I finally managed to get a handle on this blog thing.
Given my research background and interests, I'll likely be focusing on either the labor movement or the media reform movement -- though, to be honest, I cannot use the phrase social movement with a straight face given my exposure to the 'social movement as a verb' thinking of McGee, DeLuca, and Naze. :)
What I would really kill to do, though, is focus on the efforts to oppose abstinence-only sexual education and support comprehensive sex education. I also wouldn't mind expanding the research to include the broader push towards what's called sexual freedom, or the freedom for individuals to participate in whatever consensual sexual activities they want; recognizing the value and diversity of human sexualities and their need to flourish without social and legal derision.
Any feedback, especially from you Dr. Aguayo, would be appreciated.
Take care and control!
7 comments:
Well....where do I start?
As for abstinence only sex ed, I would have to say that would be a great disservice to everyone. HOWEVER, BUT and OH MY GOD, the very idea of exposing children to the type liberal sex ed you proposed would be uncontrollable, and probably growth hindering. Exploring sexual freedom? These are jr. high and high school kids! Also, who decides what type of sexual lifestyles and practices should be taught? You, some old man, a school board, the president??? Imagine the STDS, pregnancies and AIDS epidemics times 100...that is if kids are not only taught alternative lifestyles, but practically encouraged to go and try them out. Remember, they are just KIDS! Also, the social ramifacations would be astronomical. Imagine the akwardness you felt as a youth, and then imagine it times 100. These lifestyles are practiced by adults, and should NOT be taught to children. If this type of sex ed happens, I will gladly take my kids out of school and home school. Kids learn about these lifestyles on their own, through media etc. Why not teach them safe sex which includes but is not limited to abstinence.
Chris..While I respect your opinion I think you may have misinterpreted Scott's post. He was stating two seperate opinions..1) That abstinence only sex education is harmful and the focus of our schools should be on comprehensive sex education. As time progresses so should our school systems. And 2) he also wouldn't mind researching the increased push towards sexual freedom. This isn't saying let's teach our children how to be swingers, it's a push to recognize the importance of sexuality as a basic human need and the importance of being able to explore your own sexuality without the okay of the government.
Hope this cleared things up a little bit..I look forward to hearing your opinions throughout the semester! Have a good weekend!
Megan
Exactly right, Megan.
I feel that is important to note in a class focusing on social movements that in order to make an accurate assessment of the condition of sex education in our schools, we must first examine the manner in which our society as a whole views sex, sexuality, and sexual maturity. I concur with Scott that we need to revamp the system in which we educate America's youth about sex. In order to do this we must first examine the rhetoricity of sex and sexuality as socially constructed notions. For this we can turn to queer theory as a theoretical approach to social protest. Michael Warner, in his book, Fear of a Queer Planet, argues, “Because the logic of the sexual order is so deeply embedded by now in an indescribably wide range of social institutions, and is embedded in the most standard accounts of the world, queer struggles aim not just at toleration or equal status but at challenging those institutions and accounts” (xiii). I'm sure that Scott has read this :) but i believe it would be helpful for his final project and for all of us to think more fully about the constructed nature (and embedded nature) of sex as a system of thought.
Lots of great ideas here. Dan, could you unpack for the class what you mean by "rhetoricity?"
I would love to. By rhetoricity, I am referring to the structures of gender and sexuality and the manner in which they enable and constrain our choices in the world. They function rhetorically by the manner in which they carry connotations of how we should be in our day to day lives (e.g., straight and male as preferred subject positions). In order to be able to make a critical assessment, we must recognize the biases that have been ingrained into the structures that shape our perspectives. To think of all of this rhetorically is to see the ways in which such social structures function to induce decisions, change, and behaviors in the people who subscribe to those structures.
Post a Comment