6 i February 27, 2015
The Guilfordian
WWW.GUILFORDIAN.COM/OPINION
Sexual education must be faced openly
BY BRIANNA
PARKER
Staff Writer
Were you taught everything you needed to know about sex, sexuality Vpd
relationships in school?
Out of the 23 students I talked to when putting this article together, only
three of them told me that the sex education they received in school was useful
to them.
“I don’t even remember having sex-ed in high school,” said
sophomore Dominic Greenaway. “They told us about men’s
and women’s genitalia, but we never really talked about sex.
I didn’t feel like I needed sexual education because I had the
Internet.”
This reflects a deeply rooted problem with the way
America’s youth is taught about sexuality. The Internet is
an important resource for many things, but sorting through
what is good information and what is bogus can be difficult
for adolescents who have not received proper education on
the topic.
American media is saturated with messages about sex. Boys
learn that, in order to be proper men, they need to get laid.
All the while, girls are learning that they need to protect
themselves against the evils of sexual intercourse, lest they become sluts.
With all the conflicting information out there, is it not the job of schools to
do what they do best and educate their students about how to protect themselves
against the potential negatives that sex brings while informing them of the
potential positives of sexuality?
Of course it is. The main problem with sexual education in America is the
limited scope of information provided to these young adults.
Abstinence-only education and sex education that only focuses on the negative
consequences of sex will never be enough to prepare people for the whole range
of sexual identities and sexual experiences that exist, let alone prepare people to
make decisions about their bodies that they are comfortable with.
And let’s talk about inclusivity for a second.
On Feb. 9, Fox News published an article claiming that students in a California
high school were publicly shamed for not accepting the “LGBT agenda” that was
being taught to them as part of their education on sexuality.
The students were visited in class by peers from the Queer Straight Alliance
and given handouts with LGBT terminology. They were also asked to place
themselves on a gender spectrum.
r >
ould come to sch^bj:i&elji|gfc|i|i^^^9y
and the next day they boiild cofne to school feeling like a girl,’^ one parenrlbfd
Fox.
Some parents, who identified themselves as Christian, claimed that parents
should have been notified for permission before the students were taught about
these topics.
The problem with asking parents for permission before teaching students
about sexual identity is that those students who are not given permission are
left woefully under-informed about issues that may very well affect them. Being
Christian does not exclude one from being gay, transgender, gender-fluid,
bisexual, asexual, etc.
The program taught at that California high school is actually a step in the
right direction and is a program which should be more common in American
schools.
What happens to these children who grow up in the dark about how to make
informed decisions with their sexual encounters?
Withholding information about sex from adolescents is no way to protect
them from the potential dangers of sexual activity. In fact, it does quite the
opposite. If young adults do not even know how to use birth control, how to
protect against STDs or the signs of healthy versus abusive relationships, this
opens the door for much bigger problems.
Seven out of my 23 interviewees told me that they wish information about
sex had been presented in a more positive light and that there should have been
a greater emphasis on consent.
In a society in which girls are sent home from school for showing too much
skin, inhibiting their ability to learn, a society in which young men are told they
need to be sexually active or else they are flawed and a society in which young
queer kids have their identities erased time and time again in hetero-centric
media, a little positivity about sexuality is greatly needed.
“Abstinence-only education programs are not effective at delaying the
initiation of sexual activity or reducing teen pregnancy,” reports Advocates
for Youth, a nonprofit dedicated to helping teenagers make informed decisions
about their sexuality.
Let’s face it — sex is never going away. Parents cannot just ignore the issue
and hope that their children remain “pure.” This is simply not how it works in
the real world. Whether adolescents decide to have sex or not, informed and
consensual decisions are paramount.
fi
LETTER IS EDITOR
Core values should be reflected in salary equality
As a former full-time employee, a current adjunct
faculty member at Guilford College and as a Quaker, I
love the ethos at Guilford. It’s a place founded on the
belief that all people have the right to express their voices
and can expect to be heard. It is a community where
gifts and shortcomings alike can be brought to light to be
examined and explored.
I believed this as a full-time employee, and I still believe
it as an adjunct instructor. However, the ongoing issue
of salary disparities between full-time faculty, adjunct
faculty and professional staff members has been eschewed
for many years. Had the issue been addressed fairly in
years past, I would still be working full-time at Guilford.
After promised salary adjustments were tabled year after
year and professional staff members received only two
small increases in the six years I worked full-time, I was
forced to seek employment elsewhere. The salaries paid to
my colleagues and I are not a living wage, and I could no
longer “make do” as a full-time employee making a paltry
salary and working the long hours my job demanded.
While my full-time job required a masters’ degree, the
time salary was equal to what I had earned at an entry-
level job in decades past. People ask me why I even took
the position in the first place. In my hiring process, I
was told that salary adjustments, which included my own
salary, would be implemented by the end of the fiscal
year. I believed that promise. When the adjustments didn’t
happen, our supervisor made repeated pleas on our behalf
to the school’s administration, to no avail. She often
apologized that her efforts had not proven successful.
Another reason that I took the full-time position at
Guilford was that I truly believe in its core mission. It’s
the same reason I continue to teach there, despite the small
paycheck that comes with being an adjunct instructor.
Guilford College is a place where good can unfold in ways
that wouldn’t happen on many other college campuses
across the U.S. And, although working full-time at
Guilford left me financially depleted, I continue to trust
that the salaries for adjunct faculty and professional staff
members eventually will reflect the equality and integrity
that is part of the College’s well-promoted core values and
that is foundational to the Quaker practice.
Cheryl Snider Bridges, M.Div.