My pal SB just sent me a link to this ABC News article Govt. Tells Singles No Sex Till You’re 30: Critics Say the New Guidelines are About Morality, Not Health. I actually began to weep (no, really) when I read the piece, which explains that the US gov’t just dumped $50 million into the Department of Health and Human Services’ $50 million Abstinence Education Program (the mandated substitute for sex education in our public schools; meaning that if you want money, you have to play their way, Mafia-style). We’ve had five years of abstinence programs in public schools, and the helpline calls only get more dire, more STD focused as they have no idea that oral/anal sex *is sex* too, and from younger people. With this new round of “education grants”, I predict a health crisis, for starters.

Many updates after the jump.

* * * * * * *

So, here are the new United States Health and Human Services abstinence program “Legislative Priorities” — kudos to ABC for linking to the HHS document:

“IV.7 Legislative Priorities
Describe how the State’s proposed plan will address each of the following A-H elements:

(A)’has as its exclusive purpose, teaching the social, psychological and health gains to be realized by abstaining from sexual activity;
(B) teaches abstinence from sexual activity outside marriage as the expected standard for all school age children;
(C) teaches that abstinence from sexual activity is the only certain way to avoid out-of-wedlock pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and other associated health problems;
(D) teaches that a mutually faithful monogamous relationship in the context of marriage is the expected standard of human sexual activity;
(E) teaches that sexual activity outside of the context of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects;
(F) teaches that bearing children out-of-wedlock is likely to have harmful consequences for the child, the child’s parents, and society;
(G) teaches young people how to reject sexual advances and how alcohol and drug use increases vulnerability to sexual advances; and
(H) teaches the importance of attaining self-sufficiency before engaging in sexual activity.’

Each element should be meaningfully represented in all Federally funded abstinence education grantee programs and curricula.”

Of course, I’m happy to say I broke their under-30 rules this morning. Although for the DHHS I’m a threat, *not* a target market.

Update: Sweet London Boy just emailed me these sobering links:

Teach contraception to primary pupils, says report Snip: “Children should be taught about contraception while they are still in primary school, according to a report published today. Condoms should be free or sold at low cost to teenagers in schools and sports centres, according to the report by the Institute for Public Policy Research”

(…)”A spokesman for the Department for Education and Skills said teenage pregnancy rates were at their lowest for 20 years and had fallen by 11.1% since the government’s teenage pregnancy strategy began in 1998. ‘We are taking steps to improve the support we give to parents to talk about sex and relationships…’”

And in the badly titled Westerners ‘are more promiscuous’ (about the Lancet study results making major internet rounds right now), snip: “And among singletons, westerners were more sexually active as well. (…) The researchers said these findings were surprising, as higher rates of STIs were reported in developing countries. But the report’s author, Professor Kaye Wellings, said: ‘This suggests social factors such as poverty, mobility and gender equality may be a stronger factor in sexual ill-health than promiscuity.’ And she added that the results showed flexible approaches to tackling public health had to be adopted.”

Update: Reader Erica writes, “Right under the eight A-H points you listed on your blog, in section IV.8: ‘Do not promote contraception and/or condom use.’

At all?

Teaching kids not to have sex does more than undermine our society. It encourages ignorance. Even if you’re abstinent until you’re thirty, don’t bet on everyone else following these ‘guidelines.’ It’s not the government’s place to tell anyone to abstain from sexual activity. They have WAY overstepped their bounds on this one. Initiative D: the program ‘teaches that a mutually faithful monogamous relationship in the context of marriage is the expected standard of human sexual activity.’ Thanks. I really needed the government to tell me what is and is not normal, what is and is not expected of me as a citizen of the United States. This is just appalling. After reading your article, ABC’s article, and then the ACF document itself, I was completely unable to speak for a full five minutes.”

Update: A pal from Copenhagen sends me this post on what looks like a great health blog — read Abstinence of Malice. Snop: “For 12 years you have been eligible to fight and die for your country. For 11 years you have been voting. For eight years you have been legally drinking. For four years, if you are a single man, you have been paying less in car insurance.

But Good Ol’ Uncle Sam thinks you are too young to have sex unless you are married.

USA Today reports that the administration’s waste of millions of dollars on abstinence-only education targeted at teenagers actually extends to adults up to age 29.” Read more, it’s excellent and to the point.

Update: but what Americans want is different than what our gov’t forces on us — read Most Americans Favor Comprehensive Sex Education (Forbes).