Dear Betsy,
This is Dan Lata and I wish to begin that I have taught 7th & 8th grades for over thirty years so I know the animal very well.
All the people and press refer to STD’s. But never tell what they are and how to avoid them besides abstinence. Sex education in schools is a farce. When speaking to teenagers one must be simple and make sure they understand the terms you are using. Illustrations are very useful.

STOP using the extreme cases and talk about the average. You cannot get AID’s from swalowing sperm (cum). They may not know what sperm is.

Also tell people how to recognize a sexually transmitted disease and how it can be cured. Not all are serious and some are easily cured.

There is nothing wrong with sex if you know how to use it. One must know their tools to enjoy their pleasure.

Love,
Dan

Dear Betsy,

I read your column in the Chicago Sun Times today. And yes, as a male in high school, back in the ’70s, my fantasies were quite similar to your female fantasies. Oh, how my heart skipped a beat when I passed the black-haired beauty in the halls. She was soft-spoken, smart, a member of the pep club. She was everything I hoped for as a 17 year old boy. I dreamed of romancing her; hell, I just wanted to get up the courage to talk to her. That was my dream. Sex never was part of the equation. I simply wanted to know her and maybe be lucky enough to have her call me her boyfriend. She seemed so special to me.

Today, I work at a university and come in contact with young males and females on a daily basis. And what I experience does not agree with your statement: “Men and women, and their sex drives, are typically (gasp!) different. That’s obvious.”

Well, I am sorry, but it is not “obvious” to me when I see so many coeds exuding the signals that can only mean they want “it” (i.e. sex) as much as their male classmates. And they are not afraid to communicate it.

Now the reasons they want “it” may be different then males. And perhaps you could focus on that in another column. But don’t be fooled, they do want “it”.

It has been said that the definition of insanity is performing the same exact action over and over again while expecting different results. Why is it then that people like Betsy Hart can look at abstinence-only education and refuse to admit that it has wreaked havoc on our country? I refuse to believe that one look at the tragically ignorant questions being asked by America’s youth on internet teen health forums would not cause any thinking, intelligent person to realize that something is truly backwards here. It has cost the nation almost $2 billion to enforce a system of censorship that results in teenagers telling each other that they can become pregnant from swimming at a public beach and insisting that Mountain Dew, when applied topically, can prevent disease and pregnancy.

It’s medieval in nature that a fear-mongering, agenda-based program in which life or death information is intentionally withheld can somehow be labeled as “education” and be preached in the classroom. Don’t get me wrong, abstinence itself is a personal choice that everyone is free to make. However, how intelligent can personal decisions really be when the information one needs to make them is never presented to begin with or, worse yet, shunned and silenced with shame?

Betsy Hart and her ilk seem content to blame “culture” for current statistics pertaining to STDs and, for once, I agree with her. In my mind, there are few things more criminal or blatantly sadistic for a society to impose upon its youth than to legislate and fund a “health” program that is pro-ignorance and, in turn, pro-disease, pro-unwanted pregnancy and pro-abortion. We should be desperately ashamed that we aren’t creating a better, safer world by instead demanding that health information be freely taught and completely untainted by superstition, fear, or special interests. Only when we reach that point can we truly say that we have given young people the tools they need to live safe, productive, empowered lives. Until then, they deserve an apology.

Dear Betsy,
You made a few points I have to agree with. (Though I still can’t support abstinence-only courses.)

However, this sort of remark always makes my toes curl:

“Men and women, and their sex drives, are typically (gasp!) different. That’s obvious. What may not be is how beautifully this is designed to work. For a culture, it means that women have the opportunity to, well, civilize men, calling them to commit to marriage and children, to experience the benefits of a regular, monogamous sexual relationship.”

That would be all very well if all women behaved the same way. They don’t and never have. Even centuries before the Pill existed. (Why do you think they call prostitution “the oldest profession”?)

My real cause for complaint, however, is the idea that girls and women should be expected to civilize their PEERS. Civilizing people is what ADULTS do to CHILDREN. It is clearly arrogant and foolish for a man to think he can change a woman who doesn’t want to change after they marry - or before, for that matter. Why is it not arrogant and foolish for the woman to think that way? As I see it, this is masochism in both the Victorian and pseudo-feminist sense; the idea is that a woman is a moral failure if she can’t reform at least one cad in her lifetime - and her own sons don’t necessarily count. Not to mention that if fathers are so important to the well-being of sons’ lives (as half the country argues), why do some still blame a married MOTHER when a boy turns out bad? Maybe it’s often just a matter of free will. If a boy or man WANTS to change his bad ways, wants help, and makes that clear, that’s different.

Just a thought.

To clarify, my last warning would be: Don’t put up with unwanted sexual behavior from your peers in school - or other bad behavior, but don’t expect any apologies either. They’re just going to move on to other people with less backbone - and by the time they grow up, they’ll expect you to forget if not forgive. And if you come from a bad neighborhood, especially, prepare to work hard and long before finding a truly suitable spouse - maybe by age 30. Remember too, while Elizabeth Bennet understood the idea “better to be alone than to wish you were,” she still got “rewarded” for rejecting the caddish ways of Darcy, who didn’t really want to change. I.e., “Pride & Prejudice” is a fairy tale, when you think about it.

Oh, and my comment for your column “Let’s Not Overanalyze Play” has finally appeared on your blog. Thanks!

link bid directory…

This is similar to comment spam but avoids some of the safeguards designed to stop the latter practice. Six Apart started a working…