like they refuse to acknowledge that they smoke pot, or take ecstacy or any other things that they "should not be doing." I have a teenage son who I have been completely open with regarding sexual activity, drug use, alcohol consumption etc. Telling them they can't do something only makes them want to do it more. My son has been open about his sexuality with me and he has assured me that he and his girl use protection. Now, I have to take his word on that. I can't spy on them to see if he is lying (nor would I want to). The problem is not that young people are having babies too early. The problem is parents abstaining from their responsibility. I don't care how stressful their job is, or that they work long hours etc., they have a responsibility to inform their children, keep an open dialogue and trust them. They're much smarter than we give them credit for!

[buena]

I propose abstinence for all spouses of the people who run this country until the war is ended, the next war is averted, we all have affordable healthcare, and a few other things.

Lysistrata got the women in ancient Greece to tell their men, "No sex until the war's over."

Might as well put abstinence to good use.

[paperpusher666]

A joke from my Catholic youth is that the only birth control that I was allowed to use was a St. Joseph's aspirin held tightly between my knees.

[Monica]

The problem is not that teenagers "find some kind of love and acceptance in each other's company" and that leads to sex. The problem is that either they don't love each other, or such feelings are fleeting, or it's just that some circumstances change, and the two split up.

The most honest approach would be to promote marriage as a long-term objective. If it is not appropriate to actually marry very young, although if they have sex together, they might as well, some other form of serious commitment, such as engagement, could be used until the young people are ready to marry.

Abstinence alone is not the solution. It could be presented as something positive, such as a part of a progression towards marriage (for instance, abstinence for engaged people, or in the initial stages of a very long engagement). But I can see why promoting abstinence without anything else is not enough.

[Mason]

Hi. I have never posted anything to a blog before tonite, so if I'm going about this wrong - I'll learn. I wanted to share this paper I wrote last year for school as I feel it fits the topic and I still feel the same way - Also, I'm not sure if you have time to read all of these - but if you do -I just have to tell you that you are doing a wonderful service and that I truly hope we can all get people to remember who we are truly and make a positive difference.

So here are my thoughts -

Hildr Mason
ENG 105, Assignment 5, Final
29 September 2006

In Defense of Our Teens
By
Hildr Mason

In Our Teens Defense
By Hildr Mason

It is imperative that comprehensive sex education is provided to our society’s teens within our school systems. This needs to not only be followed up at home, but initiated by responsible parents willing to encourage mature and educated choices made by today’s youth.

Teens today are faced with some of the toughest times ever. They are bombarded with sex and violence on TV, cable, movies, internet, radio, billboards, everywhere they turn. Virtually nothing is being done to shield their innocence. Ironically, when it comes to educating and teaching protective measures against all that teens witness on a daily basis; the government, religious groups and even a few parents want to step in and “protect” our kids. “Protecting” teens with censorship of the information sex educators are allowed to use in a classroom setting is a crime, not protection. How is it that some find it socially acceptable to allow our teens out in a world that is so full of sex and violence? And then go a step beyond this abuse prohibiting them from being taught precautions and safety measures to avoid danger in the socially accepted sexual and violent world we allow them to live. Why are we willing to censor information that will protect our children, but not willing to censor the exact information that is out in the world, in their face each and every day? If we are to censor anything, it should begin with the information that brings them all too early into these adult experiences. The social damage has already been done to many, little by little, since the day they were born. As long as teens are growing up in the world as it is; they need to be provided with as much information as possible to make well informed mature decisions. The only source of acceptable protection at this point is full comprehensive sex education for our youth. When we can teach them that “the sex” they have already known all their lives, as taught through the media is more than just sex; they will have a better understanding of life and the world they live in. They can begin to form their own beliefs. Making choices based on truth. They will set a higher moral standard for themselves and others, not only when it comes to sex, but in all areas of their lives.

Do you, as an adult, remember what it was like to grow up as a teenager; the pressures and pains of normal everyday life? Back when today’s adults were teens, society’s morals and values were much higher. It was not even acceptable to use the word “damn” on TV. Love scenes were left to the imagination. We didn’t have the media cramming sex down our throats from every angle like our kids do today. If you think back honestly, many of you will remember that even without any real talk of sex in the media, school systems or from our parents, sex still managed to slip into our lives. And most of us were more than likely between the ages of 16 and 20 when it slipped there.

Alford, 2002, stated that, “Legislators and congressional staff do not acknowledge the world in which young people live. If they did, they would hesitate to push, as an ultimate value, something that is actually a norm.” (para. 8) Why would the government be so aggressive to implement Abstinence-Only programs throughout our nation? Our government is spending millions and billions of our tax dollars on more or less a moral ideal that makes them look good in the eye of the public, but ultimately threatens our teens with ignorance. The new law which stems from the “Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996” as an attachment section entitled “Separate Program for Abstinence Education” sets out to give states a total of up to $50 million to dedicate towards abstinence education within a 5 year time period.

“The law specifies that funded programs, among other things, must
teach: 1) the social, psychological and health gains of abstinence; 2)
that abstinence is the only way to avoid pregnancy and sexually
transmitted diseases; 3) that a mutually faithful monogamous relationship
in the context of marriage is the expected standard of human sexual activity;
4) that sex outside marriage is likely to have harmful effects and that out
of wed-lock pregnancy is harmful to the child, the parents and society.”

Legislation further went on to mandate that information on contraceptives and disease prevention be censored through funded programs. (Mazur, 2003, paras. 12-13) In the article, “Advocates of abstinence education are hypocrites” by Sarah Goff (2005), she tells us that by providing abstinence only education to our children, we are not only being hypocritical, but we are clearly giving false facts as scare tactics to encourage them to refrain from sex. “Clearly, it would be better to eliminate elements of paranoia and dishonesty in our abilities about sex than to incorporate them into public policy.”(Goff, 2005, para 5) Sarah went on to say, “No one should be forced to be kept ignorant, when such information offers a wider range of life choices.” (Goff, 2005, para 9) I agree, don’t you? How can anyone justify lying to our teens by using information that is meant strictly to scare them away from sex and remain abstinent. This can’t possibly be healthy. If we were to accept this teaching and it got out of hand, imagine the phobias that could perhaps develop. If it wasn’t for our natural instincts and our hormones that will eventually replace all the brainwashing; humankind could dwindle away completely out of fear to ever have a natural sexual relationship. Of course this won’t ever happen. We will instead be left with a generation that is secretive and sneaky when it comes to sex. They could also become full of confusion, guilt and self hatred when the truth is hidden from them.

By accepting an abstinence-only program we are putting the government and some religious organization’s self-righteous morals before our own children’s well being. Kids will be learning in environments that do not promote responsibility of your own actions based on true knowledge of life. As teens mature we are not teaching them how to be responsible in many ways. This will just add to the list of many other “good ideals” we have enacted upon in raising our kids today. Abstinence-only is just another so called “good ideal” that has led our youth into a disturbed generation. Without a Comprehensive Sex Education program we will end up seeing more of our children unnecessarily suffering from diseases and unwanted pregnancies. They need to be well informed how to prevent these things. Teens do not need to be put out and left in the dark after so many years of having a light shown so brightly directly in their faces.

According to Lippman, (2002), Abstinence-only education only slightly delays sexual experiences; and a comprehensive sex education program not only delays sexual exploration in most cases, but it provides the necessary information on protection and birth control teens will need to be aware of when they do become sexually active. (para 10) For adults to think that teens won’t at some point become sexually active just because “we say so” is very naïve. The only thing that has changed since the adults of this world were teens is the amount of sexual content in the mainstream of our teen’s lives. “Children live in a world in which sex education is censored, but sex is glamorized in advertisements and on TV, and the sexual activities of the government officials are described in the morning papers and the evening news.” (Mazur, 2003, para 4) They are continually sent mixed messages that they should begin to act like an adult, because we allow them into the adult world. However, “to restrict kids’ access to information”… is “an insult to kids, a presumption that they are too stupid or fragile to be given information about the real world.” (Taylor, 2005, pg 3, para 4)

It should not be up to the government or the educational system to teach our kids about the world we live in and how to grow and live as one; it’s up to us, a society as a whole. Parents ultimately need to become responsible for their children once again, instead of relying on the Government and school systems to teach values and morals. When we step up and take on our parental responsibilities all of society will profit. The government and school systems will then have no choice but to back up what we teach at home. Our children will be living a life of truth, of morals, of values and of respect. Our children will grow into teens that will already know why they should be having a sexual relationship and do so only when they are able to make this mature decision. When it comes to life situations such as this I always try to put myself in my children’s place and respond to their issues with my past experience. I give them the tools that I either had or in many cases wish that I had. I believe it is better to be honest, educate and be there for our children before the difficult decisions have to be made. This is the only way that they will be able to make sound choices using their own good judgment. They will also feel safe knowing that they can come and talk to you about any and everything. This builds a trust that you will provide honest answers. In messages “communicated to teenagers… We can tell them that we will do our very best to provide appropriate limits and help guide their choice, but we know that we cannot ultimately make all of those choices for them.” (Roffman, 2004, pg 3, para 3)

Thankfully, many schools and parents are still very much in support of full comprehensive sex education rather than abstinence-only when it comes to teaching our kids about sex. (National Coalition against Censorship, 2001, para. 15) I have to believe this is because the majority of adults do remember what it was like being in their teen’s shoes. And this is what we as parents are teaching at home or in some cases, would teach if we were to take our parental responsibility back upon ourselves.

Without a good well rounded comprehensive sex class we are crippling our youth with ignorance. Abstinence can and should be taught within the curriculum as one more choice that they have. It can not however be viewed as the only solution to a growing problem. We have to get to the root of the issue. If we continue to be dishonest and hypocritical, that is all our children see. Besides of course, all the media sex they have grown up with. Sex is going to happen; have no doubt, it’s within all of us as a natural instinct. It really comes down to just a matter of when and how prepared we are when it happens. Because of the changing times we live in now, more than ever, we can not allow our teens to be ill-prepared. The best way to make sure they are prepared is to be there for them as parents and role models supporting Comprehensive Sexual Education in our schools.

References:
All below references taken from Opposing Viewpoints database.
Alford, Sue (2002), The Problems with Abstinence-Only Sex Education, para 8.

Goff, Sarah (2005), Advocates of Abstinence Education are Hypocrites, para 5, 9.

Lippman, Helen (2002), The Dilemma of What to Teach in Sex Education, para 10.

Mazur, Marilyn C. (2003), Censorship of Sex-Related Speech Violates the First Amendment, paras 4, 12 -13.

Roffman, Deborah M. (2004), Abstinence-Only Sex Education in Ineffective, pg, 3,
para 3.

Taylor, Charles (2005), Censorship is Not an Effective Way to Protect Children, pg 3, para 4.

National Coalition Against Censorship (2005), Abstinence-Only Sex Education Endangers Students, para 15.

[Chickensh*tEagle]

Hildr Mason:

Since you're new, could I offer some advice on blog posting?

Keep it short. People absorb information from the screen less easily than from print on paper. A very long post is self-defeating on the Web, where most people have a limited amount of time to update themselves on a variety of sites they frequent.

Keep it coming, but please, keep it short.

[Andrea]

I wish to clarify what I wrote earlier:

Indeed, teenagers probably don't love each other. At that age, acceptance feels like love, and sex feels like acceptance. The teenagers who can stick to a program of abstinence feel acceptance elsewhere. Usually, these are the ones who are part of smaller groups that emphasize self-esteem and membership, and have abstinence as a basic value premise.

The problems with abstinence education are that a) it relies on bad information, and b) one can call oneself an abstinence counselor with very little training. The first is a big problem. Bad information about complex issues causes more problems. The second problem correlates with the first. Badly taught bad information will cause many students to reject any information they hear on the subject. And very few will go looking for better answers.

They'll just go looking for something they think they can be sure of, like something that feels like love.

[Gordon Lightfoot]

So I'm at a loss. Do I qualify as abstinent because I'm not getting any, or is that just social castration?

[Sister Anna Maria]

I say give all them young peckerheads condoms and make it mandatory to use them. Forget the Pope and his ancient doctrines et al, you gotta wrap it up, just as you wear a bicyle helmut in case of a perilous crash.

I am surprised Barbara wouldn't mention this in the first place.

For all you kids reading this, you can find condoms just about anywhere, but the best place to buy em is usually a pharmacy or a big box retailer. Good prices. Don't buy cheap ones in vending machines in bars. Some of them are made in China and not too good.

[Chris S.]

I agree with the comments about being poor and unattractive. I guarentee if a person is one or the other or God forbid, both. Abstinence will happen all by itself.

[Lance]

Wow. Miss, you clearly have some issues. Sex isn't a bad thing, I promise you. Especially in your youth. I don't see what you hope to achieve by keeping non-virgins out of university, I am soon to start university on a botany course I intend to carry to PhD and my current partner is doing the same in medicine - and you'd keep us both out because we're comfortable with ourselves and far more free than you'll ever be?

then again, we both also smoke pot. Such is england! lock us all up, I dare you ^_^

[WereBear]

I went to high school in the '70's, when the anti-drug films were just starting. They had the same problems the current abstinence training has.

They lie.

When you lie to teenagers, you will be found out. They are at a stage where they are reality-testing everything that is said to them, as part of the maturation process.

So once authorities lie to them, everything they say goes out the window.

[Monica]

I did not say that non-virgins should be kept out of university. That would just be a way to promote abstinence while saving money because abstinence training would no longer be necessary. And I did not say that there should be no way to make up for this problem. It's just that the punishment would make people think very seriously before losing their virginity.

For instance, how would you like it if for a couple of years, you had to rake leaves and clean garbage every working day but had to pay tuition or an equivalent amount of money? That would not replace university courses. It would be done before taking any courses. For instance, if a program takes 4 years, the student would pay for 6 years but rake leaves for the first 2 years. That would promote abstinence!

[Jacqueline]

Lily H. wrote: "Abstinence education for the poor? I can't think of anything more of an anti-aphrodisiac than being poor! The instant you reveal to a potential partner you're financially challenged, you'll need a stopwatch to see how fast they exit the scene to find someone else less constrained."

I'll drink to that even though I don't drink! I literally had ZERO social life between the ages of 24 and 35 while I was struggling in poverty trying to overcome TWO disabilities in getting my college degree in hopes of having a chance for re-entering the workforce in a meaningful career (physical disability from car accident and severe dyslexia). The saddest part of all was that others would say to me, "But you're so pretty, surely you can find somebody!"..Yeah, right...I could have had more than my fair share of men just out for a "booty call", but no love, no permanent commitments - and I felt I deserved to be loved and not just some guy's "good time" while he was "slumming it". So by lack of options, I had no choice BUT abstain.

It wasn't until I was 37 and had already begun suffering that dreaded middle-aged weight gain thing so many women go through that I *finally* found someone who wanted me for a lifemate: a lonely widower who is 25 years older than me...Go figure! The worst part is that I feel I have been cheated out of finding long lasting love and marriage when I was still young enough to really enjoy it, maybe have a child, you know the American Dream: nice wedding, decent career, a home, and a baby who will grow up and carry on your name or maybe get to achieve the things you didn't have a chance to do.

When you're 40, overweight, and pregnancy is simply too risky, it's a little too late...especially when your 65 yr old hubby is fixed.

[Monica]

That's because of women's liberation. You expected to have a career and many men would have expected you, too. Besides, salary levels are no longer based on the premise that the man has to support a family with a stay-at-home wife. Now, both the man and the woman are expected to be wage slaves to the Man. Once upon a time, a hard-working man would have been happy to work really hard to keep his wife at home, and perhaps would have been able to afford that more easily, or willing to have fewer material possessions in order to do so.

It is women's liberation that cheated most women while liberating those who would otherwise have had to put up with a bad family situation just to keep a roof over their head.

[Tysyacha]

ABSTINENCE AND ANNA KARENINA

A short essay on why I think abstinence sucks

By Tysyacha

When I was about 13 years old, I had my first experience with sex education in the public schools, which, in my particular school, might better have been called “education on why sex is bad and why none of you students should be having it.” Granted, we were all junior high kids at the time and sex might not have been on the Top 10 list of our wisest choices, but so much fear was instilled into me that I still have a tremendous guilt complex whenever I even think about “doing the deed”. Thanks a lot, “abstinence training”. Through it, I learned that contraceptives were mostly scams (especially condoms) and if I even thought about having sex with a future boyfriend (I had none when I was 13, figuring boys were idiots back then), then my moral compass was next to a prostitute’s.

When I went to college, I learned that not all boys were idiots, and perhaps if I had given myself away, they would’ve stuck with me.

After college, I watched the movie Anna Karenina, based on the classic novel by Leo Tolstoy. Granted, Anna Karenina committed adultery and what I’m talking about here is what some fire-and-brimstone preachers denounce as “fornication”, but I finally gave Anna some credit as I watched her “fall into sin”. Anna wanted passionate love, and what she was getting from her husband was dutiful sentiment. Marital love, or at least marital sex, in my mind, is a duty and a formality without any trace of the passion that Anna felt for Count Vronsky, her lover. That’s what my church and this “abstinence training” indoctrinated me in, almost from birth.

“Bozhe moi!”, or “My God!”, Anna cries as she and Vronsky embrace. Methinks the married folks experience less to none of this. According to my “abstinence training,” having sex when you’re married is what you’re supposed to do, but something about the “supposed to do” part just makes me yawn. No wonder some people coyly refer to sex as a “wifely” or “husbandly duty.” Bozhe moi!

Another reason I believe that marital sex is supposed to involve duty instead of the Anna Karenina/Vronsky sort of passion is that the Russian language, which has some far more descriptive words than English does, has two separate words for “wife” and “lover.”

"Zhena", the word for “wife”, is based on the word for “woman” (yawn!), while "lyubovnik" and "lyubovnitsa", meaning “lover”, are based on the Russian word for “love”, obviously. I would be far prouder, like Anna, to call myself a man’s "lyubovnitsa" rather than his "zhena".

Sex is a choice, a right, a gift of love and passion, not a duty and a privilege only given to the chosen few who can afford weddings.

That’s why I think abstinence and “abstinence-only” training for students in our public schools both completely suck.

Sincerely,

Tysyacha Karenina

P.S. I’m abstinent by chance and by choice. I’m waiting for a "lyubovnik" (lover) who won’t care one bit if I have a disability!

[Monica]

Anna Karenina's relationship with Vronsky deteriorated and Anna killed herself in a moment of jealosy. The problem with love is that it doesn't last. In fact, men seem to be genetically programmed to look for other partners after a while, possibly as soon as the woman gets pregnant, and marriage is a way to make the man stay.

As for the beauty of love while it lasts, you forget that after that great encounter, Anna got pregnant. Moreover, in the book, at some point, Anna was advised by her doctor on birth control, although what existed at the time must have been unreliable, or unreliable enough to make adulterous sex irresponsible. If, for instance, the method was the pull-out method, it is precisely during passionate love that the man was more likely to lose control and not do it on time. And it's not reliable enough to count on it when avoiding pregnancy is almost a matter of life and death. But the first time, the sex was probably just plain irresponsible, without whatever protection the doctor must have recommended. It's a crime, and innocent children suffer the consequences of illegitimacy (and the husband may be stuck with them even though they are not his). No wonder in some cultures or religions, adultery was punishable by death.

You may not see it that way now that avoiding or terminating pregnancy is easier, but I see that great love scene as a terrible crime, especially in those time when the danger of pregnancy was greater.

[Kyso K]

Perhaps I'm just petty and filthy, but I call Joneen MacKenzie's bluff: what exactly is her definition of "animal in bed"?

Hearing an abstinence promoter just gush that out to a journalist reminds of the time I was sitting at a bar with a bunch of friends: the two of them that had lead sheltered, boring lives were trying to out-cool each other ("And then I got so drunk, I puked in a bowl!" Squee!) while the recovering alcoholic just smiled into his soda and kept his mouth shut.

I'm glad Mrs MacKenzie is happy with her sex life- and I'm sure that believing you went from sexless to lioness when you got married is key to being a sincere abstinence proponent- but I am skeptical that she's having the kind of cliff-hanging, adventurous, animal-like sex that she is so self-congratulatory about.