A creative approach to STDs
Posted on March 28th, 2008 – 3:01 PMBy Josephine Marcotty
For years I’ve been writing health care stories in the hopes that all of you out there will read them. Now with the launch of this blog we can start having a two-way conversation about the health of all the bodies you love. So let’s chat!
Last week I talked to Fred Evans, one of the people on the front lines of the battle against sexually transmitted diseases. He had a novel approach for how to start turning that epidemic around. He runs a community outreach program called Seen On Da’ Streets in north Minneapolis that teaches young black men about STD’s and provides screening. The rates of infection are especially frightening among young African Americans. Evans says that the only way to stop it is to make safe sex, well, sexy. There is also a fascinating piece in the New York Times Magazine about the small abstinence until marriage movement on campuses.
Here is what Evans had to say:
“We live in the real world. We know that young people are having sex. We are battling this glamorization of sex. We are trying to glamorize safe sex.
“It’s difficult get into public schools because of the stigma of talking about sex and condoms. They want to go with abstinence based. But the high schools in our community, they have day care so kids can bring their children to school.
“When I raise the question about safe sex as sexy or loud and flashy, people cringe at the idea. But this thing needs to be as loud and flashy as the music and videos they are listening to in order to get their attention.”
Is he right?
23 Responses to "A creative approach to STDs"
Sorry Fred, I do not agree I feel we need to empower our youth to understand the responsibility that comes with having unprotected sex for them as well as others,people regardless of age are going to have sex,we need to educate each other about the choices one makes.
We need to take our schools back — abstinence based sexual education is a minority interest in many areas and for some reason they were let to change curriculum for the worse. I signed a petition as an outgoing Senior at a high school in ISD 279 in 1999 to keep the status quo of full-information sexual eduction — it seemed wholly inadequate to eliminate safe sex information from these classes. Sex-ed didn’t teach me how to have sex, it taught me how to have sex if I chose to before I was married or highly committed.
The best way, in fact the only 100% effective way, to not get an STD is to not have sex. If someone chooses to do it anyway, then they can live with the consequences. That’s how things work in the “real world.”
Educating about safe sex is also absolutely fine, but people need to understand the inherent limitations in the effectiveness of safe sex methods.
Yet, like so many things, it comes down to a matter of responsibility and if you need loud flashy music to be convinced to practice safe sex, you probably aren’t a very responsible person.
Whether he is ‘right’ isn’t as valid a question as whether what he is doing will help.
I think it will and is.
Also, I can already tell that this blog is going to be an asset to the Star Tribune’s website — and the community it serves.
I hope you have big success with it.
Young people have sex, because we as a society tell them to have sex. Companies and the media force sex on them 24/7. Is there any wonder 1 in 4 girls has an STD? I remember in high school, after going through the “sex-ed” program thinking how much easier it is to follow the “501 button-fly” solution. If the button-fly is closed,
How many high school anti smoking programs talk about “safe smoking”?
How many high school anti drug programs talk about “safe drug use”?
How much damage is done by one smoke? How much damage is done by one drug use?
Compare that with a single “opps” with someone who had an “opps” with someone else?
How much money is made by Planed Parenthood, the abortion industry and the drug companies, after a single “opps”? Follow the money and you will find the real benefactors to the “sex-ed” programs today.
I think this is ridiculous.
For starters, high school kids are not simply dogs in heat, all getting ready to “do it” and completely incapable of self-control. To speak of and treat them as such is absurd and disrespectful.
Secondly, trying to compete with the popular culture by making the “safe” sex message “sexy” and “loud” and “flashy” only reinforces the same misleading messages that have been shoved in the faces of today’s youth since the day they were born.
What the youth of today needs is not “loud” and “flashy” distorted messages, but the truth of living out real and authentic love. Why are we so convinced that real love, the love that each and every person truly longs for, is unattainable?
Not only that, but why do we still think that the STD epidemic will be stopped by “safe” sex. Even the National Institute for Health reported that only 2 of the 8 most prevalent STDs could REDUCE the risk of transmission. And even then the “silent killer” (HPV) can be transmitted anywhere from mid-thigh to mid-abdomen. A condom obviously does not protect those areas.
So why encourage our youth to play Russian roulette with sex? And why treat them as completely lacking any intelligence and willpower? Our youth do not need more band-aid solutions that have been scientifically proven failures. What they need is the honest message of authentic human love, and then the encouragement and help to live it.
I grew up a gay youth during the horrendous 80’s and when gays were being blamed for just about anything you wanted due to the discovery of HIV. The one thing that was taught during those years was how to put on a condom and use it. It was taught to me before I was sexually active and it was taught in the schools. Well I’m still here, still clean and yes I am sexually active, but because of the HIV scare and paranoia of the 80’s, I’ve never NOT used a condom. Youth today absolutely need condom education, because STD’s are still just as dangerous and easily transmitted as they were 20 years ago. So, what’s changed if STD’s haven’t? Maybe condom education??
First off I am the female outreach specialist with Fred over at Fremont clinic I feel this article was very informal in opening people minds to this dangerous epidemic in our community. Maybe now people will realize that STI are serious health concerns. I hope that this make people know that safe sex is sexy as well in style. I feel that if you can rock a the lastest jordan you should be able to have enough style to rock a protection.
I ALSO WORK FOR SEEN ON DA STREETS AND I THINK IT IS A VERY GOOD PROGRAM, IT HELPS THE YOUNGER PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY TO BE MORE EDUCATED ABOUT SAFE SEX AND PROTECTING THEMSELVS FROM GETTING STD’S AND GETTING PREGNANT. I THINK WITHOUT THIS PROGRAM THIS COMMUNITY WOULD BE WAY WORSE OFF THAN IT IS NOW. THERE WOULD BE MORE TO DEAL WITH THAN THE DRUGS AND VIOLENCE THAT GOES ON AROUND HERE. SEEN ON THE STREETS IS ONE OF THE VERY FEW THINGS THAT ARE BENEFITTING THE COMMUNITY.
I’m probably a little too old (34) for my opinion to matter much for kids today–
–but I’ll say this: When I was young, adults were incapable of producing anything “hip” to get our attention. Assemblies with grown ups rapping about social issues? We would roll our eyes or cringe or otherwise tune out these messages.
I think effective messages on sex come from peers or near-peers who have gone through these circumstances. Young fathers talking about how their lives have changed, young women talking about the decision whether or not to have an abortion, etc.
Attention grab if you must, but I think it’s better to grab it with the message itself, rather than with bells and whistles.
Seen on da streets is something new to my eyes but it is a eye opener to me. Its allowing me to know and understand more about safe sex besides the information that is taught in school, not saying schools aren’t educating todays youth today but its not doing enough for individual communities. I feel Seen On Da Streets is not only giving back to the community but it is also saving lives and allowing adults and children to be more aware of the things that can hurt ones body and also their chances of making it in the world. Its a graet way for young girls to not become young mothers and for young men to be able to make it past the drugs and violence being provide by ignorance.
What is the problem?? The problem is giving children permission to have sex by: (1) taking a ‘they are going to do it anyway’ attitude (2) providing them more explicit details under the title of ‘education’ and (3) providing them with all kinds of ‘birth control’ and abortion when birth control fails.
WHY DON’T PARENTS PROTECT and PROMOTE THE PURITY AND MODESTY OF THEIR CHILDREN???
If the parents don’t, who will? Sexual activity is not in the best interest of the children. I don’t think any parent that loves their child could argue that it is. Teenagers will constantly push the limits, whether it be driving, parties, friends, clothing, etc.
Our job as a parent is NOT to be their friend and indulge them, but to say NO.
Obviously the promotion of sex education, availability of birth control, access to ‘family planning’ and abortion has only fed this problem or we wouldn’t have the rate of STD’s, pregnancy, and abortion that we have. How long are people going to continue to fail to protect that which is most sacred in children, their innocence?
Please protect the purity of your children!!
In a activist sense, he is right on key. To beat a game you must play it, and in our culture today “the message game” is rooted in sensational advertisement. Good intentioned talks and that such cannot withstand the attacks we all face on a daily basis by mass advertisements. Hence the need for safe sex messages to be slid into the mix.
Enjoy
I completely agree. I don’t even think it should matter what parents think about discussing safe sex in schools. If children are doing it than it needs to be discussed. It is a huge problem. People need to stop being so scared about discussing these types of subjects.
SEEN ON DA STREETS
FREMONT COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES,INC
3300 FREMONT AVENUE NORTH,
MINNEAPOLIS,MN 55412
612-287-2423
The Audacity of Hope:
I have the audacity to beleive that kids are more than dogs in heat. I have the audacity to believe that if we as parents actually taught them morality, some - yes, many would listen. I have the audacity to hope that my kids will wait until they are married regardless of what pop culture says.
As for the safe/free sex message: How’s that working for our kids?
I think this is a great blog idea! I hope it catches on. As for the topic here - It’s worth a shot to glamorize safe sex… I’m not thrilled with the thought that my kids will likely start experimenting with sex in their teens. However, nine out of ten of my friends and I did so why would our children be different? I came of age as AIDS was just starting to be recognized as more than a “gay disease” so we had the constant fear of death instilled in us by nurses, counselors, dorm “moms” etc. I worry that people are not scared of HIV/AIDS anymore and don’t even consider the other STIs. That does concern me in general. As for the abstinence movement - great, just not realistic for most people in my eyes. A few carefully chosen partners prior to marriage might actually be a wise route in my humble opinion. Sexual/physical compatibility is arguably a critical aspect of most adult lives/livelihoods.
Are the “three Rs” being taught in a “sexy or loud and flashy manner?”
No? So why sex education?
Sex ed, and by that I mean all of the options teens face- from abstinence to to safe sex- as well as the manners of sexual expression (autoeroticism, heterosexual, homosexual and bisexul relations), is never boring when it’s all new, wondrous, confusing and there are internal and external pressures governing one’s choices.
Sexy, loud and flashy have no place in the classroom. At least not if you’re spending my tax dollars…
Stacy Harris
Publisher/Editor
Stacy’s Music Row Report
http://www.countrymusicreport.com/Stacyharris.htm
When will this Country ever learn that the way to a happy healthy sex life free of disease is the way God ordained us to live. Talk to anyone who has maintained chastity and purity until their marriage day and the joy of knowing how special you are to each other. Yes, this is old fashioned in the eyes of the world we live in. We have allowed Hollywood, Videos, advertising, a former President, congressmen, and you name it to turn what was mean’t to be a wonderful part of marriage into a free for all, animalistic, immoral, degrading, exploitation of Men, Women, Young people, and children. Now our young people are paying the price because we allowed rampant sexual activity and they are getting STD’s and many will die of these or cervical cancer or throat cancer or will become sterile. We should be so proud that we took God and abstinence out of our schools and replaced it with SAFE SEX. The results are staring us in the face. Its quite a price to pay when society has decided there are no longer any moral rules to live by. This Country doesn’t stand a chance unless we go back to teaching abstinance because that is the way it was mean’t to be.
Simply put, the status quo in educating kids about sex isn’t working. Teaching abstinence only sexual education doesn’t work– nor does our seemingly ineffective safe sex lessons. We need a new approach. Kudos to Fred for at least trying a different approach. Not all people/parents open up the line of communication about sex with their kids and then it falls to the schools to do that service.
Also, in regard to Bryan Cochran’s comment, Planned Parenthood and the “abortion industry” don’t pocket a ton of money from unplanned pregnancies. Planned Parenthood, for example, runs on a sliding fee scale and a young woman (or man) won’t be denied care even if she/he can’t afford it. Please don’t belittle this valuable service.
I foresee two solutions to exploding rates of teen pregnancy and teen STD’s. (1) A return to norms of sensible self-restraint. Like it or not, that means preaching abstinence as the only sure-fire preventative measure, possibly with safer-sex information as a backup. Young peer educators may be a very effective supplement, especially if they have personal experience with pregnancy or STD’s. (2) A return to norms of supervised free time for teens. Like it or not, that means monitoring, curfews, and chauffeuring by responsible adults.
I am 60 and graduated from high school in 1965. Of course, my generation chafed at the norms described in (1) and (2 above. But our rates of pregnancy and STD’s were much lower. When will the “old” health statistics of that era be publicized?
Tragically, we Baby Boomers embraced the Sexual Liberation movement of the 1970’s and passed this permissiveness on to our kids. Now we are reaping what we sowed. It’s time we go “back to the future” and rediscovered the practical benefits of level-headed restraint. It was “realistic” then and it’s “realistic” now. Just do it.
To speak directly to this program, I think we have to remember that this program and other outreach programs are often intended for ‘non-traditional’ youth. These are kids who don’t have parents who will sit down with them to talk about safe sex; they may be sexually abused by an adult in their life; or maybe they skip school frequently and miss the sex education lesson-if it’s even offered. So we can’t impose traditional methods or logics on this population. While I think it is important to advocate for comprehensive sex ed in the schools, other approaches- like Fred Evans’ community outreach-will only reach a wider audience and improve the health of all youth via multiple channels.
And while we’d all like to teach kids about ‘real love,’ I bet a number of teenagers-regardless of their background or home life-would claim that they are in love.
The ozone depletion propagandists dismiss this natural chlorine by arguing that not an ounce of it reaches the stratosphere. No scientist ever made such a claim. F Sherwood Rowland, one of the leading propagandists wrote.The very large volcanic eruption of El Chichon in 1982 increased the total amount of stratospheric chlorine by about 10%, only to fade into the CFC background in about a year.
