The Daily Pennsylvanian :: Arielle Pardes | From the bedroom to the classroom

Arielle Pardes
The Screwtinizer

Despite learning very dutifully how to wrap a condom onto a banana, I have yet to find a practical use for putting contraceptives on my fruit. If this is a common experience among high schoolers in the United States, then it’s no surprise that American sex education is out of whack.

Perhaps I should be grateful for the sex education I received, considering that abstinence is stressed in more than three quarters of public schools (thanks to the millions of dollars of federal grants made available to states that promote abstinence until marriage).

Still, few programs — whether considered “comprehensive” or not — send the message that sex can be healthy and (dare I say it?) pleasurable.

Al Vernacchio’s class at Friends’ Central High School in Wynnewood, Pa. is different. The course, Sex and Society, stretches the boundaries of sex education far beyond mere biology. Students explore everything from sexual orientation to masturbation, where few questions are off limits and every inquiry is valued.

Vernacchio earned his master’s degree in human sexuality from Penn’s Graduate School of Education in 1993 and returned to Penn last night to give a talk entitled: “Have Great Sex: Optimizing Your Sex Life.”

“Because I was trained in human sexuality, which so few sex educators are, I’m able to talk about more than just the plumbing,” he said.

And indeed he does: from sex toys to gender, students in his class learn about the multiplicity of factors that contribute to sexual experiences.

In an age when even “comprehensive” sex education is designed to scare the jeepers out of you (remember Coach Carr’s warning in Mean Girls that if you fool around, you will get chlamydia and die?) Vernacchio’s course is refreshing.

But his approach isn’t commendable simply because he gives his students free reign to talk about blowjobs and their favorite flavored lube. Modern sex education fails us not just because it’s vanilla but because it’s restrictive. When we’re taught that sex means “penis into vagina, ejaculation, done,” we miss out on the big picture implications that surround our sexual experience.

The Guttmacher Institute, a leader in sexual health research, reported this month that 70 percent of teens have had sex by age 19, meaning we have an entire generation of sexually active people who don’t know much beyond putting a condom onto a banana.

But sex amounts to more than just the physical act: our sexual experiences hinge on our perception of our bodies, our relationship to our partner and our understanding of pleasure.

College junior Isabel Friedman, who introduced Vernacchio last night, took his class during her senior year of high school. Friedman believes standard sex education programs focus too much on the anatomy and physiology of sexual experience.

“The truth is that so much of what makes sex complicated are the emotional and value systems at play, and I think that’s really where modern sexual education completely fails us,” she noted.

The most memorable lesson that Friedman learned from Vernacchio’s class was one on sexual values.

“I was taught that the sexual decisions you make are through a value system,” Friedman said, adding that students in Vernacchio’s class were challenged to talk about what sex meant to them personally.

In November, The New York Times Magazine profiled Vernacchio in a cover story, calling him a “consummate sex scholar” and asserting “this sex-ed class may well be the only one of its kind in the United States.”

Perhaps Vernacchio is an anomaly for America but this approach is the norm in nations like Sweden, where schoolchildren are taught about the birds and the bees as early as age six. Classes start by introducing the straight facts and later incorporate sex into subjects like biology, history and literature. The message is that sex is a healthy, normal and an integrated part of everyday life.

If we learned about sex through this model, how might our sex lives be different today? Would your first time have been empowering and fun instead of an awkward tangle of teenage bodies trying to figure out what the hokey pokey was really all about?

A good sex education program need not tell us which positions score the best orgasm or how to engage in your first orgy, but we do need to offer an open dialogue to students. Indeed, learning about sex and all that comes with it may be the most important thing you learn in school.

Comments (11)

Of course, the only problem with that is that many religions DO teach abstinence until marriage (they also teach about the beauty and joy of sex within marriage, but the secular world seems to ignore that). The education that you laud instead ostracizes those with said religious beliefs and is intolerant of such convictions. What you might call being a prude, others consider a virtue. I’m glad to see such an enlightened college student trampling on the dogmas and moral teachings of billions of people! Keep it up.

It’s been clear for a long time that abstinence-only education doesn’t work. Of the approximately 750,000 teen pregnancies that occur each year, 82% are unintended. So enforcing abstinence doesn’t keep kids from having sex, it keeps them from having SAFE sex. The type of education advocated in this article doesn’t force students to start having sex immediately, but it does provide accurate information and an open dialogue to prepare students who are sexually active, or will one day become sexually active.

I’ve been following this column for three weeks now and quite frankly, I find it appalling that at an institution like Penn, the only good discussion we can have is about sex? Shouldn’t we be fostering academic growth at this institution? Why don’t we try writing about something that causes students to think and engage in open discussions. Your columns are awful, in the fact you endorse casual sex and fail to acknowledge that many students on campus choose to keep their legs closed until marriage. I have no problem with columns on sex, and sex education is important. But is it really necessary to casually talk about it EVERY WEEK? Here’s a challenge: write a column about the joys of practicing abstinence, and actually interview someone who does. We’re not the prudes you make us out to be…..

Yeah @Right, but… but according to what I assume is the same study you used (Guttmacher Institute http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/FB-ATSRH.html) most teenagers are using contraception when they have sex. And yet, they still get pregnant or contract STDs. That is because there is no such thing as “safe sex”. Condoms break or are used incorrectly. Birth control pills sometimes don’t work. The only certain way to avoid unintended pregnancy or STDs is to abstain from sex. Abstinence-only education DOES work if people LISTEN to it. I refuse to believe that teenagers are slaves to their hormones who need to have sex in order to be fulfilled, and that telling them to restrain themselves is somehow cruel and oppressive. Sex can be a beautiful, wonderful thing, but it is also something that you shouldn’t engage in unless you are a mature person (ideally married, but that’s my religious opinion…being in a committed, monogamous relationship is a similar concept). High school teenagers are not mature, that’s why most of them can’t vote, sign a legal document, drive without restrictions, drink alcohol or do several other “adult” things. Lulling teenagers into a false sense of security that tells them that if they use condoms or the pill, nothing will happen to them is WRONG and misleading. That said, I believe sex education should acknowledge the various forms of birth control that exist, for knowledge’s sake, but should not promote any of them, and should stress that abstinence above all is what will prevent STDs and unintended pregnancies. It should definitely mention the several health and moral risks of the pill and IUD, such as blood clots, breast cancer risk, and death of an unborn child (not yet implanted in the uterus in the case of the pill, fully implanted and growing in the case of the IUD).

What sex education should NOT do is promote sex as another casual teenage activity like going to the movies or the mall. School is not sex camp. There’s no need to talk about your “favorite flavor of lube” or how to make sex better for teenagers. What’s next, live demonstrations? Somehow, I survived just fine without having a class like this. Vernacchio’s brand of sex education is weird and inappropriate for children.

You argued: “Why don’t we try writing about something that causes students to think and engage in open discussions.” Isn’t this EXACTLY what this column is advocating? The type of sex education promoted in this piece is all about thinking and engaging in open discussions about sex, so that students can become educated about sexuality beyond just anatomy.

You also wrote: “I have no problem with columns on sex, but is it really necessary to casually talk about it EVERY WEEK?” Isn’t that exactly what a “sex column” is: the place to write about sex on a regular basis? You seem severely confused and misinformed.

Next time you try to critique a well-written piece by one of the few good columnists on the DP staff, try to have some valid points.

religious people are just butthurt because they’ve been taught from the day they were born that their bodies are evil and sex is disgusting, and they can’t understand why anyone would think otherwise

There are so many issues with the previous comments but to address pretty much all of them at the same time: ABSTINENCE ONLY EDUCATION DOES NOT WORK. Telling kids not to have sex is not going to stop them from getting it on. It’s just going to make it more likely that they end up with an unwanted pregnancy, an STD or STI, or being pressured into sex when they aren’t ready.

Teaching kids about safe, responsible, consensual sex isn’t going to make those kids that don’t want to have sex go out and screw the whole football team. Sex education programs like the one outlined in this article are going to provide teenagers with the resources to establish healthy sexual practices and a good relationship with their own sexuality, thereby fostering a good relationship with themselves and their peers. This education is not forcing anyone to have sex or ostracizing religious teens with moral obligations to sex. And just because they don’t believe in having sex, doesn’t mean they shouldn’t learn about it. I don’t believe in religion but I sure as hell had to learn about it and it gave me a more well-rounded world view and grounded me even more in my personal beliefs.

Reforming sex education will only provide teens with the opportunity to form healthy sexual relationships, information on safe sex, and a better self image throughout their lives. Abstinence only education is outdated and ineffective, and modern “comprehensive” sex education isn’t much better. Drastic and sweeping reform is needed and can only be beneficial in the long run.

Every once in a while, some DP columnist thinks she or he is being a trail-blazer by writing something like this. Abstinence only education is probably a bad idea. But students also don’t have to learn in school about sex being pleasurable, positions, etc. That could make some kids really uncomfortable and is a personal choice meant for outside the classroom. It’s up for everyone to make up their own minds about AT THEIR OWN PACE. Schools can teach the biology, ramifications (emotional, physical, std’s etc.) and let students make their own choices. It doesn’t make you a prude to wait until you’re emotionally ready. You may be ready at 13 or 25. Teaching kids how to have pleasure is not something schools need to do. I was taught about healthy eating and no one threw in that binging on hot chocolate and ice cream could be delicious, even though it is! People are smart enough to come to their own conclusions.

You people really don’t get it. “I refuse to believe that teenagers have to be slaves to their hormones” …really? Were you ever a teenager/do you remember what it is like? Teenagers have always been and will always be “slaves” to their hormones. Its just part of that stage of life. The sooner we realize that teenagers are going to have sex the sooner we can come together and stop the adverse effects of sexual activity. I went to high school. I saw dozens of boys and girls make abstinence vows. I can count on one hand with a finger cut off how many of those vows even made it to college, let alone marriage. And the statistical data across our country aligns perfectly with my anecdotal evidence. Abstinence vows do not work. I will repeat in case you didn’t hear. ABSTINENCE VOWS DO NOT WORK. Education about contraception is the only thing that can lower std and teen pregnancy rates. When you keep a topic in the dark it only makes it more tempting. Plus then the teenagers don’t know how to handle it when life inevitably throws it at them. That’s why Europe has lower std rates, lower teen pregnancy rates, lower bing drinking rates, lower DUI rates, lower amounts of alcohol poisoning, lower amounts of abortions, etc. You want to lower abortions? You want to lower teen pregnancy rates? Then wake up America. Europe has been taking my suggested route for years. The facts speak for themselves.

To the commenter before me, you clearly didn’t even read my whole comment, where I stated that sex education programs should give students the facts about what sex is and acknowledge that contraception does exist, but should not promote it over abstinence, since contraception is at most 99% effective if used correctly, and abstinence is obviously the only 100% effective way to prevent pregnancy and STDs. You seem to not want to accept that abstinence vows absolutely do work if people KEEP THEM. Your friends failed at keeping their vows. The abstinence did not fail. It was not like a condom that broke. The fact is, no matter what we tell kids, some of them are just not going to follow the advice. Even if we handed out free condoms and birth control pills to everyone and explained how to use them, there are always going to be instances where the condom slips off or breaks, or girls who get pregnant even though they were on the pill. Are you going to help these kids raise their babies or get to the doctor for STD treatment because they followed your “safe sex” advice? Nope. Oh, and yes, I very clearly remember what it was like to be a teenager, considering I’m barely in my twenties. And I remember that when I was a teenager I did a lot of DUMB things. Because teenagers are dumb in a lot of ways. It’s just the way it is. That’s why most of us don’t marry the people we date in high school, or pick our career paths in 9th grade. What I don’t understand is, we’re so okay with telling teens “no” about other things. We say “Don’t smoke”, not “Smoke a little bit, lots of people smoke and don’t get lung cancer, so as long as you’re not going through three packs a day or something you’ll be fine!” Don’t do drugs. Don’t drink and drive. Don’t eat unhealthy food, even though it’s delicious. Why is sex so different? People need to wait to have sex until they are RESPONSIBLE.

There are many things wrong with the statements you have made in your previous comment but lets tackle the largest one due to the fact that there are only 24 hours in a day. You compared sex in high school to smoking cigarettes or drinking and driving. Wow. You have such a warped perception on this topic I don’t know where to start. You cannot make a blanket statement and say that kids are not ready for sex in high school. Kids mature at vastly different ages and many are ready by early sophomore year. Others obviously need to wait until college and some even long after that. But it is not FACT that all high school students are too immature and irresponsible to handle a sexual relationship. Smoking cigarettes is bad for you. In any quantity. Drinking and driving is lethal and irresponsible. Every time. Sex is not bad for you all the time. Sex in high school is not bad for you all the time. You are lumping pre-adult sexual activity into a category that it does not belong at all. We don’t all believe in a deity that says we should save our virginity for marriage or even one person. In fact personally I believe only having one lover can cause marital problems but that’s an entirely different topic. To tell kids that they should not have sex in high school is wrong. If they are ready for a sexual relationship, have mutual care between them and their partner, and are educated with contraception then they have the full right to engage in sexual activity. To even begin to support a system that tells every single kid that they simply aren’t mature or responsible enough is oversimplification and morally wrong. If the kid is not ready for sexual activity, or have his/her own religious beliefs they are free to abstain. But abstinence as a strategy or policy simply isn’t realistic. Just as intelligent design is not science and therefore doesn’t belong in science classes, abstinence is not an effective preventative measure and therefore should not be included in classes where the ultimate goal is to prevent the spread of stds and teen pregnancy.

Comments are closed for this item.