Think Progress, you lazy bastards

Since this Think Progress graphic keeps popping up in my facebook timeline, I might as well share it with you all, too.

It’s likely no coincidence that many of those same states lack the comprehensive sexual education requirements that would help educate their residents about HIV transmission from an early age. Health classes in Texas, Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina, Mississippi, and Louisiana aren’t required to provide any kind of medically accurate information about HIV. And in two of those states — Texas and Florida — public schools don’t have to offer any type of sexual health education whatsoever.

The article completely ignores the HIV/AIDS diagnosis rates in Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York, which are in the same range as most of the Southern states. (Before anyone says that it's an "urban" problem, remind me again which is the second largest city in the US and what state it's in.)

I guess I'm all pissy about the article because it's just so fucking lazy. It only took me a couple of minutes to look up the sex education policy of New York State:

New York has no law that mandates sex education or regulates its content if taught – it has not taken the necessary action to guarantee complete, comprehensive sex ed for its students. However, New York does require that students be taught about HIV as part of health classes. Sex education policy is governed by New York Commissioner’s Regulations 135.3 and Learning Standards for Health, Physical Education, and Family and Consumer Sciences.

 (Advocates for Youth)

And what do you know? Illinois and Massachusetts are in the same boat: no mandate for sex ed, but information about HIV/AIDS must be taught in high school. New Jersey, though, is a bit of an oddball:

New Jersey has among the most comprehensive sex education policies of any state. Its students must receive age-appropriate information on a variety of topics, including gender stereotypes, sexual orientation, the benefits of abstinence, and condoms and contraception.

So, yeah. Claiming that abstinence only sex ed is the cause of high rates of HIV/AIDs oversimplifies the problem. I have no doubt that it contributes to high rates of STIs and teen pregnancy, but simply blaming red states for their lack of proper sex education isn't going to reduce rates of HIV/AIDS.

Real sex ed vs. "abstinence only"

From Think Progress:

The number of teen births in the U.S. dropped again in 2010, according to a government report, with nearly every state seeing a decrease. Nationally, the rate fell 9 percent to about 34 per 1,000 girls ages 15 through 19, and the drop was seen among all racial and ethnic groups.
...
This is the lowest national rate for teen births since the Centers for Disease Control began tracking it in 1940, and CDC officials attributed the decline to pregnancy prevention efforts.

Woo hoo! This is some damn good news!

But wait...

Mississippi continues to have the highest teen birth rate, with 55 births per 1,000 girls. New Hampshire has the lowest rate at just under 16 births per 1,000 girls. 

*facepalm!*

That's an absolutely huge discrepancy. My question is: how do Mississippians explain statistics like that? Do they rightfully blame their elected officials? Do the blame someone/something else? Do they even notice?

Now we have concrete proof* that "abstinence only" education does not work. I doubt that Mississippi's elected officials will care, though-- what does it matter to them that they're very likely condemning these young women to a life of hardship? From where I'm sitting, pretending to save their daughters' "purity" is more important than actually raising them to be happy and healthy.

How disgusting.

*I'm pretty sure we've had the proof before now, but it's nice to be able to reinforce the fact that "abstinence only" is unmitigated bullshit.

Oh, Tennesee

The Tennessee Senate voted 28-1 to amend the state’s sex ed curriculum by adding warnings against “gateway sexual activity.” Senate Bill 3310 does not explicitly define what those activities are, but it comes in response to controversies in Nashville and Knox County schools over instruction given to high school students that mentioned alternatives to sexual intercourse.

“ ‘Abstinence’ means from all of these activities, and we want to promote that,” said state Sen. Jack Johnson, R-Franklin, the bill’s sponsor. “What we do want to communicate to the kids is that the best choice is abstinence.”

 The Tennessean

I'll give the TN lege one thing, they've finally caught on to the "technical virgin" problem. No, no, no, no, no, no. I don't think that there's a problem with teenagers that engage in a variety of sexual activities. The problem lies in the "purity" movement-- it doesn't actually stop kids from engaging in oral and anal sex, while at the same time it actively discourages them from practicing safe-sex techniques. Abstaining teens have similar rates of STDs to, um, "normal" teens, but are less likely to use condoms or make any preparations for sex.

Of course, telling kids that all sexual activity is strictly verboten isn't going to solve the problems of STDs &/or teen pregnancy, but we can't expect Republicans to be smart or practical, can we? If they can't cling desperately to their dogma, what else have they got?

As for the whole "gateway to sexual activity": what the fuck? What does that even mean and how far does it go? Is making googly eyes a "gateway"? Hand holding? Smooching? This is the most ridiculous, anti-sex thing I've heard in a good damn while.

Also, good job stealing the terminology from the "War on Drugs", TN. (By the way, how well is that "war" working out for you?) We don't need a war on sex too, thank you very much.

(RH Reality Check)