Show & Tell: When I Stopped Believing in the Stork

Petta's last theme for November is When I stopped believing in Santa or the Stork. I thought I'd focus on the stork.

I don't think I ever really believed in the stork (?), the reason being I was born in the 1970s (1976) and my upbringing was heavily influence by the times my parents were living in. So instead of telling me stories of storks bringing babies and dropping them on house roofs (is that how the story goes?), they read the book Per, Ida & Minimum to me. I can't remember if I ever thought very much of babies or asked my parents "where do babies come from?", at least not before my brother was born when I was four, almost five years old, but I'm sure I did (maybe my mum can enlighten me?!).

Nowadays, even though the book can still be bought and parents still use it I'm sure (I certainly will), Per, Ida & Minimum is not considered as politically correct and mainstream as it was in the 1970s and 1980s. Now we're living through some sort of neo-Puritan reaction to the "wild and free" 70s where pictures, even in cartoon form, of naked people in general and of people having sex in particular, are controversial, especially in children's literature (though at the same time the Internet is full of it and young people go nude in front of webcams - it's a mixed time period, I guess). The "discovery" of paedophilia hasn't helped either of course.

Some images from the book (all borrowed off the Internet), in case you're not familiar with this iconic piece of educational children's literature:

This image reminds me of my aupair year in the US. My two host children, 7 and 9 years old at the time, were very curious about sex and they figured I would tell them more than their mum did. I decided to be very honest, with consideration to their age of course. One such question was how many times I had had sex (they were more interested in times rather than number of partners - not that I had much to brag about at age 19-20 either...) and the older one added "my mum has had sex three times (= the number of children she had), upon which I explained that sometimes you have to have sex several times to conceive and that, also, sometimes you just have sex because it's nice :)



I'm sure most people have played this game at least once! Though sometimes we also played how to make babies, not just deliver them! ;)



This is something I'm wondering quite a lot right now, as 9 January is approaching fast... :)

Abstaining from the Truth

In the early days of my blogging and reading other people's blogs, back in early 2005, my friend Nonna blogged about the abstinence education in Texas that had proven unsuccessful. In a comment to Nonna I cited a Swedish article on the topic, "Living in celibacy easier said than done":

"More and more Americans promise to abstain from sex before marriage, zealously supported by President Bush. But only every tenth keeps his/her promise.

Solemn promises of a life in celibacy until your wedding day ought to be quite difficult to demand of the drinkers at the clubs in Stockholm - and of the rest of Sweden. Statistics show that young Swedes on average make their sexual debut at 16. In the USA however, there is a nation-wide movement to persuade the youngest to practise abstinence. President Bush supports the work and Congress has assigned 131 million dollar to abstinence teaching. As a rule the debated is conducted with Christian characteristics. But the problems with teenage abortion, spread of HIV, and STDs have made a great deal of people outside of church listen. Since 1993 the movement True Love Waits has alone convinced 2,4 million young Americans to sign a promise of chastity:

'As a believe that true love waits, I commit before God, myself, my family, those I date and my future partner to remain sexually untouched until the day I enter into marriage'.

The effectiveness of the abstinence model is however strongly questioned by scientists. And many sexuality specialists believe that medical arguments can make more people wait than can promises to God. Especially if the promises are not kept anyway.

A new scientific report from the University of Columbia shows that 88 % of those who have given a promise of celibacy have not kept it. The frequency of STDs among these people was just short of as high as among those who had not promised to abstain. Those who broke their promises, quickly came even with the promise-free group by having many partners in a short period of time.A study at the A&M University in Bush's homestate Texas has showed a similar result. Among teenagers who have been taught abstention, the number of people making their sexual debut following the end of the course increased, in particular among the boys. The many young people getting pregnant in the USA are petitioned more and more firmly by abortion opponents. Around the country these organisations offer free ultrasounds in order to persuade women to reassess. Spokesmen claim that up to 90 % of these women have abandoned the thought of abortion after having undergone these examinations.

The abortion advocates accuse these clinics for leading the women to continue their pregnancies. At the same time these women do no get any information about contraceptives. Instead they are encourage to - exactly - abstain from sex."

I just read another article on the subject (from October 2007), by Amanda Robb at the New York Times, titled "Abstinence 1, S-Chip 0"

"DEMOCRATIC leaders are right to contest President Bush’s veto of their bill to expand the State Children’s Health Insurance program. But sadly, their “bipartisan compromise” will leave millions of young Americans vulnerable to sickness and suffering of the most preventable kind.

To entice Republicans to support the bill, the House of Representatives agreed to increase money for abstinence-only sex education by $28 million, to a total of about $200 million a year. Abstinence-only courses, the only form of federally financed sex ed, teach that sexual activity outside of marriage is likely to cause psychological and physical harm. If that were true, our health care system would be not only broken, but besieged. A 2002 survey found that 93 percent of American adults had had premarital sex by the age of 30.

In addition to provoking shame about a nearly universal activity, abstinence-only sex education is ineffective and dangerous. Last April, a 10-year study found that students who took abstinence-only courses were no more likely to abstain from sex than other students. Previous studies revealed that abstinence-only students avoid using contraception.

Programs in public schools teach patently false information like 'the chances of getting pregnant with a condom are one out of six' and H.I.V. 'may be in your body for a long time (from a few months to as long as 10 years or more) before it can be detected.'

The results are tragic. The United States has the highest teenage pregnancy rate in the developed world (about the same as Ukraine’s), and the highest abortion rate in the Western world. Sexually transmitted infections like syphilis and gonorrhea are on the rise for the first time since the 1980s, and chlamydia is being diagnosed twice as often as it was a decade ago.

Among Americans living in poverty — those who might see the $4 price of a three-pack of condoms as the take-home pay for an hour of work at minimum wage — the unintended pregnancy rate has increased 30 percent since 1994. Our teenage pregnancy and abortion rates have declined during the last decade, but research suggests this is mainly because of increased use of condoms, something young people must learn about outside of school.

By dropping the financing for abstinence-only sex ed, Congress could save enough money to insure 150,000 children a year. And it would also demonstrate much needed resolve to protect all aspects of children’s health."

I can't believe that in 2008 some people still have such old-fashioned views and are turning a blind eye to the evidence and the social reality around them. Scary.

"Who wants a sweet with the wrapper still on?"

The above refers to a saying in Africa, which contributes to African socities' distrust of condoms. A recent article in the New York Times tells the sad story of many people, especially women, in this part of the world. Titled "When marriage kills" it deals with the fact that marriage is probably the No 1 "carrier" of HIV and Aids.

"Sex kills all the time, particularly here in Africa. But prudishness can be just as lethal. President Bush is focusing his program against AIDS in Africa on sexual abstinence and marital fidelity, relegating condoms to a distant third. It's the kind of well-meaning policy that bubbles up out of a White House prayer meeting but that will mean a lot of unnecessary deaths on the ground in Africa. The stark reality is that what kills young women here is often not promiscuity, but marriage. Indeed, just about the deadliest thing a woman in southern Africa can do is get married."

If you're located in or visiting Sweden, do pay a visit to the excellent exhibition on HIV/Aids at the Museum of World Culture in Göteborg.