Author
|
Topic: Younger girls, responsibility and sex
|
kuri
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4202
|
posted 27 April 2005 08:48 AM
First of all, I want to emphasize that I'm putting this thread in the feminism forum for a good reason: I want to hear pro-feminist viewpoints on teen sexuality.I come to this topic because of implications, in thread like this one and this one that teens, in particular teen girls don't have the right to be sexual. Or, if they are sexual, they don't have the right to expect to be treated with dignity or empowered anymore. I find it really shocking that we are still carrying on a madonna/whore dichotomy to the next generation. Yet, I fully recognize that the risks, emotional and physical, of intimacy do need to be communicated to teenagers. I just feel that they should still be told to make the decisions for themselves and should have a right to dignity regardless of whether they choose to have sex or not. So, the questions that arise, for me, are: can there be a pro-feminist case made for abstinence? I don't mean the choice of abstinence; I think that's obviously feminist because it means that individuals are empowered to choose. I mean, can a feminist argument be made for advocating abstinence as the only, or preferred, choice for teenagers regardless of their circumstances? Secondly, I'm wondering if anyone can recommend or share some feminist perspectives on youth and adulthood as it pertains to sexual agency. I've always thought the main thing was to endow teens with the ability to make their choices whenever possible, while keeping them fully informed. I realize that peer pressure can create a "false consciousness" of choice around sex, i.e. where one thinks it's their own choice but are really acting out of a desire to be popular or cool or whatever. But while I read a lot of feminist writing about the family and society and women's agency there, I havn't yet had the opportunity to read any about agency and equality for children. In some ways, this loosely ties to the vote at 16 issue, too, because it's about when one can make a decision as an adult, but I'm interested in theories about decision-making as it relates to sexuality and feminist empowerment specifically.
From: an employer more progressive than rabble.ca | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hailey
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6438
|
posted 27 April 2005 09:01 AM
quote: Or, if they are sexual, they don't have the right to expect to be treated with dignity or empowered anymore.
Every member of the human family deserves to be treated with dignity. People making choices outside of your comfort zone included. quote: So, the questions that arise, for me, are: can there be a pro-feminist case made for abstinence? ... I mean, can a feminist argument be made for advocating abstinence as the only, or preferred, choice for teenagers regardless of their circumstances?
I wish I had made a mental note of the program but I remember when I was in University there was information brought forward about a feminist organization that had a campaign that was focused on encouraging young women to delay sexual activity. It was based on some studies that reflected that significant sexually active relationships tended to diminish interest in school and extra-curricular activities. It was shown in those studies that young women that deferred sexual relations a few years ended up accomplishing more academic goals. I would speculate that is perhaps because people get caught up with all of the emotions of a relationship and studying becomes a distant second priority. As well I have read that persons who begin to have sexual relations very very early often have complicated family lives so if that's true that could skew the study and it's results. Anecdotally, Hillary Clinton has spoken out in favour of seeing young women defer sexual relations until college I believe. I think that people can desire to see young women delay sexual relations until they have experienced more of other aspects of life, to become more secure in themselves as a person, to accomplish certain academic lives, and to make sure that they can balance relationships and school. I don't think the key issue is whether or not you think that a 14 year old should be having sex. It's about how you treat people who disagree with that guidance.
From: candyland | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stargazer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6061
|
posted 27 April 2005 09:30 AM
Pretty concerned about young women's sexuality being curbed no? What about young men? While 1 female teen is pregnant, she clearly cannot get pregnant again. Yet 1 male teen can impregnate many, many females within the same 9 months. Why the focus of female sexuality and attempting to curb it when there clearly is a bigger issue? It takes two people to have sex. Seems to me some sexual responsibility for boys, and how to treat women as people and not toys would be a good start. Just a question. [ 27 April 2005: Message edited by: Stargazer ]
From: Inside every cynical person, there is a disappointed idealist. | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
kuri
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4202
|
posted 27 April 2005 10:55 AM
quote: Originally posted by Hailey: ...a feminist organization that had a campaign that was focused on encouraging young women to delay sexual activity. It was based on some studies that reflected that significant sexually active relationships tended to diminish interest in school and extra-curricular activities. It was shown in those studies that young women that deferred sexual relations a few years ended up accomplishing more academic goals.
That's interesting. It reminds of some of the arguments in favour of all-girls schools as a way of ensuring that girls stay focused on academics rather than relationships. I'm not quite convinced that it's the way to go but I think it's a valid position. quote: Originally posted by stargazer: Why the focus of female sexuality and attempting to curb it when there clearly is a bigger issue? It takes two people to have sex. Seems to me some sexual responsibility for boys, and how to treat women as people and not toys would be a good start.
Indeed. But that's a whole different kettle of fish, I think. The spirit of my original question did kind of treat boys' interest in sex as neutral and given, if only as an a way of parsing down to the conceptual question of female maturity and decision-making. I did this in part as a way of focusing and in part because the two threads that raised the question for me focused on the female side of things in their moral calculus. I certainly did not mean to imply that only females are responsible.
From: an employer more progressive than rabble.ca | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
smokingeatingdrinkingprohibited
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7699
|
posted 27 April 2005 04:14 PM
Hailey's points ring true to me. I'd add that the messages that some programming sends out about a person's sexuality can be quite disturbing. Everything from prevalence of very causal sexual encounters, to equating womens' worth to their sexual potential.Anyway, some kind of counter-action is required for teens of both sexes. I don't mean we should do this to STOP individuals from emulating what's seen in tv/films. Do it in order to allow teens to be able to critically think about this stuff. AND to allow them to define who they want to be, for themselves. What comes to mind are vulnerable teens who feel that they have to do certain things to fit in, whether they're comfortable with it or not. quote: "I have spoken to so many girls that have told me that they don't want to be giving their boyfriends blowjobs. But they are scared that he will break up with them or another girl will do it. So there is a real power imbalance there."
CBC study
From: Glasgee | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
v michel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7879
|
posted 27 April 2005 04:36 PM
Kurichina, I can tell you a couple of instances I'm aware of. I have seen effective pro-feminist arguments made for abstinence in very specific cases where sexual activity would by nature be exploitative. One example is the therapeutic environment. For teen girls struggling as survivors of abuse or with other psychological concerns, it may be that the girl needs time away from sex or dating activities to heal. In that case, the decision to abstain can go hand-in-hand with a feminist message, as it is the girl making a decision with herself and her health as the primary factor and societal expectations as secondary. Also, in some closed environments where equal relationships are not possible, advocating abstinence can be pro-feminist. I don't want to get into hot water but my experience in particular has been with small religious communities. In a place where virtually all sexual relationships put the woman at a disadvantage, and girls internalize the idea that sex is something that they will eventually "owe" a husband, combined with youth and religious confusion, it may be that a positive relationship of equals just isn't going to happen to a teenage girl. In that environment often the girl feels guilty engaging in sexual activity but also feels guilty for denying it, and her religion's message of abstinence is diluted by the expectations of the men around her. So I have seen abstinence advocated effectively from a pro-feminist stance in that environment. The idea is that the girl doesn't have to have sex with anyone if she doesn't want to, and if she is getting an uncomfortable feeling from the dynamic in her immediate community she should abstain until she has either a) come to terms with it as an adult or b) moved away and found potential partners who share her views on relationships. That is a weird case where the feminist left takes a stance that the religious right ought to agree with, but not in their own backyard. It's a tricky line, though. In my opinion abstinence is best considered a feminist message in situations where a healthy relationship is not possible. But at the same time, I am not sure at what age to draw the line.
From: a protected valley in the middle of nothing | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
kuri
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4202
|
posted 28 April 2005 03:36 AM
quote: Originally posted by vmichel: It's a tricky line, though. In my opinion abstinence is best considered a feminist message in situations where a healthy relationship is not possible. But at the same time, I am not sure at what age to draw the line.
That's sort of what I thought, too. When I started this thread, I was thinking that a pro-feminist abstinence message was something that was conceptually impossible, which was why I found condemnations of girls' "value systems" in one thread and demands that we "discourage sex" in the other thread so difficult to deal with. Hearing these special circumstances is interesting, and the type of situations you describe there seem *somewhat* like a temporary feminist separatism. quote: Originally posted by smokingeatingdrinkingprohibited: What comes to mind are vulnerable teens who feel that they have to do certain things to fit in, whether they're comfortable with it or not.
While that is a problem, that's not the message I was confused about. I fully support any messaging that empower teens to make their own decisions and not give into peer pressure. What I thought was more problematic was the idea that we should necessarily "discourage sexual activity" wholesale and not just "unwanted sexual activity." quote: Originally posted by smokingeatingdrinkingprohibited: Everything from prevalence of very causal sexual encounters, to equating womens' worth to their sexual potential.
I'm confused by what you mean by this, though. While the second one is obviously bad, I find it hard again to see much of a problem with "very casual sexual encounters." If that what someone wants and they enjoy it and are taking the necessary precautions so its safe than why not? Separately, does anyone know of any feminist theorists who've addressed issues of maturity/childhood and what they feel constitutes a transition between the two on an intellectual level?
From: an employer more progressive than rabble.ca | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hailey
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6438
|
posted 28 April 2005 10:48 AM
quote: Hailey's points ring true to me. I'd add that the messages that some programming sends out about a person's sexuality can be quite disturbing. Everything from prevalence of very causal sexual encounters, to equating womens' worth to their sexual potential.
I grew up speaking to christian youth groups about a number of topics. A key and thematic one was abstinence.From that people sometimes get to feel that they know you more intimately and you have to accept that they'd ask you questions with less hesitance than you, perhaps, think is ideal. After I got married one of the most surprising thing to me was that a gender-bias that I had not ever seen before became very noteworthy. It is something that troubles us both. Well, actually it bothers my husband more. quote: It's a tricky line, though. In my opinion abstinence is best considered a feminist message in situations where a healthy relationship is not possible. But at the same time, I am not sure at what age to draw the line.
Honestly I think that there are separate issues to be considered. I truly think that getting caught up in a romantic relationship at a young age can really distract a girl in particular from academic and vocational goals. It's hard to see the forest from the trees at that age. It would be hard not to be distracted. I would think that supporting young girls to make decisions about their future would be a feminist goal.
From: candyland | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
bigcitygal
Volunteer Moderator
Babbler # 8938
|
posted 03 May 2005 09:36 AM
Hi there, just wading into the discussion with some thoughts: most teens, girls and boys, crave "adult" or "forbidden" behaviours, acts, substances, experiences, etc. Sex is one of those "adult" things that teens want to experience. Some teens can view sex in the same way they view smoking cigarettes, drinking, smoking pot, etc. Of course this doesn't mean that all teens do this, or that I agree with lumping all those behaviours together!Sex is a hot topic (haha pun intended) mostly because our society is so screwed up about it (ditto). So of course teens, and everyone, will have skewed ideas of what's presumed to be the "right" decision around sexual activity . What's important for me as a feminist is that I would not posit any one decision as the right solution for all, teens or otherwise. From: a former teen
From: It's difficult to work in a group when you're omnipotent - Q | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469
|
posted 03 May 2005 10:35 AM
quote: most teens, girls and boys, crave "adult" or "forbidden" behaviours, acts, substances, experiences, etc.
They should have visited me last week then. With a knowing wink I could have ushered them into the back room and introduced them to something we adults like to call "Filling out your tax return". If that's not too much adult experience for one night, we could go "pay some bills", or maybe "clean the bathroom".
From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Jesse Dignity
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7131
|
posted 04 May 2005 06:46 PM
quote: Originally posted by Wilf Day: Statscan looks at the sexual habits of early teens:girls who had a weak “self concept” were more likely than those with a stronger sense of self to have had sex by 14 or 15. “The opposite was true for boys,” Statscan said.
Yeah, but what that tells me is that we need to work on strengthening girls' self concept, not on discouraging them from having sex specifically. If they're yielding to social pressures because they're lacking self-determination, then making them feel even worse about having sex isn't going to fix anything. I think that's the way to approach teens and sex - don't worry about telling them whether they should do it or not. Give them the tools to responsibly determine for themselves whether they should do it or not, and the emotional footholds to stand firm in their own decisions. Promoting abstinence as the only moral alternative will never weaken the virgin/whore dichotomy. You can't fight stigma with stigma. That's my take.
From: punch a misogynist today | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|