Apparently it’s Sexual Responsibility Week, but the irony must be lost on those well-intentioned people who had the idea for such an event. “Sexual responsibility” seems to imply that a college student, the target market of this campaign, can have an active, premarital sexual life while still remaining more or less “responsible.” The university will very likely teach us about how “safe sex” prevents nasty things like sexually transmitted infections, and people from the Women’s Center have already made the rounds between many classes, informing us of the dangers of rape and pleading with us to help them “eliminate” the scourge from our society. I could not be more supportive of attempts to reduce, and even eliminate if possible, STIs and rape in college life. But I cannot take a movement seriously that fails miserably in addressing the root cause of these unnecessary burdens.
There has been a heated debate in recent years over the way in which our society should approach sex education, particularly on whether or not abstinence should be included as a serious alternative to “safe sex.” Authorities tell students that we are going to “do it anyway,” so we might as well be taught how to do it “safely.” To grasp the insanity of this reasoning, imagine for a moment that you are happily married. You are leaving the house to head off on a weeklong business trip in another state, and your wife stops you at the door with a box of condoms. When questioning her as to her intentions, she explains, “Just in case you have an affair, I want you to be safe.” Just because we as students are taught how to have “safer” premarital sex does not mean that such behavior is good for us, or the society in which we live.
Considering that condoms don’t even protect against all STIs, there is absolutely no way to fully prevent the spread of STIs unless people that have them abstain from sex. It doesn’t matter if everyone regularly tests for STIs or wears condoms religiously; if we continue to indulge in drunkenness and free love, the spread of STIs is inevitable. Similarly, it doesn’t matter if every college student is taught about the definition of “consent,” for if a great enough number of those students spend their time binge drinking and casually hooking up in Isla Vista, occurrences of rape will be depressingly predictable. The problem is not that one in four teenage girls has an STI, or that a disturbing number of women in college are raped, but that we refuse to change the culture and our way of life that lends itself to these abominations.
That is why there is an inherent flaw in sex education, even at the college level, that focuses primarily on “safe sex.” The university may be able to offer you all types of services, such as Student Health, that focus on “prevention,” “detection” and other tips on “safety,” but it utterly fails to actually help students become liberated from the destructive lifestyles that fuel the very aberrations they claim to despise. The university has no intention of providing resources that help students indulge in the empowerment of modesty and morality, because as far as it is concerned, we are going to get blasted on weekends and have premarital sex regardless. Why bother?
This outrageous proposition assumes that youth are no more than sexual animals without a grasp on morality and self-discipline. Nonsense. We are the future of our country and the foundation of our society, and we should therefore reject such outright condescension and mistrust. We deserve more respect as human beings, yet more importantly, we deserve better for ourselves than continuing to make self-destructive lifestyle choices. If we wish to stop STIs and shameful occurrences of rape in our college community, we need not look to authorities, be it teachers or politicians, for lectures on “safe sex.” It is up to us to take personal responsibility for our own lives and radically change the depraved, sex-obsessed culture we live in.
Not all "pre-marital sex" is "free love" or "casually hooking up" while "getting blasted", Steven. Some of us manage to be in loving, respectful relationships while remaining "unmarried" (gasp!). May I suggest you try this sex business to see for yourself? Who knows, you might enjoy yourself :)
Ignorance on displayBelieve it or not, Mr. Begakis (or should I call you Mr. "Scare" "Quotes"?), you can indeed have an active sex life and still be responsible. Condoms are highly effective at preventing STDs and pregnancy, and if you do have an STD you can, you know, not have sex. Which is why it’s important to get tested, something that is taught in safe sex lectures! Far from what you claim, the spread of STDs is NOT inevitable. And in fact, it makes no difference whether or not you are married when it comes to sex. Really. When you… Read more »
Wow. you just made SO many untrue assumptions. I’m guessing you didnt attend any of the events this week because they are all about making safer sexual choices – INCLUDING abstinence if that is what is right for you. A shit ton of students at our school dont have sex. Abstinence is right for some people and other people chose not to be abstinent. This week is meant to promote knowledge and preparation for either decision. How is that so threatening to you? You decided that Sexual Responsibility Week promotes an "outrageous proposition [that] assumes that youth are no more… Read more »
"Next time you have a thought, just let it go." -Ron White
What would Fuzzy Bunny do?
Morality is subjective.
I certainly don’t need your Los Angeles Baptist High School/Pro-Prop8/College Republicans self telling me that pre-marital sex equals a "destructive lifestyle."
Creepy
jww the stalker. Lovely.
perverse universalism
i think your article is actually more perverse than the "rhetoric" we hear from safe sex advocates. you propose a kind of morality where rape doesn’t occur because all humans save their sexuality for their life partner.
anyway, if the free-sex culture you talk about at ucsb bothers you, why don’t you transfer to a school which would fit your morality more – say, brigham young university?
Dear Reaganite
It’s called facebook.
To konijn"if the free-sex culture you talk about at ucsb bothers you, why don’t you transfer" –Wait, couldn’t I make the same argument against the piss-ant liberals here at UCSB who compare America with Soviet gulags? "Oh, you don’t like the way things run here in America, get the hell out!" Liberal response: "I’m trying to change the way things work around here, idiot!" Well, that’s exactly what Steven is doing – trying to make a difference. Something called the First Amendment. But you’d rather suggest he leave and take his morality somewhere else. I didn’t realize we had to… Read more »
Dear jww
It’s still stalking.
yeah, i would really suggest he leave. his article makes him sound extremely unhappy with the way he perceives things are at ucsb. luckily, there’s an easy way out in transferring to a part of the united states more in tune with his divine morality. what you’re suggesting i am saying has nothing to do with freedom of speech. i think there’s no reason to be tolerant of poorly researched and written ramblings. metaphorically spitting on safe-sex education isn’t mature nor helpful. won’t the author agree that we need some kind of safe-sex education, because we can’t expect everybody to… Read more »
Reaganite: Looking at someone’s unprotected facebook profile (on a shared network) is stalking? How strange. Every time I look someone up on wiki, I am stalking them too? As usual, you are missing the point. I bring up his background to illustrate the point that morality is subjective. His schooling/political standing obviously indicate a religious and conservative background that makes his ideas about sex and sexual morality out of step with the majority of students at UCSB. I do have to agree with konjin. Steven does sound unhappy at UCSB. Perhaps he should’ve weighed his options more carefully before choosing… Read more »
Proles
Well written article, Steven. There is a silent minority that agrees with you.
The taming of the sex urge separates man from animal.
Re: JPokross
‘Proles.’ Wow. Way to sound like a condescending snob.
And I’ll thank your holier-than-thou minority to show some tact and stop condemning everyone around you.
Re: To konjin
I have never heard anyone at this university compare America to Soviet gulags.
This is also not an issue of free speech and majority position. But now that you’ve brought it up, free speech is a two-way street. Begakis has the right to make a blatantly ignorant and offensive statement, and the rest of us have the choice of agreeing with him or rebutting his misinformation.
This article is comprehensive in its data. I appreciate this having much information laid out in such a clear format. You have a knack for engaging and influencing your readers. Interesting content can be rare.