Going Too Far? Sex, Sin and Social Policy Author(S): Susan Rose Source: Social Forces, Vol

Going Too Far? Sex, Sin and Social Policy Author(s): Susan Rose Source: Social Forces, Vol. 84, No. 2 (Dec., 2005), pp. 1207-1232 Published by: Oxford University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3598496 Accessed: 21-07-2015 13:14 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Social Forces.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions GoingToo Far? Sex, Sin and Social Policy

SusanRose, Dickinson College

Abstract This paper examines the impact of the ReligiousRight on Americansocial policy as it relates to family, sexuality and reproductivehealth. The articlefocuses on the current debates and practices of abstinence-until-marriageprograms vs. comprehensivesex educationprograms - and the waysin whichthey reflect and affectcultural attitudes about sexuality, teenagers,parents and rights. The manuscript is based on comparative fieldwork, includingparticipant observationsin schools and interviewsin the United States and Denmark with teenagers,teachers and sexuality educators.We question whetherit is sex educationthat goes toofar in promotingearly and promiscuous sex or the ReligiousRight in attemptingto censorvital informationand servicesfromyoungpeople.

Whatif Iwant to havesex outsideof marriage? I guess you'lljust haveto be preparedto die. - No Second Chance

The UnitedStates leads the industrializedworld in teen pregnancy,abortion and sexually- transmitteddisease rates- andin legislatingand funding abstinence-until-marriage programs as socialpolicy. It also standsout as the onlyindustrialized country still embroiled in a debate aboutwhether creationism should be taughtin publicschools. These issues helpreveal the dynamicinterplay between religion and politics in the UnitedStates. In examining the roleand power of conservativereligious groups in shapingdomestic and foreignpolicy, this paper focuses on the issues of reproductiveand sexual health,education and family- and the impactthey haveon youngpeople. Inorder to illuminatethe culturaland political-economicfactors that informdebates and social policyconcerning sexuality and gender in the UnitedStates, this study presents a comparativeanalysis of Danishand U.S.approaches to familyplanning, reproductive health andsexuality education. This analysis of youngpeople, their teachers, sex educatorsand sex ed materialsin the UnitedStates and Denmarkrepresents more than a yearof ethnographic fieldworkand participant-observationin Roskilde, Denmark and centralPennsylvania.' The case of Denmarkis informativebecause the ratesof teen pregnancyand attitudestowards sexuality50 years ago were not muchdifferent than those in the UnitedStates. Since the 1970s, however,Denmark has takena muchmore pragmatic approach to teen sexualityand sex education.Although Danish and American teens tend to havesimilar patterns of sexual debutand activity,Danish teens have muchlower rates of teenage pregnancy,abortion and sexuallytransmitted diseases (STDs).For example, in 1995,there were 61 birthsper 1,000 females between the ages of 15-19in the UnitedStates, and only nine in Denmark(Feijoo 2001; Singhand Darroch2000).Today, the dominantDanish discourse about sexuality and reproductiverights is strikinglydifferent from the dominantdiscourse in the UnitedStates - not because Danesare by natureor nationality"just more open" about sex and Americans "justnaturally more prudish" - rather,the debates oversexuality and reproductiverights and responsibilityare rooted in different religious, political, economic and community orientations.

Directcorrespondence to Susan Rose, Department of Sociology,Dickinson College, Carlisle, PA 17013.E-mail: [email protected].

? The Universityof NorthCarolina Press SocialForces, Volume 84, Number2, December2005

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1208 * SocialForces Volume 84, Number2 * December2005

Abstinence-Until-Marriage Programs in the United States

Since 1996, nearly$1 billionin state andfederal funding has been allocatedfor abstinence- only educationdespite a lack of evidence supportingthe effectiveness of this approach (Hauser2004; Kirby[1997] 2000; Manloveet al. 2004; "NewStudies" 2005; "SexEducation" 2002; "WaxmanReport" 2004). Underthe Bushadministration, abstinence-only programs have expandedrapidly. While $170 millionin federalfunds have been slated for FY2005, PresidentBush has allocatedan additional$39 millionfor abstinence-until-married education programs,bringing the total requestfor FY2006 to $205.5 million.This representsa 50 percentincrease in funding since 2004 ("NewStudies" 2005; Yoder 2005). Despitethe decliningteen pregnancyrates during the 1990s,34 percentof teenage girls get pregnantat least once beforethey reachage 20, resultingin morethan 850,000 teen pregnanciesa year- the vast majorityof whichare unintended. At this level,the UnitedStates has the highestrate of teen pregnancyin the fullyindustrialized world. Roughly 9 millionnew STIsalso occuramong teenagers and young adults in the UnitedStates annually(Children's DefenseFund 2004; Henshaw2004; "NewStudies" 2005). By law, abstinence-only programs must haveas their"exclusive purpose, teaching the social,psychological and healthgains to be realizedby abstaining from sexual activity." While this is a desirableoption for young people, it is also problematicfor many.By promoting abstinence-only education that omits complete, medicallyaccurate information, U.S. policy ignores research, public opinion and the experience of othercountries about what actually works to preventteenage pregnancyand STIs. The WaxmanReport (December 2004), which examinedschool-based sex education curricula,concluded that many young people are receiving medically inaccurate or misleading information,often in direct contradiction to the findingsof governmentscientists. Since 1999, severalmillion children ages 9 to 18 haveparticipated in the morethan 100 federally-funded abstinenceprograms. After reviewing the 13 most commonlyused curricula,Congressman Waxman'sstaff concluded that two of the curriculawere accuratebut 11 others,used by 69 organizationsin 25 states, contain unprovedclaims, subjectiveconclusions or outright falsehoodsregarding reproductive health, gender traits and when lifebegins (Connolly 2004; see also "TexasTeens Increased Sex AfterAbstinence Program" 2005; Waxman 2004). InMay 2002, the Houseof Representativespassed H.R.473, the PersonalResponsibility, Workand FamilyProtection Bill, which renewed funding of abstinence-onlyprograms at the level of $50 milliona yearfor the next five years.While there was oppositionto the billby many, includingRep. Lois Capps (D-Calif.)who argued that "abstinenceprograms are exaggeratingthe failurerate of condoms"and using "terrortechniques to keepteens from havingsex," the billpassed by a vote of 229-197with committeeRepublicans arguing that "itwould be impossibleto agreeon whatinformation is medicallyaccurate."

Americans Teaching Fear

Inabstinence-until-marriage materials, sex is often equatedwith death, disease and danger; fearsurfaces as the primarymessage andtactic used to persuadeyoung people to steerclear of sex beforeor outsideof marriage.The abstinence-only video, "No Second Chance,"used for middle-schoolSex Respectaudiences, juxtaposes discussions of havingsex outsideof marriagewith images of men dyingfrom AIDS. In "No Second Chance,"an evangelicalsex educatorcompares sex outsideof marriage- notto the all-Americangame of baseball- but to playingRussian Roulette. She tells a classroomof youngpeople that: "Every time you have sex, it's likepulling the trigger- the onlydifference is, in RussianRoulette, you onlyhave one in six chances of gettingkilled." When one boy asks, "whatif I havesex beforemarriage?"

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Sex,Sin and SocialPolicy ? 1209 he is told, "Well,I guess you'lljust haveto be preparedto die. Andyou'll probably take with you yourspouse and one or moreof yourchildren." James Dobson'sorganization, Focus on the Family,distributes "No Second Chance"and its companion,"Sex, Lies, and the Truth." Bothhave been widelyused in publicas well as Christian,schools throughoutthe United States (Kantor1994; Mast 1983; "TeachingFear" 1996). According to the organization's website (1999-2005),"Sex Respect" is now beingused in 50 states and23 countries. Founderand presidentof the NationalAbstinence Clearing House in SiouxFalls, South Dakota,Leslie Unruh uses snakesto teach aboutSTDs and the dangersof usingcondoms. 'Asshe uncoilsher nest of rubbervipers: Herbie Herpes, Wally Wart, Hester Hepatitis, Albert AIDS,Lucy Loss of Reputation- and don'tforget - poorPregnant Peggy Sue, she tellsyoung peopleabout the risksof sex beforemarriage." (Sternberg 2002) "Condoms," she says, "are overrated.'We tell them condoms won't protectyour heart,that latexwon't stop human papillomavirus."' (See also Brody2003; quotedin Sternberg2002.) Another abstinence-only curriculum,Abstinence Works. A Notebookon Pre-MaritalChastity, invokes the image of MotherTeresa (Driscol 1990). Displayed on its 1990cover is a pictureof MotherTeresa on one side anda pictureof a skeletonon the other.Surrounding them in bolditalics are the words:

TodayI set beforeyou Lifeor Death,Blessing or Curse. Oh,that you wouldChoose Life that you and your children might Live. - Deuteronomy 30:19

LeslieKantor, former director of the SIECUSCommunity Advocacy Project, conducted an extensivecontent analysis of abstinence-onlysex-ed programsproduced and promotedby ChristianRight groups that are used in publicschools. She concluded:

These programs omit the most fundamentalinformation on contraception and disease prevention, perpetuate medical misinformation,and rely on religiousdoctrine and images of fearand shame in discouragingsexual activity

Giventhis introductionto sexualityin increasingnumbers of publicschools across the UnitedStates (Dailard2000; Landryet al. 1999),how are youngAmericans conditioned to thinkabout and negotiatetheir own andothers' sexuality? Once they marry- if they choose to marry- how willthey deal with theirsexuality and the sexualityof theirspouses? Even withinthe contextof a heterosexualmarriage, how are such negative- eventerrifying images - suddenlytransformed? And what aboutthose who do not live withinthe confines of a heterosexualmarriage; those who are gay, lesbianor transgendered;or those who find themselveswithout a partner,be it throughdeath, divorce or nevermarrying? Where should the linesbetween privatebelief and publicpolicy be drawn? The ReligiousRight represents some 10 percentof the adultAmerican population. Their concernsabout teenage sex and teen pregnancyclearly resonate with a largerpublic, but theirsolutions do not.Their influence on socialpolicy is disproportionateto their numbers; the vast majorityof the Americanpublic is supportiveof sex education.A 2004 reporton "Public Supportfor Comprehensive Sexuality Education" indicates that 93 percentof parentsof junior highschool studentsand 91 percentof parentsof highschool studentsbelieve it is veryor somewhat importantto have sex educationas partof the school curriculum.2And young people?Eighty-two percent of adolescentsages 15-17and 75 percentof youngpeople ages 18-24want moreinformation on "howto protectyourself from HIV/AIDS and otherSTDs," "thedifferent types of birthcontrol that are available,"and "howto bringup sexual health issues such as STDsand birthcontrol with a partner."(Hoff 2003: pp. 70-71and 111-112)

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1210 * Social Forces Volume 84, Number 2 * December 2005

Theelectorate likewise shows supportfor comprehensive sexuality education: 63 percentof voterssaid they were more likelyto vote for a candidatewho supportscomprehensive sex education,while only 10 percentof engaged voters supportedabstinence-until-marriage programsin publicschools ("MobilizingSupport" 2002). While 30 percentof Americanadults agreewith the statement"the federal government should fund sex educationprograms that have 'abstainingfrom sexual activity' as theironly purpose," 67 percentof adultsagree withthe statementthat "the money should be usedto fundmore comprehensive sex educationprograms that includeinformation on how to obtainand use condomsand othercontraceptives." (Sex Educationin America 2000: 7). Although 28 percentof Americanadults agreed that "providing informationabout how to obtainand use condomsand other contraception might encourage teens to havesexual intercourse," 65 percentof adultsbelieved that "not providing information abouthow to obtainand use condomsand other contraception might mean more teens will have unsafesexual intercourse." (Sex Education in America 2004:22) Evenconservative Christians tend to supportcomprehensive sex education.A 1999survey showed that8 in 10 conservativeChristians supported comprehensive sex educationin high schools and7 in 10 supportedit in middleschools (Surveyof America'sViews 1999). Former Presidentand CEO of SIECUSfor 12 yearsand current president of "TheReligious Institute on SexualMorality, Justice and Healing,"Deborah Haffner agrees, arguingthat the majorityof evangelicalssupport comprehensive sex educationthat includes abstinence as an option.3 Inspite of millionsof dollarsin funding,to date, there are no sound empiricaldata that indicatethat abstinence-onlyprograms are effective; in fact, there have been very few evaluationstudies of abstinence-until-marriageprograms (Kirby 2001; Manlove2004; "New State Evaluations"2004). Empiricaldata also suggest that to the degree that an effect of comprehensivesex educationhas been identifiable,it has been foundto postponeinitiation of sexualintercourse; reduce the frequencyof intercourseand numberof sexualpartners; increasethe use of contraceptives;and reducepregnancy rates among teens (Kirby[1997] 2001; Schorr1998; "Teaching Fear" 1994). Why, then, do abstinence-onlyapproaches appeal to many politiciansand policy-makers,even when the majorityof Americanssupport comprehensivesex education?What are the consequencesof implementingabstinence-only approachescompared with comprehensivesex educationthat includesabstinence as a reasonableand often desirableoption? No one is debatingwhether abstinence should be presentedas a viableoption and reasonablechoice. Whatcritics are questioningis how abstinence-until-marriageprograms came to masqueradeas educationin publicschools.

The Sexual Politics ofAbstinence-Only

Since the early 1980s, the "familyvalues" movement has been pushingabstinence-until marriageprograms. In 1981, the U.S.Office of PopulationAffairs began administeringthe AdolescentFamily Life Act (AFLA), a program designed to preventteen pregnancyby promoting chastityand self-discipline.Crusaders for teen sexualabstinence then scoredanother major victorywhen Congresspassed welfare reform in 1996.Overshadowed by the welfare-to-work aspectsof the lawwas a provisionto fundprograms to teachchildren that sex beforemarriage is notonly morally wrong but also dangerous to theirhealth. Between 1997 and 2002, more than halfa billiondollars was spent on abstinence-onlyprograms. At the same time,funds were divertedfrom comprehensivesex educationprograms and internationalfamily planning assistance(International Family 1997).4 In February 2005, President Bush proposed a 25 percent increasein funding for abstinence-only programs for FY2006 over the previousfiscal year while slashingfunding for manyother social programsin the name of deficitreduction, including fundingfor local schools, food stamps, child care and health care for veterans." Many - fromthe

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Sex,Sin and SocialPolicy *1211

Children'sDefense Fund to the Texas Baptist Standard- are questioningjust how compassionateBush's policies are (Marus 2005; Children's Defense Fund 2005).

International Consequences: From Domestic to Foreign Policy

Theserecent actions to limitreproductive health reveal the ways inwhich the UnitedStates is retreatingfrom its own previousposition and that of its traditionalallies aroundthe world (LaFranchi2004). On his firstday in office in January2001, PresidentBush reimposedthe "globalgag rule"that had been institutedby PresidentReagan in 1984 and revokedby PresidentClinton in 1993. Imposingthe UnitedStates' position on the abortionpractices of othercountries, however, reflects neither U.S. law norU.S. public opinion. It also significantly impedeswomen's access to familyplanning and contraceptiveservices by prohibitingU.S. familyplanning assistance to hospitalsand healthclinics in developingcountries that also provideabortions or abortion-relatedinformation (Cohen 2001). At the U.N.Children's Summit in May2002, U.S. HealthSecretary Tommy Thompson arguedfor the teachingof abstinenceas the preferredapproach to sex education.According to a CBSWorld News report,"The three-day conference was long on rhetoricabout the sanctityof childhoodbut short on consensus. Delegates at a U.N.session on children haggled... overa finaldeclaration with the UnitedStates, the Vaticanand Islamicstates in favorof sexualabstinence and againstany hintof abortionfor adolescents."(Ireland 2002; U.N.Children's Summit Hits Snag 2002) SusanCohen, writing for the GuttmacherInstitute, reportedthat: "TheUnited States delegation,siding with the Sudan,Iran, and Iraq"(and slidingperilously close to Bush's"evil axis"), "both stupefied and angered the European(EU) and LatinAmerican delegations which finallyvoted against the U.S. position."Adrienne Germain,president of the InternationalWomen's Health Coalition, bluntly stated:

Thisalliance shows the depthsof perversityof the [US.]position. On the one hand, we're presumablyblaming these countries for unspeakableacts of terrorism,and at the same time we are allying ourselveswith them in the oppressionof women. -quoted in Cohen2002

Inits closingstatement at the summit,the EUdelivered a strongrejoinder to the United States. "Youngpeople shouldbe empoweredto makeappropriate and safe choices about theirsexual behavior."The Spanishdiplomat speaking on the EU'sbehalf argued: "They (young people) must be able to access high qualitysexual and reproductivehealth informationand services to achievethis, as we all agreed in Cairoand Beijing."Belgium's youth minister,Bert Anciaux, went furtherin a statement released afterthe summit.The U.S.approach, he said, reduces sex educationto "awoolly discourse on abstinenceand fidelity"that "does not fit in with the world of experience of millionsof young people throughoutthe world."Echoing the sentiments of others, Anciauxcommented that he was "amazedthat, due to the pressureof extremelyconservative lobby groups within the United States, the U.S. government has become an ally of all kinds of reactionary regimes."(Cohen 2002) Likewise,in the seven-dayAsian and PacificPopulation Conference held in Bangkokin December2002, the Americandelegation engaged in an acrimoniousdebate with all of the othercountries over abortion, sex educationand methodsof birthcontrol (Dao 2002). U.S. administrationofficials maintained that the 1994 Cairoagreement did not adequatelysupport the promotionof abstinence. U.S. delegates maintainedthat phrases present in the

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1212 * SocialForces Volume 84, Number 2 * December2005

conference'sproposed policy - such as "reproductiverights" and "consistent condom use" - were euphemismsfor abortion and the approvalof "underage"sex - policiesthat were far out of linewith the currentBush administration which advocates abstinence outside of marriage and opposes abortion(McClure 2002). Assistant Secretary of StateArthur E. Dewey stated unequivocallythat the UnitedStates would seek to blockthe passageof anyinternational family planningpolicy that permits abortion or promotescontraception for adolescents. "The United Statessupports the sanctityof lifefrom conception to naturaldeath." (Dao 2002) But when the UnitedStates demanded that even the phrase"reproductive health" be struckfrom the proposal in orderto protectunborn children, critics - even those fromhighly religious countries like the Philippinesand Iran- suggested that U.S.foreign policy had been hijackedby the Religious Right.Rejecting proposals by the BushAdministration, 32 Asiannations reaffirmed the historic agreementreached at the 1994 InternationalConference on Populationand Development (ICPD).They also agreed on anaction plan to advancereproductive and sexual health and rights acrossthe region(Caucus for ICPD 2002; Statement by Obaid 2002; "U.S. Fails to Block"2002). "Itis sad to see the U.S.move frombeing a leaderon these issues, to that of a minority voice,"said NinukWidyantoro of the Women'sHealth Foundation in Indonesia:

Sexualand reproductivehealth is one of the most importantsocial issues of the millennium.We know thatthe U.S.delegation does not even represent the views of the majorityof the American people. Thecurrent U.S. administration is being held hostageby an extreme conservativeminority with little regard for the health, welfareand freedomsof women of Asiaand the Pacific.We hope thatin the future,U.S. delegations at such conferences will more accuratelyrepresent the humanitarianvalues of the women and men of theirnation. - quoted in Dao 2001

Such positions have distanced the UnitedStates even furtherfrom the worldwide consensus on reproductiveand sexualhealth issues thatthe UnitedStates hadonce been instrumentalin shaping at the 1994 InternationalConference on Populationand Developmentin Cairo,and the 1995 WorldConference on Womenin Beijing.Throughout the negotiations,it was the "Riogroup," comprised of LatinAmerica countries, that took the leadin confrontingthe UnitedStates on most of the reproductivehealth issues, despite the U.S.government's assumption that these overwhelminglyRoman Catholic countries wouldsupport the sociallyconservative U.S. position. The EuropeanUnion (EU), Australia, Canada,Japan and Norwaywere also active in opposing the U.S. efforts. Cohen(2002) concluded:"Indications are that the WhiteHouse focus primarilyis on appeasingits core far-rightconstituency, which does not bode well for UNFPA"("President's Overseas ReproductiveHealth Policy 2002"), nor does it for young and unmarriedpeople in the UnitedStates.

Cross-National Data on Teen Sexual Behavior

The UnitedStates leads the industrializedworld in its high rates of teenage pregnancies, abortionsand STDs.Although the U.S.teen pregnancyrate has decreasedduring the past decade, it is still nine times higherthan that of the Netherlands,nearly five times higher thanin Germany,and nearlyfour times higherthan the ratein France.The teen birthrate is also much higherin the UnitedStates, nearly11 times higherthan in the Netherlands,

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Sex,Sin and SocialPolicy ? 1213

nearlyfive times higherthan the rate in France,and nearlyfour times higher than in Germany.6The teen abortionrate is nearlyeight times higherin the UnitedStates than in Germany,nearly seven times higherthan in the Netherlands,and nearlythree times higher than in France(Feijoo 2001). Muchhigher rates for HIV,syphilis, gonorrhea and chlamydia likewisedistinguish the UnitedStates (Darrochet al. 2001; Feijoo2001). Cross-nationalstudies revealthat differential rates in teen pregnancyare influencedby culturalattitudes towards and educationabout sexuality,the accessibilityof healthcare and contraception,the relationshipbetween religionand politics, and the degree of economic inequality(Jones et al. 1996).With one of the highest rates of infantmortality, child death, child poverty and economic inequalitybetween rich and poor in the industrializedworld, the UnitedStates is not faringwell (Brouwer1998; Henshaw2004; KidsCount 2000; "NewStudies" 2005; Shapiro1992; Singhet al. 2000; Stateof America's Children2004). Ratherthan deal withthese complexand interrelatedissues, however,U.S. policytoo often addresses teen pregnancyas an isolatedsocial problemand increasingly advises young girlsto 'justsay no."

Just Say No

Abstinence-onlyadvocates advise young people to not have sex; theiraim, however,is to curtailsexual activityfor anyone not in a heterosexual marriage.Uneasy about teen sexuality,homosexuality, the increase in out-of-wedlockbirths, and the erosion of the patriarchal,nuclear family, they emphasizethe dangers of sex and the hazardsof sexual relationshipsoutside of marriage(Gallagher 1999). Fearrather than affirmation,rejection ratherthan acceptance, and denial ratherthan knowledge about sexuality tend to dominate abstinence-onlymaterials, and serve as a chilling effect on contemporary Americanresearch and social policy. Forexample, in 1987 a numberof institutes,including the NationalInstitute of Child Healthand HumanDevelopment, The Centerfor Disease Controland Prevention,the NationalInstitute on Aging, and the NationalInstitute of Mental Healthsupported a proposal by EdwardLaumann, et al., to undertakean ambitiousstudy of sexuality in America.Scientists in these agencies "wantedmore generalstudies of sexualityto then examinesuch issues as teen pregnancy,sexual dysfunctionand childabuse." Butsoon after the contract was awarded, the researchers noted that (America's)"national squeamishness about sex" began to emerge (Michaelet al. 1994: 27; Nussbaum1997). Governmentofficials in particularwere squeamishabout the inclusionof questionsabout masturbation- evidenced also in the forced resignationof formerU.S. Surgeon General Jocelyn Eldersfor using the M-word(masturbation). Political battles followed. Sen. Jesse Helms introduced an amendment to a funding bill that specifically prohibitedthe governmentfrom payingfor such a study. As a result, the researchersconducted the study throughprivate money; the sample was reducedfrom 20,000 to 3,500 adults,and no one under the age of 18 was included in the sample (Boonstra2001; Nussbaum 1997:225).As MarthaNussbaum argued in CultivatingHumanity: "Suspiciousness of sex researchhad triumphed, impeding the progressin inquiry."(1997: 225)7 Incontrast to the currentU.S. trends in legislatingabstinence-only policies, Denmark - and manyother countriesboth in the industrializedand developingworld - continueto implementmore comprehensive research and sex educationprograms, believing that it is importantto informand educate young people about sexualityand contraception.They believethat adolescents have a rightto information(Alford 2005).

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1214 ? SocialForces Volume 84, Number2 * December2005

AttitudesToward Teen Sexuality in the United Statesand Denmark

Case Study:The UnitedStates

Sincethe 1960s,Religious Right political groups have waged a campaignagainst the teaching of comprehensivesex educationin publicschools. Duringthe late 1960s, conservative Christianorganizations such as the ChristianCrusade published booklets including: "Is the LittleRed Schoolhouse the Placeto TeachRaw Sex?" in which they argued that parents were the only appropriatesource for informationabout sexuality (Kantor 1994; "TeachingFear" 1994: 11).Phyllis Schafly, head of the conservativeEagle Forum, went as faras to arguethat exposingchildren in publicschools to sex ed mayconstitute child abuse (1985). Their position was clear:any discussion about sex belongedin the home, not inthe schools. Bythe 1980s, however,it was clearthat the ReligiousRight was havinglittle success in removingsex educationfrom the schools.8As a result,conservative Christian groups shifted strategiesand beganto promote"abstinence-only" programs in the publicschools. Rallying grass-rootssupport against comprehensivesex education,the Eagle Forum,Concerned Womenfor America, Focus on the Family,and Citizens for Excellence in Educationall devoted majorresources to promotingabstinence-only curricula as a substitutefor comprehensive sex ed programs.Through a rangeof educationalmaterials, videotapes and promotional advertising,they have effectivelypromoted curricula that teach fear and withholdvital informationabout prevention of AIDSand teen pregnancy. Programssuch as "SexRespect," "Facing Reality" and curriculadeveloped by TeenAid (Me,My World, My Future; Sexuality, Commitment and Family)initially received federal Title XXfunding through the AdolescentFamily Life Act (AFLA).During the Reaganyears under this Act, approximately$7 millionwas availableannually for the developmentof "family central"pregnancy prevention programs emphasizing abstinence and adoption.The state and federalmoney used to fund "Sex-Respect"was essential,according to a writerfor the ConservativeDigest:

... the Adolescent FamilyLife Act was writtenexpressly for the purpose of diverting[federal] money that would otherwisego to PlannedParenthood into groups withtraditional values. This noble purposehas certainlybeen fulfilledhere. -quoted in (TeachingFear 1994: 11)

Whilerates of pregnancy,AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases remainalarmingly high among America'syouth, opponents of sex education have become increasingly successfulin censoringvital, life-saving information that has proveneffective in dealingwith these problems(Kantor 1994).

Beyond Sex:Teaching Traditional Gender Roles

Centralto the sex ed debate is the ReligiousRight's attempt to preservepatriarchy and to privilegemen's rights over women's rights and parental rights over children's rights (Bendroth 1993;Hawley 1994; Howland 1997; Marty and Appleby 1999; Riesebrodt 1993). The ideaof equalitybetween men and women is threateningto manyadvocates of abstinence-only policies.Not only are they working to preventsex beforeor outsideof marriage,they arealso fightingto preservethe traditional,patriarchal family. The pro-marriage movement goes hand-

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Sex,Sin and SocialPolicy 1215 in-handwith this (Gallagher1999; Stacey 2002) as does the promotionof old-fashioned gender-rolenorms. As one readsthrough the abstinence-onlymaterials, one findsan oldand mixed message. It is the story of sex as the tale of predatorand prey - and women, beware. Men are consideredto be sexual beings,who beyonda certainpoint, cannot hold back.Therefore, women must. Such messages are abundantlyclear in PatriciaDriscoll's, Sexual Common Sense. AffirmingAdolescentAbstinence. The turning point, according to the ArousalTime Linefound in this bookis "theprolonged kiss." After this point,there is no turningback. While females too have sexual instincts,they take longerto become arousedand, therefore, are givengreater responsibility in exercisingrestraint. Thefollowing excerpt from "Sex Respect" contextualizes the ArousalTime Line. Presented hereis a fictitiousdialogue between TV host, Jane Bright,and psychologist,Dr. Wise.

Jane: Wehave manyteenagers in our "RespectingSex" audience, Doctorso I thinkit would be helpfulto them if we talkabout how sexual feeling gets strongeras two people become increasingly intimatephysically Let's call it thestages of sexualarousal.

Dr.Wise: Fine,Jane. As you can see, it shows the stages of sexual arousal.

Dr.Wise: Males thinking about the oppositesex tendto focuson the sexualorgans, their own and thoseof the imaginedpartner Females, when they visualizea sex partner- I shouldsay love partner- think not of the male's genitals, but ratherof his whole body as an instrumentfor giving warmth, closeness andsecurity In fact, a male can experiencesexual release witha womanhe doesn'teven like, whereasa womanusually can't do so unlessshe loves herpartner

Jane:Dr Wise,do you thinkthis difference is a good thing?

Dr.Wise: Yes,it helps girlscope withthe sexualaggressiveness of boys.It helps thembe morelevel-headed about sex.

The ReligiousRight's concern about sex and sexualityfocuses on issues regarding social orderand control- especially over women's bodies and desires. The adage that "good girls don't"but "realboys do" continues to engender the double-standardthat defines male and female in oppositionto one another,although many of the abstinence- only curriculaare pushingfor abstinence for all pre-marrieds.This framework,however, revealscontradictions. From a conservativeChristian perspective, humans are not animals (whichis at the cruxof the evolution-creationdebate), rather they stand onlya littlelower than the angels. Yet, they are also seen as no differentfrom animalsdriven by sexual instincts:once aroused,there is no turningback. These distinctionssound very familiar because they are partof the "sexualwisdom" of Americanculture that goes well beyond the confinesof conservativeChristian thinking. Women are considered to be less controlled by theirsexuality and thereforemore responsiblefor both theirown sexual behaviorand thatof men. Ifshe is not,then warnsT.V. evangelist James Robison,whose bookSex is Not Lovesold morethan half a millioncopies, it is the worstthing that can happento humanity. In"God's Angry Man," William Martin describes Robison's tirade against sex, "hisprime target,selected at least in partbecause he ratherobviously understands its powerfulallure."

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Knowthe Progressionof SexualFeeling with IncreasedPhysical Intimacy SexualArousal - --- i??~~~~~~~~~~~% --- Simple Good Mutual Being Hand Night Prolonged Heavy Sex Sexual Endof Relationshipin ; Tooether Holdina Kiss Kiss Neckina Pettina Pettina Plav Intercourse its PresentForm *

beginningof Male Female Female Nogenital feeling aroused danger Genital Genital Genital 0o feeling feeling feeling aroused aroused aroused t:0q00

*Chartfrom PatriciaB. Driscoll,Sexual Common Sense: Affirming Adolescent Abstinence

t7dr

I o

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Sex,Sin and SocialPolicy * 1217

Ina talkto youngpeople, Robison "spoke in excited,almost lurid tones of the responsea girl's bodycan stirin a youngman's loins."

Man,when you see a girl'slegs orbreast, it's supposed to botheryou. Ifyou can lookat herlegs andher body and it doesn'tbother you, you are a pure queer... Girls,if yourboyfriend walks out of here tonight and looksover at yourlegs just shiningin the breeze and says,your legs don'tbother me, you canput it down- you'veeither got hideous legs or he's a pervert. - Robison(quoted in Martin1981: 157)

Robisonthen goes on to talkabout the woman'sresponsibility in taming the malebeast:

Sex before marriagedevelops sensual drives that can never be satisfiedand may cause a man to behavelike an animal.Some girls become thatway too, butmost of themdon't. When they do, it'sthe mostawful thing that can happento humanity - Robison(quoted in Martin1981: 223)

Moreawful, we must ask, than rape?Than millions of people dyingof AIDS?Of having unwantedchildren who cannotbe caredfor by theirparents or a societythat refusesto pay for adequatehealth care or raisethe minimumwage so that people workingfulltime rise abovethe povertyline? The renewedefforts to underminesex educationare not just about sex; they are partof a broaderchallenge to publiceducation which centers around parents' vs. children'sand states' rights.

Gender and Sexual Politics of the Religious Right

The attempts of the ReligiousRight in the UnitedStates to preserveparental rights over those of children'srights reveal the kindof hostilitydirected towards women and children. In his critiqueof the FourthWorld Conference on Women, GaryBauer, president of the FamilyResearch Council, wrote that feminists wanted "to enshrine the 'rights' of adolescents to informationand medicalservices where sex and AIDSwere concerned, without 'interference'from parents" and that although, "parents rights were not completely overruled,they were subordinatedto 'the best interests of the child."' Moreover,"these radicalwomen are tryingto achieve greaterequality between women and men in economic and politicalspheres, so that women can better support their familiesand children."(Bauer 1995) Inhis August1995 FOFNewsletter, "The Family Under Fire By the U.N.,"James Dobson warnsthat the U.N.Conference on Womenrepresented:

"themost radical,atheistic, anti-family crusade in the historyof the world....The extremists who are...promoting this conference are a millionmiles outsidethe Americanmainstream.... It is a mysteryto me how such enormousthreats to ourspiritual and culturalheritage haveslithered into our midst without due noticeor alarm. "

FormerU.S. Presidential candidate, Pat Buchanan, evidently concurred, commenting just afterthe conferencethat "it was so bizarre,seeing allthose women- itwas likethe barscene

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1218 * SocialForces Volume 84, Number2 * December2005 outof StarWars." Dobson goes on to warnhis readers,radio audiences and congressmen that while"the Agency for International Development will channel hundreds of millionsof dollarsto supportwomen's reproductive and sexual rights and family planning services, the onlyhope forderailing this train is the Christianchurch." Althoughempirical data show that the degree to which an effect of comprehensive sexualityeducation has been identifiablein studies, it has postponed initiationof sexual intercourseand/or increased the effectiveuse of contraceptives(Kirby [1999] 2001; Manlove, 2004; "NewState Evaluations2004;" Schorr 1998), abstinence-advocates continue to insist thatcomprehensive sex educationencourages young people to havesex.

Different Discourses: The Danish Approach

Thedominant Danish discourse about sexuality and reproductive and teens' rightsis strikingly differentfrom the dominantdiscourse in the UnitedStates (AdolescentSexual Health 2001; see also Heins2001; "Sexuality Rights" 1995). In Denmark, the rightsof adolescentsto sexual and reproductiveinformation and choiceare framed within the contextof a socialdemocracy andhave been embeddedin Danishlegislation since 1966.As NellRasmussen, director of the DanishFamily Planning Association, described in an interviewin 1998: Denmarkbecame the firstcountry in the worldto grantyoung people, regardless of age, access to contraceptionand contraceptioncounseling... It's about human rights: in orderfor you to act responsibly,you haveto have choices - governmentor parentsor whoeverthe decisionmakers are cannotdemand responsible behavior of teenagersor of the populationif they don't give them an opportunityto make their own choices based on sufficient information....We have developedan enablingenvironment for young people to support themselves in the process of makingtheir sexual identityand realizingthemselves as becomingadults - and sexualityis an importantpart of becomingan adult....Young people havethe rightto askand they have a rightto be metwith respect.... they shouldn't be let down, theyshould be supported. Rasmussenalso arguedthat progressive social policies recognizing adolescent sexuality havenot promotedpromiscuity.

Fromthe outside,(it seems that)we in Denmarkhave the mostliberal systemof adolescentsexual and reproductive health and rights. Seen fromthe inside,however, we don'ttend to thinkthat we havea very liberalsystem. We tend to thinkthat we have a verypractical and pragmaticapproach to the fact thatyoung people do starthaving sexualrelations somewhere in theirteens. In Denmark, actually rather late. around16.7 for boys and even 16.9for girls, and it reallyhasn't changedvery much overtime. And 80 percentof youngpeople use contraceptionat firstintercourse. That may not be enoughbut it'sa veryfavorable situation. (See also Knudsen1999.)

Historically,dominant Danish attitudes towards sexualitywere not so differentfrom mainstreamAmerican ones (Centerwall1995; "SexualRights" 1995). Within the past three decades,however, we findDanes much more open about sexuality and contraceptive use than Americans(David et al. 1990). The Danishgovernment has mandatedthe teaching of comprehensivesex educationas partof the generalschool curriculum. These programs tend to be quite pragmaticand straightforward,without being graphic,which is hardfor many Americansto envision.

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Sex,Sin and SocialPolicy ? 1219

One of the sex ed videos used in elementaryschools, "WhereDo BabiesCome From," is a cartoon-animatedvideo that presents four children talking, laughing and gigglingwith one anotheras they sharequestions and informationabout where babiescome from.Covering femaleand maleanatomy, menstruation, intercourse and birthing,the videopresents a lot of informationin a veryfunny yet directway. When I showed this to my college class, students said that it was the best - the most informativeand the funniest- "documentary"they had everseen on sex education.The video demystifies sex and invitesthe audienceto laughwith the childrenand couple, who are loving,affectionate - andyes - sexualwith one another.The message reflectsthe realitythat kids are curious and have lots of questions,that talking about sex can be bothembarrassing and fun, and that it's as muchabout feelings, caring and love as it is aboutbiology.

YoungPeople's Perspectives

Individualinterviews and co-ed classroomand small-groupdiscussions (both same sex and co-ed) with approximately100 Danish and 300 Americanteens revealed significant differencesin howthey spoke aboutsexuality and relationships.The Danishteens tendedto talkabout sex in terms of mutualpleasure and responsibilitywhereas the Americanteens tendedto speak in termsof performanceand achievement(as in "feelinginadequate if they didn'tachieve orgasm").When asked when "nomeans no,"both Danish boys andgirls were quiteclear: "when someone says no, thatmeans no." Their language did not assume that the malewas the predatorand the femalethe preywho was the one pressuredinto having sex. Forexample, one 15-year-oldboy inthe presenceof his maleand female classmates said:

If I don'tfeel likeit, thenI wantthat to be OK.If my girlfrienddoesn't likesomething, well then we trysomething else. Ifone of us doesn't wantto, then we findanother way Orwe go fora walk.

A 15-year-oldgirl in the same class commented:

Ifa girlsays no andshe reallymeans yes, wellthen she's the one who misses out- she couldhave said yes if she wantedto.

Indiscussions with American teenagers, there was muchless consensus.Deciding when "nomeant no" was seen as a veryconfusing judgment call, and there was greatertolerance for- or at least morewillingness to not speak out against- sexuallyaggressive behavior. In the Americanclassrooms, those who came rightout and said "ifsomeone says no, that means no"were in the minority.Typically there would be a prolongedconversation about whethera person(always assumed to be a female)was clearin herown mind,whether she reallymeant no when she said no, howforcefully or frequently she said no, whethershe was givingdouble messages eitherverbally or non-verbally,what the girlwas wearing,and how she was actingwhen she said no. The same ambivalenceor confusionwas expressed in small-groupdiscussions and individualinterviews as well. The discourseamong Americanteenagers also was genderedin ways that the Danish discourseabout sexual responsibility and responsivenesswas not. Inthe Americancontext, onlyfemales were referredto as saying"no" or beingambivalent about having sex; not once was the malepronoun used to speakof someone saying"no." When it came to talkingabout women's ambivalence,the discussionoften led to girlsand women being untrustworthy ratherthan confused or conflictedabout what they wanted,or theirbeing unclearin their

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1220 * SocialForces Volume 84, Number 2 * December2005 expressionof whatthey didand did not want. The blame for miscommunication was placed, as muchby otherwomen as by men, on the female.Often the conversationin the American classroomwould fall backon: "Ihave knowngirls who tease men;""... who say no when they meanyes;" "You can't blame the guys.""If the girlteases a guy,then she has to be ready to get whatshe gets.""After a certainpoint, you can'texpect a guyto juststop." In the Danish context,both male and female teenagers put responsibility on the individualto say whathe or she meant, and they held the individualresponsible for his or her actions (including contraceptivechoices). In the Americancontext, more responsibility and blamewas placed on the femaleespecially if somethingwent wrong.One 16-year-oldAmerican girl told me:

I thinksometimes girls are afraidto say "no."They're afraid of what theirboyfriends might think. Or, if theydo say no, and then the guy goes aheadanyway Tthey don't want to admitthey said no because thatwould mean thatthe guy didn'tcare aboutthem. I know I've done that.I don'tlike that about myself, but I'vedone it.And I have friendswho have too.

Itmay be easierfor some of these girlsto disregardtheir own desiresand voices thanto believethey were forcedto have unwantedsex fromsomeone they thoughtthey lovedor who lovedthem. This seemed to be muchless of a quandaryfor the Danishgirls interviewed. Whilesome of them had sex thatwas not particularlypleasurable, they were less likelyto haveexperienced unwanted or forcedsex and muchmore likely to knowwhat they wanted and didn'twant. They also were muchless likelyto confuse love and sexualdesire. Forthe Danishyoung people and their parents, it was OKto havesex withsomeone once youturned 16 or 17.Validation did not dependon how muchyou were in lovewith the otherperson, but how responsibleyou were in makingdecisions. Becoming sexual was considereda partof normaldevelopment, of growingup.

Loveis such a strongword. I have a boyfriendand I careabout him. We'rehaving sex andthat's OK with my parents. They know. Theyjust wantus to be protected.He can sleep overat my house. But,I can't say I love him.Love and hate are such strong words. My parents, and my sistersand my brother- I love them.I've known them all my life. Butmy boyfriend,I've only known him a few months.We need to knoweach othermore. It should be reallydeep whenyou say that. -17-year-oldDanish girl

I reallylove my boyfriend.So I thinkit's OKI'm having sex withhim. Butif myparents caught me, theywould kill me! - 17-year-oldAmerican girl

Lene,the Danishgirl, takes lovequite seriously. It is not a wordto be thrownabout easily. Sex, on the otherhand, is not a big deal.It's fun, butyou need to takecare to use protection so you don'tget AIDSor an infection.Elena, the Americangirl emphasizes love. Because she's in love,it's OKto havesex. Elenais bothsincere and adamant when she says, "Ireally love my boyfriend,"but then she leansforward and whispers, "But if my parentscaught me, they wouldkill me. Ifthey knew,it wouldbe allover. I don'tknow why they can'tunderstand how muchwe loveeach other." Anotherstriking contrast between the Danishand American teenagers was theirattitude towardsalcohol and sex. Whilethe Americanteenagers reported that they or their friends often

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Sex,Sin and SocialPolicy ? 1221 drinkin orderto lowertheir inhibitions to havesex, the Danishteenagers believed that alcohol andsex were nota good match.A smallgroup of 15-to 17-year-oldDanish girls commented:

Itruins it if you'redrunk I think.If the boy's verydrunk he can'tget it up. He can'tget [an]erection and thatruins it a lot. So I thinkyou shouldn'tdo it if you'redrunk. And you forgetthe condomif you're drunk.It's easier to havegood sex if you'renot drunk.

A 15-year-oldboy concurred,

Ifyou're drunk, you can'tdo it verywell and it doesn'tfeel as good. If I reallylike a girl,I don'tdrink before we havesex.

TheDanish girls were also more open in talking about sexuality, communication and intimacy:

ButI thinkyou have to be comfortable.If you feel totallycomfortable andsafe withthe person, you do morethings. So I thinkyou can have sex andall, but the moresafe and the morecomfortable you get with the personthe more wildthe thingsget, the moreopen you get with yourboyfriend. - 16-year-oldDanish girl

Nonetheless,Danish girls also experiencedsome of the same difficultiesas American girls.The double standardcontinues to exist in Denmarkas well as in the UnitedStates, althoughperhaps to a lesser degree:

Girlsif theyare kissingwith two (boys)in one eveningat a partythen they are cheap and hookersand all that.But, if a boy or a man is togetherwith more thanone, 'ohit's just cool.' Ijust think,that just sucksreally - 15-year-oldDanish girl

Whatboth Danishand Americanyoung people emphasizedwas theirdesire for more informationand discussionabout feelings, emotionsand relationships.They wanted more communicationwith their parents and teachers. Many of them faced problemsat home: a parent'salcoholism, abuse, depressionthat often madethat communication difficult. Forexample, Laura, an American14-year-old girl shared her story just afterattending an abstinence-onlyassembly at her ruralschool in centralPennsylvania. Unlike previous years when PlannedParenthood had given the assembly, Lauralistened to MollyKelly, a self- identifiedand nationallywell-known "chastity educator," who gave the presentationfor HeartbeatCommunity Services. Kelly's public relations materials indicated that she hadtalked withmore than 100,000 young people, drawing from the PostponingSexual Involvement and ManagingPressures Before Marriage curricula, both of whichuse "Sex,Lies, and the Truth" and "NoApologies" as video resourcesin theirtraining "in order to reinforcethe risksof sexualinvolvement." Kellycriticized the contraceptiveindustry as a multi-milliondollar business that is "ripping off youngpeople."

Someone'smaking lots of moneyoff of otherpeople's sex. Peopletalk aboutsafe sex - butthe contraceptiveindustry offers no guaranteefor

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1222 * SocialForces Volume 84, Number2 * December2005

theirproduct. Condoms have a 10-17percent failure rate. Butyou can't takethe condomor pill back if itfails. What if therewas an airlinecrash and the airlinesresponded, "well, we get there 83 percent of the time?"(Lots of laughter).The stakes are high. With sex, you eithergain a lifeor lose a life.AIDS is a lose-a-lifekind of situation.

Mrs.Kelly argued that it was adultswho were irresponsiblein givingyoung people more and moredevices that only made matters worse.

They'regiving you the toolsthat give you the problems in thefirst place - andthen they tell you it is "safesex. " There's no suchthing as safesex. Thereis a risk.We can't call it safe orsafer There'sonly saved sex.

Afterthe assembly,I hadthe opportunityto talkwith Laurain a smallgroup of 8thgrade girls.While the otherswere laughingthat it was "alittle too littleand muchtoo late,"Laura quietlybut passionatelybegan talking:

MyMom got pregnantwhen she was 16 and had to reallystruggle. Thenwhen my oldersister got pregnantat 16, my Mom was really angryShe wouldn'ttalk to herabout sex orgetting pregnant, and she doesn'ttalk to me. Shejust yells and tellsme "notto do it."You can't have a reasonableconversation with her about it. And now it'sreally crazy at home with my sister's baby, and everyone cryingand screaming.It's nuts. I thinkwe need to knowmore about sex notless.

Laurafelt left inthe lurchboth at homeand at schoolwhen it came to sex education.The school counselorwho sat in with us agreed:"They deserve more- better."Both American and Danishteenagers wanted parents and teachers to trustthem more,respect them more, andteach them more.They believed they needed more,rather than less, information,but it was the Americanteenagers who pointedto the numberof theirfriends, sisters or school mateswho hadgotten pregnant as proof. Ratherthan being shelteredfrom the world,children live in families,and young people haveto dealwith the problemsthat the adultswho raisethem face (Males1996; 1998).Yet, legislationlike the FamilyProtection Acts striveto protectparents' rights over the rightsof theirchildren and to prohibitpotential interference in family life (Rose 1986; 1993). In the case of sex education,rather than recognizing the realitiesof youngpeople's lives and their right to information,many advocates of the ReligiousRight are trying to imposea gag orderthat will keepchildren isolated, ignorant, and sadly, more vulnerable.

Adolescent Rights as Human Rights: The Danish Case

Ifyou are to understandwhat has really happened in Denmark, you can not explainthe developmentof ourview of sex educationand access to contraceptionin generalby the liberalNordic approach to sexuality because it's not like that. It's actuallymuch more a consensual understandingby the populationin generaland the governmentin dealingwith things in a waythat makes the mostsense. - Rasmussen

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Sex,Sin and SocialPolicy * 1223

Sincethe 1960s,with the activismof the labor,women's, and disabilities' movements, young people'srights were also recognizedand given a moreprominent place in Danishsociety.

Duringthe'60s, the Danish WelfareSociety... realizedthat young people were equalmembers of societyand shouldshare the same benefits of belonging to society as adults.If we want people to behave responsibly,we have to give them the chance to.... The governmentsawthe benefitsof this- ifyou give them(young people) the option,you can also demandthat they behave responsibly - Rasmussen

Thiswas a recurrenttheme in interviewswith teachers, as well as with sex educatorsand professionalsworking in the areaof reproductivehealth. Bjarne Rasmussen, AIDs-Secretariat at the FrederiksbergHospital and principalinvestigator for and authorof "YoungPeople's SexualBehavior" ([1989] 1998) explained in a 1998 interview:

It'simportant not to cheat young people... Tobe honest in sexual education,especially in theschools because if theyoung people find out thatyou are cheatingthem, they won'tbelieve you lateron. It's very,very important to get a discussiongoing. It'simportant to make the youngpeople understandthat they make their own choice. They mustmake an activechoice andsay ' wantto use contraception'or 'I don't want to use contraception'because they have made the choice and theyare involved.

Conclusion

Whothen is goingtoo far?The Danes in providinginformation or the Americansin withholding information?While the onset of sexualactivity for Danesis similarto thatof Americans,both averagingaround 16.7 years,Danish teenagers are morelikely to use contraceptionand are muchless likelyto get pregnant,have an abortionor contracta sexuallytransmitted disease. Thereare also proportionatelyfewer Danish11 to 14 yearolds who have been engaged in sexualactivity (B. Rasmussen [1997] 1998). This is an importantfinding. Using 1988 data from the UnitedStates NSFG and the GuttmacherInstitute, Glei estimated that among U.S. girls who were mothersby the age of 15, 39 percentof the fatherswere ages 20-29;for girlswho had givenbirth to a childby age 17,the comparablefigure was 53 percent(Glei cited in Brownand Eisenberg1995:205; see also Moore1995). While these datasay nothingabout whether any of these relationshipsinvolved sexual coercion or violence, the significantage differenceat this pointin the lifecycle suggests an imbalanceof power.A numberof studieshave also revealed that a historyof childhoodsexual abuse amongteen mothersis common(Boyer and Fine 1992).Flemming Balvig, a leadingcriminologist and statistician in Denmark,has attributedthe Danishdecline in the rate of reportedrapes to two primarymovements: the women's movementand sexualityeducation which focused on sex equity,mutual responsibility and respect,and bodilyintegrity (Balvig 1997; Interview with B. Rasmussen1998). Inthe American context, special interest groups vie for power and often have disproportionate influence.This is the case withsexuality education and reproductive health in general. Numerous mainstreamorganizations, including medical, government, and religious agencies, are supportive of comprehensivesexuality education. Many signed a letterto PresidentBush stating that they "are committedto responsiblesexuality education for young people that includesage-

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1224 * SocialForces Volume 84, Number 2 * December2005

appropriate,medically accurate information about both abstinence and contraception, [and] urge [him]to reconsiderincreasing funding for unproven abstinence-only-until-marriage programs."9 Andwhile new billsare being introduced to bettersupport comprehensive sexuality education, at the moment,abstinence-only programs continue to dominatethe agenda. Abstinence-onlyproponents not only provide medical misinformation and promote fear and ignorance,they also failto plan,fund, and implementeffective social policy that could more effectivelycurb teen pregnancyand the spread of STDs- and providebetter economic, educational,and health opportunities for all young people. Experts on teen pregnancyand child welfaresuch as MarianneWright Edelman and Kristin Luker (1997) convincingly argue that teen pregnancyis less aboutyoung girls and their sex livesthan about restricted horizons and the boundariesof hope.Yet, the ReligiousRight continues to blamethe "fallengirl/woman," the feminizationof men,the declineof two-parentfamilies, homosexuality, and the mediafor the ills of oursociety rather than economic and structural forces that perpetuate inequality between men andwomen, and between the enrichedand impoverished classes. In the battleover sexuality and choice,it's girls'and women's bodies, lives, and livelihoodsthat are alltoo often sacrificed- blamed,marginalized and held accountable for creating the problemof teen pregnancy. The threatof women's equalityand the usurpingof male power is echoed in many ChristianRight newsletters, books, sermons, rallies, and TV and radio shows, as the desirefor patriarchalcontrol and parentalorder is unabashedlypronounced. Both hostile and benevolentforms of sexism (Glickand Fiske2001) are evidenthere as the ReligiousRight attempts to keep women in their place, on the pedestal, dependent on men who are expectedto remainin control. The debates around abstinence-only policies, while concerned withtrying to preventadolescent sexual activity, are as much- if not more- abouttrying to preserveor reclaimthe patriarchal,nuclear, heterosexual, Christian family. Whenformer Secretary of StateColin L. Powell was askedabout HIV-prevention strategies for youngpeople during an MTVinterview on Valentine'sDay, 2001, Powelltold the musicchannel audience,"It is importantthat the wholeinternational community come together, speak candidly aboutit, forgetabout taboos, and forgetabout conservative ideas with respectto whatyou shouldtell young people about. It's the livesof youngpeople that are put at riskby unsafesex. And,therefore, protect yourself." (Cohen 2002) But like Dr. Everett Koop, former U.S. Surgeon Generaland a pro-lifeconservative Christian, who advocatedfor sex educationand the rightto informationon contraceptionand abortion, Powell was immediatelyattacked. "Conservatives reactedharshly to the secretary'sendorsement of condomuse by sexuallyactive young people and to the idea that this administrationsanctions any message otherthan abstinence until marriageas the principal,ifnot only, acceptable approach" (Cohen 2002). Gary Bauer, president of AmericanValues, admonished Powell - who has a long-heldspecial interest in global HIV/AIDS issues, especiallyin Sub-SaharanAfrica - to stickto diplomacy:On "publichealth issues, he shouldfollow the leadof the Bushadministration, which he serves."(Cohen 2002) As we enterthe new millennium,family planning, reproductive and sexual health,and economicwell-being are vital concerns for individuals,communities, and nations.The United States which is the only countrythat legislatesand funds abstinence-only-untilmarriage programsin publicschools, also leads the worldin its highrates of teenage pregnancies, abortions,and STDs. Moreover,abstinence-only-until-marriage programs have been taught for over two decades and yet there is still no peer-reviewedresearch that proves it is effective.10While rates of pregnancy,AIDS, and othersexually transmitted diseases remain alarminglyhigh among America's youth and people in the developingworld, opponents of sexualityeducation and reproductive health are trying to censorvital information and services bothat homeand abroad. The ReligiousRight has not achievedits agenda,but it has produceda chillingeffect on comprehensivesexuality education. A 1998 study by researchersat The AlanGuttmacher

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Sex,Sin and Social Policy * 1225

Institutefound that amongthe seven in ten publicschool districtsthat have a district-wide policyto teach sexualityeducation, the vast majority(86 percent)require that abstinence be promoted,either as the preferredoption for teenagers (51 percenthave such anabstinence- plus policy)or as the onlyoption outside of marriage(35 percenthave such an abstinence- onlypolicy). Only 14 percenthave a comprehensivepolicy that addresses abstinence as one optionin a broadereducation program to prepareadolescents to become sexuallyhealthy adults.In almost two-thirds of districtpolicies across the nation- those withcomprehensive and abstinence-pluspolicies - discussionabout the benefitsof contraceptionis permitted. However,in the one-thirdof districtswith an abstinence-onlypolicy, information about contraceptionis eitherprohibited entirely or limitedto discussionof its ineffectivenessin protectingagainst unplanned pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases (Dailard2000). InFebruary 2005, PresidentBush proposed a $2.57 trillionfederal budget for fiscal year 2006 thatwould substantially cut oreliminate many domestic social programs, while creating or boostingfunding for a handfulof othersthat would promote"traditional family values." Eventhe TexasBaptists are questioningjust how compassionatethis is (Marus2005). In God'sPolitics: Why the RightGets ItWrong and the LeftDoesn't Get It,Reverend Jim Wallis, editorof the progressiveevangelical magazine, Sojourners, argues that "thereligious and politicalRight gets the publicmeaning of religionmostly wrong - preferringto focus onlyon sexual and culturalissues while ignoringthe weightiermatters of justice. He believesthe secular Leftdoesn't seem to get the meaningand promise of faith for politicseither- mistakenlydismissing spirituality as irrelevantto socialchange." In the interestof allchildren, as well as familywell-being, we need to takeseriously a broad-basedapproach to bothsocial problemsand social policythat is based on empiricalevidence and a recognitionof the pluralisticsociety in whichwe live.This is what democracyis all about.In the finalanalysis, ratherthan having gone too far,the UnitedStates has not gone nearlyfar enough in providing reliableinformation, education and healthcare to ourchildren.

Notes

1. The most widelydiscussed "abstinence-based" program, "Sex Respect," was writtenby ColleenK. Mast in 1983.The for-profit corporation, Respect, Inc. distributes "Sex Respect" and "FacingReality."

2. Only4 percentof parentsof juniorhigh school studentsand 6 percentof parentsof high school students believe sexualityeducation should not be taught in school ("Public Support"2004).

3. Personalcommunication, January 2005.

4. Sincetaking office in 2001, Bushwithdrew millions of dollarsin congressionally allotted aid to the UnitedNations Population Fund, froze $3 millionfor the WorldHealth Organization's reproductivehealth program,and aggressively attempted to export its domestic "abstinence-only"campaign and its anti-abortionviews at venuesprovided by various U.N.- sponsoredglobal meetings ("Congress and ReproductiveHealth Services" 2002).

5. The Bush Administrationreleased a 237-page reportFebruary 11, 2005 detailingthe programsslated for eliminationor substantialcuts intheir FY 2006 budgetproposal. The reportis availableat http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2006/pdf/savings.pdf. Severalmembers of the Coalitionon HumanNeeds (CHN)have producedexcellent

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1226 * SocialForces Volume 84, Number 2 * December2005

analyses of the President'sbudget. The CHNwebsite links to many of these is www.chn.org/issues/budget/index.html.OMB Watch has produceda numberof pieces analyzingthe President'sbudget and they are availableon the OMBWatch website: President'Bush's FY 06 Budget:An Overview.

6. Adolescentchild-bearing is more common in the UnitedStates (22 percentof women reportedhaving a childbefore age 20)than in Great Britain (15 percent), Canada (11 percent), France(6 percent)and Sweden (4 percent).And the differencesare even greaterwhen comparingbirths to youngerteenagers. A greaterproportion of U.S.teenagers did not use contraceptionat eitherthe firstor most recentintercourse (25 percentand 20 percent respectively)than that reportedin France(11 percentand 12 percent),Great Britain (21 percentand 4 percent),Sweden (22 percent and 7 percent)(Adolescent Sexual Health 2002; Darrochet al.2001; Feijoo 2001; Jones et al. 1996;"Teenage Sexual and Reproductive 2001).

7. Deeplyconcerned about the growingAIDs epidemic, a numberof otherleading social scientists in the mid-1980sbegan makingtheir case that a greaterunderstanding of teenagers'sexual behavior was urgentlyneeded in orderto stem the rateof deadlyHIV infections.The American Teenage Study (ATS) was designedas a five-yearnational study, withthe intentto provideinformation about health-related risk behaviors related to teenage pregnancyand sexually transmitted diseases, including,HIV In 1993,however, Congress explicitlybanned the ATSin the NIHreauthorization act. Inresponding to the controversies surroundingthe fundingof ATS,Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) asserted: Children may be embarrassedby such discussion,but they will not die fromembarrassment. They can die fromAIDS. The can sufferpermanent health effects fromsexually transmitted diseases. Andthey can suffera lifetimefrom premature parenthood (Boonstra 2001).

8. This fieldworkincluded classroom observations; class, small group,and one-on-one interviewswith teenagers; and interviewswith parents,teachers, and sex educators.In the case of the CentralPennsylvania School, 240 9ththrough12th graders also filledout surveysin the week followingthe abstinence-onlyassemblies sponsoredby Heartbeat CommunityServices. This number included all those in one of fourhealth classes or a quarterof the highschool population.

9. In1981, a nationalpoll indicated that 70 percentof parentsfavored sex-ed programsin the publicschools; a 1985poll showed 75 percentof adultsapproving sex-ed in the public highschools, with 52 percentapproving of such programsin grades4 through8; most respondentsalso believedthat programs should cover a widerrange of topics, including teachingabout birth control, the biologyof reproduction,the natureof sexualintercourse andabortion ("Teaching Fear" 1994).

10. An evangelicalpsychologist, James Dobson heads up the largest Christian-Right Organizationin the UnitedStates, Focuson the Family(FOF), with magazines reaching 3 millionreaders, and a dailyradio program reaching more than 5 millionpeople on 3,000 stationsworldwide. He is also authorof Dareto Discipline,one of the leadingchild care manualssold inthe UnitedStates.

11. Studiesconducted by Johns Hopkinsresearchers and funded by the NationalInstitute of ChildHealth and Development indicate the effectivenessof sexualityeducation programs in delayingthe age at firstintercourse, increasing the use of contraception,and reducing pregnancyrates among teens. Researchersfound no significantassociation between

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Sex,Sin and SocialPolicy ? 1227

takinga coursein sexuality education and being sexually active. In 1994, the WorldHealth Organizationreleased a reportthat had analyzed35 studies done aroundthe worldon sexualityeducation. Authors Grunseit and Kippax conclude that there is no supportfor the contentionthat sexualityeducation encourages sexual experimentationor increased activity(Schorr 1988; "Teaching Fear" 1994).

12. Fora listgo to: http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/news/president.htm.

13. Advocatesfor Youth contracted with an independentstatistician to analyzedata, recently releasedby the Centersfor Disease Controland Prevention(CDC), about sexual behavior amonghigh school studentsfrom 1991 to 2003. Advocates'report on the analysisof the YouthRisk Behavior Surveys (YRBS), Trends in SexualRisk Behaviors among High School Students- UnitedStates, 1991 to 1997 and 1999 to 2003, foundthat the much-touted improvementsin adolescentsexual risk-taking behavior actually took placefrom 1991 to 1997.These improvements did not continue into the time periodbetween 1999 and 2003, whichcorresponds to the firstyears of the abstinence-onlyinitiative.

References

Abstinence-Only"Sex" Education. July 2004. Fact Sheet, Planned Parenthood.

"Abortionin Context:United States and Worldwide." 1999. Issues in Brief.The Alan Guttmacher Institute (www.agi-usa.org/pubs/ib_0599.html).

"Adolescenceand AbstinenceFact Sheet." 1997. 26 SIECUSReport, October/November. (http://www. siecus.org/pubs/fact/factO001.html).

"AdolescentPregnancy: Current Trends and Issues: 1998." February 1999. American Academy of Pediatrics. Pediatrics.103(2): 516-520. (http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/103/2/516).

Alford,S., and AmmieeS. Feijoo.2000. AdolescentSexual Health in Europeand the U.S.- Whythe Difference?Washington, D.C.: Advocates for Youth. (www.advocatesforyouth.org).

Alford,S., N. Cheethamand D. Hauser.2005. Science and Success in DevelopingCountries. Holistic ProgramsThat Work to PreventTeen Pregnancy HIV & Sexually Transmitted Infections. Washington, D.C.:Advocates for Youth.

Bader,Eleanor. 2005. "Abstinence-OnlyEducation" Z MagazineOnline, Vol. 18, No. 1, January (www.zmagsite.zmag.org/lmages/baderpr105.html).

Balvig,Flemming. 1997."Voldtaegt," Opinion, Information Mandag, 20January:5-6; "Voldtaegters Omfang og Karakteri Danmark: En undersogelseaf voldaegtsanmeldelseri 1990, 1991, og 1992 & Voldtaegstudviklingeni Danmark. Copenhagen: Udgivet af Rigspolitichefen1998.

Bearman,PS., and H. Brueckner.2001. "Promisingthe Future:Virginity Pledges and FirstIntercourse." AmericanJournal of Sociology,106(4): 859-912.

Bendroth,Margaret Lamberts. 1993. Fundamentalism and Gender,1875 to the Present.:Yale University Press. Boonstra,Heather. 2004. "Abstinence-Promotion andthe U.S. Approach to HIV/AIDS Prevention Overseas." Issuesin Brief.The Alan Guttmacher Institute.

Boyer,D., and D. Fine.1992. "Sexual abuse as a factorin adolescentpregnancy and child maltreatment." FamilyPlanning Perspectives, 24:4-11.

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1228 * SocialForces Volume 84, Number 2 * December2005

Brody,Jane. 2004. "Abstinence-Only: Does ItWork? New YorkTimes, June 1, F1.

Brouwer,Steve. 1998. Sharing the Pie. A Citizen'sGuide to Wealthand Power. Henry Holt & Co.

Brouwer,Steve, PaulGifford and SusanD. Rose. 1996.Exporting the American Gospel: Global Christian Fundamentalism.Routledge.

Brown,Sarah, and LeonEisenberg, editors. 1995. Best Intentions. Unintended Pregnancy and the Well- Beingof Childrenand Families. National Academy Press, 205.

Children'sDefense Fund. 2004. "Children's Defense Fund Blasts Withholding of Reporton Hunger."Press Release:Oct. 24.

Cohen,Susan. June 2001. "Global Gag Rule: Exporting Antiabortion Ideology at the Expenseof American Values."The Guttmacher Report on PublicPolicy, 4(3).

February2002. "Congress and Reproductive Health: Major Actions in 2001 and a LookAhead." The GuttmacherReport on PublicPolicy, 5(1).

Connolly,Ceci. 2004. "SomeAbstinence Programs Mislead Teens, ReportSays." Washington Post, December2, A01.

Dailard,Cynthia. April 2000. "Fueledby CampaignPromises, Drive Intensifies to BoostAbstinence-Only EducationFunds." The Guttmacher Report on PublicPolicy, 3(2).

. February2002. "AbstinencePromotion and Teen Family Planning: The Misguided Drive for Equal Funding."The Guttmacher Report on PublicPolicy, 5(1).

. December2003. "Understanding Abstinence:' Implications for Individuals, Programs, and Policies." TheGuttmacher Report on PublicPolicy, 6(5).

Dao,James. 2002. "OverU.S. Protest, Asian Group Approves Family Planning Goals." New YorkTimes, December18.

Darroch,Jacqueline, Singh Susheela, Jennifer J. Frostand the StudyTeam. November/December 2001. "Differencesin TeenagePregnancy Rates Among Five Developed Countries." Family Planning Perspectives,33(6). The Alan Guttmacher Institute.

David,H.A., J.M. Morgall, M. Olser, et al. 1990."United States and Denmark: Different Approaches to Health Careand Family Planning." Studies in FamilyPlanning, 21:1-19.

Dobson,James. August 1995. "The Family Under Fire by the UnitedNations: An Urgent Message," Focus on theFamily Newsletter, 1-8.

Driscoll,Patricia. 1990. Abstinence Works: A Notebookon Pre-MaritalChastity. Womanity Publications.

Driscoll,Patricia, and Mary Rose Osborn. 1982. Sexual Common Sense: Affirming AdolescentAbstinence. WomanityPublications.

Edelman,Marianne Wright. February 1, 2005. "God'sPolitics." Child Watch Weblog. Washington, DC: Children'sDefense Fund. (http://www.childrensdefense.org/childwatch/050201.aspx). Frost,J.J., and J.D. Forrest. 1997. "Understanding the Impactof EffectiveTeenage Pregnancy Prevention Programs."Family Planning Perspectives, 27(5). Gallagher,Maggie. 1999. The Age of UnwedMothers Is TeenPregnancy the Problem?A Reportto the Nation.New York: Institute for American Values. (http://www.americanvalues.org/Teen.PDF).

Glick,Peter, and Susan Fiske. February 2001. An Ambivalent Alliance: Hostile and BenevolentSexism as ComplementaryJustifications for Gender Inequality. American Psychologist, 56(2):109-118.

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Sex,Sin and SocialPolicy ? 1229

Grunseit,A., and S. Kippax.1995. Effects of Sex Educationon YoungPeople's Sexual Behavior. Geneva: WorldHealth Organization.

Haffner,Debra. 1990. Sex Education 20: A CalltoAction. SIECUS.

. 2001.Beyond the Big Talk. Every Parent's Guide to RaisingSexually Healthy Teens. Newmarket Press.

Hauser,Debra. 2004. FiveYears of Abstinence-Only-Until-MarriageEducation: Assessing the Impact. Washington,DC: Advocates for Youth.

Hawley,John, editor. 1994. Fundamentalism and Gender.Oxford University Press.

Heins,Marjorie. 2001. Not in Frontof the Children.Hill & Wang.

Henshaw,S.K. 2004. US. TeenagePregnancy Statistics with Comparative Statistics for Women Aged 20-24. NewYork: The Guttmacher Institute.

Hoff,Tina, et al.2003. National Survey ofAdolescents and Young Adults: Sexual Health Knowledge, Attitudes, and Experiences."National Survey of Adolescentsand Young Adults: Sexual Health Knowledge, Attitudes,and Experiences." Henry J. KaiserFamily Foundation.

Howland,Courtney, editor. 1999. Religious Fundamentalisms and the Human Rights of Women.St. Martin's Press.

"InternationalFamily Planning Cuts Undermine Human Rights." February 4, 1997.Center for Reproductive Lawand Policy.

"In Good Company:Who Supports ComprehensiveSexuality Education." Fact Sheet, SIECUS. (http://www.siecus.org/policy/in_good_company.pdf).

"InternationalFamily Planning Cuts Undermine Human Rights." February 4, 1997.Center for Reproductive Lawand Policy.

Ireland,Doug. May 27, 2002."US and Evil Axis - Alliesfor Abstinence." The Nation.

Irvine,Janie. 2002. TalkAboutSex.' The Battles overSex Education in the UnitedStates. University of California Press.

Jones, Elise,et al. 1996.Teenage Pregnancy in IndustrializedNations. Yale University Press.

Jones, RachelK., Alison Purcell, Susheela Singh and LawrenceB. Finer.2005. "Adolescents:Reports of ParentalKnowledge of AdolescentsUse of Sexual HealthServices and TheirReactions to MandatedParental Notification for Prescription Contraception." JAMA, 293:340-348.

Kantor,Leslie. December/January 1993. Scared Chaste? Fear-Based Educational Curricula, 21 SIECUSReport.

.August/September1994. "Attacks on PublicSchool Sexuality Education Programs: 1993-94 School Year,"SIECUS Report.

Kirby,Douglas. 1997. No EasyAnswers. Research Findings on Programsto Reduce TeenPregnancy. Washington,D.C. National Campaign Prevent Teen Pregnancy.

.2001.Emerging Answers. Research Findings on Programsto ReduceTeen Pregnancy. Washington, DC:National Campaign to PreventTeen Pregnancy

Klein,Susan S. 1992.Sex Equity and Sexuality in Education.State University of NewYork Press.

Knudsen,Lisbeth. 1999. "Recent Fertility Trends in Denmark."Report 11. DanishCenter for Demographic Research.

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1230 * Social Forces Volume 84, Number 2 * December 2005

Knudsen,Lisbeth, and HanneWielandt. 1997. "SexualActivity and Pregnanciesamong Adolescents in Denmark."Nordisk Sexologi, 15: 75-88.

Kristof,Nicholas D., 2005. "Bush'sSex Scandal."New YorkTimes, Op-Ed Section A 21, Column6. February16.

Landry,D.J., L. Kaeser and C.L. Richards. 1999. Abstinence promotion and the provisionof informationabout contraceptionin publicschool district sexuality education policies. Family Planning Perspectives. 31(6):280-286.

Langan,Patrick A., and CarolineWolf Harlow. 1994. ChildRape Victims.Publication No. NCJ-147001. Washington,DC: U.S. Department of Justice.

LaFranci,Howard. 2004. "On Family Planning, U.S. vs. Muchof the World.:De-emphasis of Contraception RunsContrary to GlobalGoals." Christian Science Monitor. March 30.

Laumann,Edward O., John H. Gagnon, Robert T. Michael and Stuart Michaels. 1994. The Social Organization of Sexuality.University of ChicagoPress.

Luker,Kirstin. 1997. Dubious Conceptions. Harvard University Press.

"LynchburgSchool Board Will Censor Illustration inAnatomy Textbook." Sept. 6, 2000.Associated Press. AP- ES-09-06-001233 EDT.

Males,Michael. 1996. Scapegoat Generation. Common Courage Press.

Manlove,Jennifer, Angela R. Papillioand Erum Ikramullah. September 2004. "Not Yet: Programs Designed to DelayFirst Sex Among Teens." Washington, DC: National Campaign to PreventTeen Pregnancy.

Martin.1981. "God's Angry Man," Texas Monthly (April).

Marty,Martin, and Scott Appleby (eds.). 1993. Fundamentalisms and Society, Vol 2. Universityof Chicago Press.

Marus,Robert. February 11, 2005. "Faith Groups Question Whether Bush Budget 'compassionate."' Dallas, TX:Baptist Standard.

Mast,Coleen Kelly. 1977. "Sex Respect: The Option of TrueSexual Feeling," Student Handbook (rev. ed.) 7, 90, Bradley,IL: Respect Incorporated.

McKay,Alexander. 1998. Sexual Ideology and Schooling: Towards Democratic Sexuality Education. Ontario, Canada:Althouse Press.

Michael,Robert T, JohnH. Gagnon, Edward O. Laumann and Gina Kolata. 1994. Sex in America: A Definitive Survey.Little, Brown.

"MobilizingSupport for Sex Education:New Messages andTechniques." 2002. New York:The Othmer Instituteof PlannedParenthood of NYC.

Moore,K.A., B.C. Miller, D. Glei, et al. 1995.Adolescent Sex, Contraceptionand Childbearing.A Review of RecentResearch.Washington, D.C.: Child Trends.

"NewState Evaluations Show Federally Funded Abstinence-Only Programs Have Little Effect." September 27. 2004.Washington, D.C.: Advocates for Youth. "New Studies Signal Dangersof LimitingTeen Access to BirthControl Information and Services: Researchersand MedicalExperts Urge New Congressand State Legislaturesto Heed Data." January18, 2005.Media Release. New York: The Guttmacher Institute. No SecondChance. Jeremiah Films.

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Sex,Sin and SocialPolicy ? 1231

Nussbaum,Martha. 1997. Cultivating Humanity. A ClassicalDefense of Reformin LiberalEducation. Harvard UniversityPress.

Pear,Robert. 2005. "Bush Budget Calls for Cuts in HealthServices." The New YorkTimes, February 5.

"ThePolitics of SexualityEducation." 2004. SIECUS Report, 32(4).

"ThePresident's Overseas Reproductive Health Policy: Think Locally, Act Globally."August 2002. The GuttmacherReport on PublicPolicy, 5(3). (http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/grO50301 .htm)

"Public Support for Comprehensive Sexuality Education." 2004. SIECUS Fact Sheet. (www.siecus.org/pubs/fact/fact0017.html)

Rasmussen,Bjarne. 1997. "YoungPeople's Sexual Behavior," Danish National Survey and Report.AIDS Sekretariat,Frederiksberg Hospital, Denmark.

Rasmussen,Bjarne. June 1998. AIDS Sekretariat, Interview with the author.

Rasmussen,Nell. June 1998.Director of the DanishFamily Planning Association, Copenhagen, Interview withauthor.

"ReportCard." [1994] 2002. Washington, D.C. Children's Defense Fund.

Riesebrodt,Martin. 1993. Pious Passion: the emergenceof modernfundamentalism in Iran and the United States.University of CaliforniaPress.

Rose,Susan. 1986. Keeping Them Out of theHands of Satan.Evangelical Schooling in America. Routledge.

1987."Women Warriors: The Negotiationof Genderin a CharismaticCommunity." Sociological Analysis,48(3):245-258.

.1993. "TheImpact of Fundamentalismon NorthAmerican Education." In Martin Marty and Scott Appleby(eds.), Fundamentalisms and Society: Reclaiming the Sciences, the Family, and Education. Universityof ChicagoPress, 2:452-489.

1999. "ChristianFundamentalism: Patriarchy, Sexuality, and HumanRights." Pp. 9-20.Religious Fundamentalismsand the Human Rights of Women.Courtney Howland, editor. St. Martin'sPress.

Schafly,Phyllis, editor. 1985. ChildAbuse in the Classroom.Crossway Books. Schemo,Diana J. 2000."Sex Education with Just One Lesson: No Sex." New YorkTimes, December 28, Al.

SexandAmerica'sTeenagers. 1994. New York: The Alan Guttmacher Institute. Sex Educationin America: A Viewfrom Inside the Nation'sClassrooms. 2000. MenloPark, CA: The Kaiser FamilyFoundation.

"Sex,Lies & the Truth."1993. Focus on the FamilyFilms. Schorr,Lisbeth.1988. Within Our Reach. Anchor Press.

SexandAmerica's Teenagers. 1994. New York: The Alan Guttmacher Institute. "SexEducation: Politicians, Parents, Teachers, and Teens." Issues in Brief.The Alan Guttmacher Institute. (www.agi-usa.org/pubs/ib_2-01.html) Sex RespectWebsite (http://www.sexrespect.com/ProgramOrig.html). Shapiro.1992. We're Number One. Vintage Books.

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1232 * SocialForces Volume 84, Number 2 * December2005

"SIECUSLooks at States'Sexuality Laws and the SexualRights of TheirCitizens" and "1997-98 Sexuality EducationControversies inthe UnitedStates." August/September 1998. SIECUS Report.

SIECUSReport. June/July 2000. 28(5) (updated March 2001).

Singh,Susheela and Jacqueline E. Darroch.2000. 'AdolescentPregnancy and Childbearing:Levels and Trendsin DevelopedCountries." Family Planning Perspectives. 32(1).

Stacey,Judith. July 9, 2001."Family Values Forever." The Nation. Stateof America's Children 2004. Children'sDefense Fund.

Sternberg,Steve. 2002. "Sex Education Stirs Controversy." USA Today. July 11.

SurveyofAmerica'sViews on SexualityEducation.1999. Washington, DC: SIECUS and Advocates for Youth.

"TeachingFear: The ReligiousRights' Campaign Against Sexuality Education." 1996. Peoplefor the AmericanWay. (http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid =2025print=yesSunits=all).

"Teensex increasedafter abstinence program: Texas study finds little impact on sexualbehavior." February 1,2005. MSNBC:Reuters Updated: 2:56 p.m.ET.

"TeenageSexual and Reproductive Behavior in Developed Countries: Can More Progress Be Made?"2001. NewYork: The Alan Guttmacher Institute.

"TexasTeens Increased Sex After Abstinence Program." January 31, 2005.Houston: Reuters.

"TheSexual Rights of YoungWomen in Denmarkand Sweden."1995. The DanishFamily Planning Associationand the SwedishAssociation for Sex Education.

"UNChildren's Summit Hits Snag." May 10, 2002. (Reuters) CBS World News.

"U.S.Fails to BlockConsensus at BangkokPopulation Conference." 2002. InternationalWomen's HealthCoalition. Posted Tuesday, December 17. (http://www.iwhc.org/index.cfm?fuseaction= page&pagelD).

Ventura,S.J., W.D. Mosher, S.C. Curtin, J.C. Abma, S. Henshaw.2000. "Trends in Pregnanciesand Policies." VitalHealth Stat. 21(56):1-49.

Vergari,Sandra. May 2000. "MoralityPolitics and EducationalPolicy: The Abstinence-Only Sex Education Grant."Educational Policy. 14(2): 290-310.

Wallis,Jim. 2005. God's Politics. Why the Right Gets It Wrong, and the Left Doesn't Get It. Harper.

The WaxmanReport. December 2004. "TheContent of FederallyFunded Abstinence-Only Education Programs."Prepared for Rep.Henry A. Waxman.U.S. House of RepresentativesCommittee on Government Reform. Minority Staff Special Investigations Division. (http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/Documents/20041201102153-50247.pdf).

Wetzstein,Cheryl. 2005. "Youngpeople 'need' new sex-educationfunding plan." Washington Times, February11.

"Whatthe President'sBudget Means for America's Children." 2005. Washington, DC: Children's Defense Fund."(Accessed February 13). (http://www.childrensdefense.org/).

Wood,Gaby. 2005. "Worth the Wait."The Observer, Guardian Unlimited. February 6. Yoder,Steve. 2005. "In spite of the facts,Bush's Department of Healthand Human Services keeps pushing abstinence."In These Times. February 10.

This content downloaded from 128.122.149.145 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:14:59 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions