High Schooler Protests ‘Slut-Shaming’ Abstinence Assembly

[jim49er]

A West Virginia high school student is filing an injunction against her principal, who she claims is threatening to punish her for speaking out against a factually inaccurate abstinence assembly at her school. Katelyn Campbell, who is the student body vice president at George Washington High School, alleges her principal threatened to call the college where she’s been accepted to report that she has “bad character.”

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/04/17/1883121/west-virginia-abstinence-assembly/?mobile=nc

[FriedChicken]

Article contains quite a bit of twisting -

It IS a fact that there are some diseases that transfer just by genital contact and condoms do not prevent the spread of those particular diseases. They also aren't 100% effective for any other disease or even pregnancy prevention.
I will bet anyone $10 that Stinzel never tried to convince anyone that EVERY time you have sex you get a disease - which is what the article said she has told students.

If the students have the option of opting out of the gathering I don't see a problem with it.

I highly doubt that anything in the speech is factually inaccurate as the article claims it to be.



Some people seem to be fiercely against abstinence being defined or recommended in school - however it is in fact the most assured way to prevent the spread of disease. I don't see the harm in teaching it - maybe it will do some good.

[dannno]

Wow, good for her!

[KrokHead]

Parents should deal with this issue with their kids, not schools. Also condoms suck.

[dannno]

Also condoms suck.

I'd MUCH rather have sex with a condom than not have sex.

[BuddyRey]

I seriously break down into gut-laughs when I hear the term "slut-shaming." What Ivy League tweed-wearing sociology professor actually gets paid to come up with BS buzzphrases like that?

[abacabb2]

I'd MUCH rather have sex with a condom than not have sex.
I don't know why people hate condoms so much. I think my wife minds more.

[sailingaway]

Article contains quite a bit of twisting -

It IS a fact that there are some diseases that transfer just by genital contact and condoms do not prevent the spread of those particular diseases. They also aren't 100% effective for any other disease or even pregnancy prevention.
I will bet anyone $10 that Stinzel never tried to convince anyone that EVERY time you have sex you get a disease - which is what the article said she has told students.

If the students have the option of opting out of the gathering I don't see a problem with it.

I highly doubt that anything in the speech is factually inaccurate as the article claims it to be.



Some people seem to be fiercely against abstinence being defined or recommended in school - however it is in fact the most assured way to prevent the spread of disease. I don't see the harm in teaching it - maybe it will do some good.

A lot of people think that is for the family to address, and that schools interfere broadly into areas where 'policy makers' do not belong. They see it as undermining the family.

[affa]

I don't know why people hate condoms so much. I think my wife minds more.

because they're terrible. forgetting all other factors, (like lack of sensation, ill-fitting ones, allergic reactions, etc) it's put a plastic barrier between what should be the most sensual/spiritual/<insert word here> contact two humans can have.

[PierzStyx]

Think Progress is a liberal site. Why should anyone be surprised they'd twist someone's words in order to attack traditional values?

[KingRobbStark]

because they're terrible. forgetting all other factors, (like lack of sensation, ill-fitting ones, allergic reactions, etc) it's put a plastic barrier between what should be the most sensual/spiritual/<insert word here> contact two humans can have.

You're wise.

[Jamesiv1]

because they're terrible. forgetting all other factors, (like lack of sensation, ill-fitting ones, allergic reactions, etc) it's put a plastic barrier between what should be the most sensual/spiritual/<insert word here> contact two humans can have.

yeah, but just imagine that you are a pimp-spanked ho. Then you would love them.

that's the problem with Amerika today - not enough empathy.

[jim49er]

Think Progress is a liberal site. Why should anyone be surprised they'd twist someone's words in order to attack traditional values?

What's next do they need to sign a pledge for traditional values? Just keep it out of the school.

[WhistlinDave]

My biggest objection to "abstinence only" programs is, they don't work. They harm more kids when that's all that is taught! Studies have shown that more kids end up pregnant, and more kids end up contracting STDs, when they have gone through abstinence-only programs with no education about other methods of contraception and disease prevention.

It's simply not realistic to expect young people with raging hormones to infallibly control themselves against one of the strongest biological urges they have. People who think an abstinence-only approach is viable are living in a fantasy world.

(Either way I agree this shouldn't be in school; it's a parent's job to decide what and how to teach this kind of stuff to their kids.)

[Keith and stuff]

Article contains quite a bit of twisting -

It IS a fact that there are some diseases that transfer just by genital contact and condoms do not prevent the spread of those particular diseases.
True. Condoms do almost nothing to prevent transfer of the most common STDs during intercourse.

[FriedChicken]

My biggest objection to "abstinence only" programs is, they don't work. They harm more kids when that's all that is taught! Studies have shown that more kids end up pregnant, and more kids end up contracting STDs, when they have gone through abstinence-only programs with no education about other methods of contraception and disease prevention.

It's simply not realistic to expect young people with raging hormones to infallibly control themselves against one of the strongest biological urges they have. People who think an abstinence-only approach is viable are living in a fantasy world.

(Either way I agree this shouldn't be in school; it's a parent's job to decide what and how to teach this kind of stuff to their kids.)

A lot of people in the past have overcome their desires. The main way it to guard against certain situations where you're in a position to lose control (when her parents are out of town and you stop by for a visit ... you've already made a conscious decision without the "heat of the moment" excuse to have sex)

One of the biggest lessons in abstinence education is teaching that the urges are seemingly impossible to control if trap yourself in a corner - so they teach to stay out of corners.

I think you're over simplifying what the teaching actually is and aren't quite familiar with it. I would also argue that I've seen both types of "education" and the more conventional "pills and plastic" education did not focus NEARLY as much on the risks of being sexually active.

Off the top of my head I know 4 people that didn't have sex with anyone till after they were married (I guess I should specify that they only had sex with their spouse) including myself. I certainly didn't live in a bubble either.

Also ... I don't think I've seen a single abstinence lecture/video/speech/lesson that didn't also include information on condoms and pills. So I don't think you have to worry about kids being unaware of those thing's existence. The programs do tell kids where those mechanisms can fail though and that safe sex isn't all safe - which I think should be included in the education of either variety.

[FriedChicken]

A lot of people think that is for the family to address, and that schools interfere broadly into areas where 'policy makers' do not belong. They see it as undermining the family.

I completely understand and respect that which is why I think any program or lecture like this should have the option for kids to opt out.

But 90% of these lectures is making kids aware of the risks of STD's, which is a very serious thing for kids to understand and most parents aren't even aware of all the risks to even tell their kids about. Heck a lot of the diseases now didn't even exist back when my parents were dating.
I think this is a pretty current issue that ought to be taught in schools (STD's, how they effect you, how they're transferred specifically).

Lets face it ... it doesn't take much time to say "don't have sex till <fill in the blank>" so most of the information is actually current medical education about diseases and what they lead to.

The other 10% of the speech I can see people being objectionable to - Self worth, how to set parameters, methods of staying 'pure', staying away from temptation and perhaps some religious content.

A lot of that stuff is family matters and a lot of families might have different views towards the issue and wouldn't feel comfortable with a school teaching those topics.
However I think education about the diseases is certainly an important topic for any well rounded education.


(if we didn't have public schools this wouldn't even be an issue ... which perfect scenario)


I'd like to add in that, from what I read, I think the principle is completely out of line. I think the girl is probably being a brat for wanting to drag all this legal crap into the midst of this instead of just sitting out of the course but I don't think that justifies under the table threats.
Of course ... considering the source we're getting all the information from (thinkprogress) I wouldn't want to pick a side on this specific situation --- goodness knows we don't have all the facts!

[Slutter McGee]

I was taught that any sexual contact would rot my dick off. I am not joking.

Fuck people who teach this bullshit.

Slutter McGee

[WhistlinDave]

I was taught that any sexual contact would rot my dick off. I am not joking.

Fuck people who teach this bullshit.

Slutter McGee

When my mom found my first dirty magazine, I was taught I was going to burn in hell in excruciating agony for all of eternity for committing a Cardinal Sin. (Not to make light of the threat of your dick rotting and falling off or anything though. That sounds pretty unpleasant too.)

[WhistlinDave]

A lot of people in the past have overcome their desires. The main way it to guard against certain situations where you're in a position to lose control (when her parents are out of town and you stop by for a visit ... you've already made a conscious decision without the "heat of the moment" excuse to have sex)

One of the biggest lessons in abstinence education is teaching that the urges are seemingly impossible to control if trap yourself in a corner - so they teach to stay out of corners.

I think you're over simplifying what the teaching actually is and aren't quite familiar with it. I would also argue that I've seen both types of "education" and the more conventional "pills and plastic" education did not focus NEARLY as much on the risks of being sexually active.

Off the top of my head I know 4 people that didn't have sex with anyone till after they were married (I guess I should specify that they only had sex with their spouse) including myself. I certainly didn't live in a bubble either.

Also ... I don't think I've seen a single abstinence lecture/video/speech/lesson that didn't also include information on condoms and pills. So I don't think you have to worry about kids being unaware of those thing's existence. The programs do tell kids where those mechanisms can fail though and that safe sex isn't all safe - which I think should be included in the education of either variety.

You're right, I'm not all that familiar with what exactly is in "abstinence only" courses. I only know that I've read many times that there have been several studies showing the statistics of the trouble kids get into, when "abstinence only" is the only thing taught with no mention of other options.

I totally agree with your final sentence though.

[FriedChicken]

You're right, I'm not all that familiar with what exactly is in "abstinence only" courses. I only know that I've read many times that there have been several studies showing the statistics of the trouble kids get into, when "abstinence only" is the only thing taught with no mention of other options.

I totally agree with your final sentence though.

Thank you.
I haven't studied all the different teaching methods so its also likely we're comparing apples to oranges when we use the word, I'm sure the method could vary widely - one type being appropriate and effective and the other not so much.

[FriedChicken]

One thing I'm fairly sure of is that the public school system seems to be most interested in just stopping unwanted pregnancy - however the amount of STDs that there are now is a very alarming development and from what I can tell 'young people' (my peers and people a little younger than me, I'm 25) take sex way to casually ... its not like everyone is going to wear a t-shirt proclaiming what std they have (and a lot of times they don't know they have it - in some diseases both genders carry and spread but only one gender suffers the effects, most times the female).

So it leaves to the imagination how diseased of a society we will become by the end of our lifetimes.

Another way some of these spread is through childbirth unless delivered c-cection, genital contact ('playing around', hand-jobs, blow-jobs, etc) and some can even be transferred (including HIV) through saliva, especially if the carrier has an open sore in their mouth.

Each one of these methods have different odds and some people have a stronger/weaker resistance.
It just baffles me that most high schoolers I know haven't been taught any of this but they all know how to put a condom on a banana. (I still don't understand whats complicated about a condom. I've always considered condoms pretty straight forward (no pun intended) to the point (again, no pun.) that the only teaching needed would be for someone who can't read [the instructions on the box] and all that would have to be said is "this goes on your penis" ...)

[FriedChicken]

I was taught that any sexual contact would rot my dick off. I am not joking.


If your girlfriend was a leper they were probably right. :)

[jtstellar]

One thing I'm fairly sure of is that the public school system seems to be most interested in just stopping unwanted pregnancy - however the amount of STDs that there are now is a very alarming development and from what I can tell 'young people' (my peers and people a little younger than me, I'm 25) take sex way to casually ... its not like everyone is going to wear a t-shirt proclaiming what std they have (and a lot of times they don't know they have it - in some diseases both genders carry and spread but only one gender suffers the effects, most times the female).

So it leaves to the imagination how diseased of a society we will become by the end of our lifetimes.

Another way some of these spread is through childbirth unless delivered c-cection, genital contact ('playing around', hand-jobs, blow-jobs, etc) and some can even be transferred (including HIV) through saliva, especially if the carrier has an open sore in their mouth.

Each one of these methods have different odds and some people have a stronger/weaker resistance.
It just baffles me that most high schoolers I know haven't been taught any of this but they all know how to put a condom on a banana. (I still don't understand whats complicated about a condom. I've always considered condoms pretty straight forward (no pun intended) to the point (again, no pun.) that the only teaching needed would be for someone who can't read [the instructions on the box] and all that would have to be said is "this goes on your penis" ...)

i dislike kids almost the same way i dislike animals.. they're like half developed brain masses just roaming around

yes i still believe they have all the rights a 'full' person deserves, but goddam they are annoying.. i hate kids. interestingly, i lean pro-life, less the religious argument

as for being direct to your point.. well i'm not having a relationship with some half brain walking matter just entering college anytime soon so i don't really give a crap, and i doubt the type that interests me (usually not the stupid type and definitely not a raging liberal, and NOT a feminist) will contract it.. but i will keep an eye out since this is being referenced

[KingNothing]

A West Virginia high school student is filing an injunction against her principal, who she claims is threatening to punish her for speaking out against a factually inaccurate abstinence assembly at her school. Katelyn Campbell, who is the student body vice president at George Washington High School, alleges her principal threatened to call the college where she’s been accepted to report that she has “bad character.”

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/04/17/1883121/west-virginia-abstinence-assembly/?mobile=nc

Good for her!

[KingNothing]

"At GW’s assembly, Stenzel allegedly told students that “if you take birth control, your mother probably hates you” and “I could look at any one of you in the eyes right now and tell if you’re going to be promiscuous.” She also asserted that condoms aren’t safe, and every instance of sexual contact will lead to a sexually transmitted infection."


Wow.

[PaulConventionWV]

I seriously break down into gut-laughs when I hear the term "slut-shaming." What Ivy League tweed-wearing sociology professor actually gets paid to come up with BS buzzphrases like that?

This. The girl starts from zero on my respect-o-meter just for using that ridiculous phrase.

[KingNothing]

This. The girl starts from zero on my respect-o-meter just for using that ridiculous phrase.

Any kid who stands up for common sense against a principal -one who is threatening her, no less- deserves respect.

[belian78]

Yeah, if you don't support a girl's 'right' to explore her sexuality in any way she deems, you are obviously a fundie that would rather her be locked in a basement until you can marry her off. :rolleyes:

That being said, telling young women that if they do choose the pill their mothers will hate them and you can tell promiscuity by looking at them, is wrong as well.

[fisharmor]

When I was in high school the secular sex-ed program heavily implied that if I had sex once I was going to get AIDS.
The same health class also heavily implied that if I smoked pot even once I would crash my car and end up a paraplegic who spent my time going from high school health class to high school health class telling kids not to smoke pot.

Two of the myriad reasons why my children will never set foot in a public school.

[PaulConventionWV]

Any kid who stands up for common sense against a principal -one who is threatening her, no less- deserves respect.

I don't know all the facts of the case. This seems like one of those stories that involves a lot of bias and mud-slinging. But the girl is obviously a liberal freak who isn't even an adult yet.

[belian78]

I don't know all the facts of the case. This seems like one of those stories that involves a lot of bias and mud-slinging. But the girl is obviously a liberal freak who isn't even an adult yet.
You're obviously comfortable making malicious statements about a young woman you know literally next to nothing about though. tsk tsk

[Sola_Fide]

The answer to all of this is homeschooling.

/end thread.

[KingNothing]

I don't know all the facts of the case. This seems like one of those stories that involves a lot of bias and mud-slinging. But the girl is obviously a liberal freak who isn't even an adult yet.

And the speaker and principal are obviously lying and/or stupid, and have no business teaching kids.

[PaulConventionWV]

When I was in high school the secular sex-ed program heavily implied that if I had sex once I was going to get AIDS.
The same health class also heavily implied that if I smoked pot even once I would crash my car and end up a paraplegic who spent my time going from high school health class to high school health class telling kids not to smoke pot.

Two of the myriad reasons why my children will never set foot in a public school.

Correct. I don't like either side in this case. To me it's like two republicans arguing about whether we should invade Iran or N. Korea first, except with more drama, mud slinging, and immature liberal teenage girls.

[PaulConventionWV]

You're obviously comfortable making malicious statements about a young woman you know literally next to nothing about though. tsk tsk

I called her a liberal freak. The freak side apart, try and tell me that she isn't liberal.

[KingNothing]

You're obviously comfortable making malicious statements about a young woman you know literally next to nothing about though. tsk tsk

He's an excellent christian. Except when it comes to the whole "don't judge others" thing. He LOVES him some judgement-passin'

[KingNothing]

I called her a liberal freak. The freak side apart, try and tell me that she isn't liberal.

Right, yeah - aside for the aspersion you cast, you didn't cast any aspersion.

[KingNothing]

Correct. I don't like either side in this case. To me it's like two republicans arguing about whether we should invade Iran or N. Korea first, except with more drama, mud slinging, and immature liberal teenage girls.

I'm not sure what "backstabbing" the girl committed. She said "hey, you people are lying to us." The principal said "oh yeah?! well, shutup or I'll ruin your future!"

Which person comes off as an "immature liberal teenage girl" in that situation?

[belian78]

I called her a liberal freak. The freak side apart, try and tell me that she isn't liberal.
So she's a freak because she's a liberal? And what makes her a liberal? Her being offended by a lady telling her classmates their mothers will hate them if they are responsible about their promiscuity?

[PaulConventionWV]

He's an excellent christian. Except when it comes to the whole "don't judge others" thing. He LOVES him some judgement-passin'

Depends on how you define judgment. The "judge ye not" thing is taken out of context anyway. It is a Christian's duty to judge right behavior from wrong.

[KingNothing]

PaulConventionWV is so aggravating because he moralizes constantly and pushes his religion, but is actually a terrible follower of it. The hypocrisy is infuriating.

[PaulConventionWV]

Right, yeah - aside for the aspersion you cast, you didn't cast any aspersion.

Freak, freak, freak. Oh my God I'm terrible.

[KingNothing]

Depends on how you define judgment. The "judge ye not" thing is taken out of context anyway. It is a Christian's duty to judge right behavior from wrong.


It is a Christian's duty to be a kind person and set a good example, not to disparage other people, you self-righteous brat.

[PaulConventionWV]

I'm not sure what "backstabbing" the girl committed. She said "hey, you people are lying to us." The principal said "oh yeah?! well, shutup or I'll ruin your future!"

Which person comes off as an "immature liberal teenage girl" in that situation?

I re-worded it. Backstabbing isn't the right word. Besides, I didn't actually attribute the back-stabbing to the girl.

[PaulConventionWV]

So she's a freak because she's a liberal? And what makes her a liberal? Her being offended by a lady telling her classmates their mothers will hate them if they are responsible about their promiscuity?

"Slut-shaming". It's just obvious. Don't be obtuse.

[KingNothing]

I re-worded it. Backstabbing isn't the right word. Besides, I didn't actually attribute the back-stabbing to the girl.


If a religious conservative such as yourself pointed out the deceit of a liberal heathen in a position of power and were then threatened, your tune would be entirely different right now.

[PaulConventionWV]

PaulConventionWV is so aggravating because he moralizes constantly and pushes his religion, but is actually a terrible follower of it. The hypocrisy is infuriating.

That may or may not be. Believe it or not, I'm not that devout. I just happen to believe the evidence for God's existence is overwhelming and I hate it when people make illogical arguments to the contrary. So sue me.

[PaulConventionWV]

It is a Christian's duty to be a kind person and set a good example, not to disparage other people, you self-righteous brat.

You're telling me what a Christian's duty is? That's rich.

[KingNothing]

If someone called you a "religious freak" I don't think you'd take kindly to it, you religious freak.

[heavenlyboy34]

I called her a liberal freak. The freak side apart, try and tell me that she isn't liberal.
She's a libertine. Liberal has a very specific meaning and is commonly misused in MSM. See Mises' "Liberalism".

[PaulConventionWV]

If a religious conservative such as yourself pointed out the deceit of a liberal heathen in a position of power and were then threatened, your tune would be entirely different right now.

No I wouldn't. I never said I supported the principal. Where did I say that?

[PaulConventionWV]

If someone called you a "religious freak" I don't think you'd take kindly to it, you religious freak.

lol

[belian78]

"Slut-shaming". It's just obvious. Don't be obtuse.
This is RPF, once upon a time this (I'm hesitant to call it so) argument would be laughed out the damn door.

[PaulConventionWV]

This is RPF, once upon a time this (I'm hesitant to call it so) argument would be laughed out the damn door.

I object to the phrase. What argument am I making? To me, she qualifies as a "liberal" just by using it. So I'm being loose with the definition. Sue me again.

[Krzysztof Lesiak]

Wow, Campbell isn't even hot. WTF?

[PaulConventionWV]

Wow, Campbell isn't even hot. WTF?

And I'm sure she would take offense to that. More so than any girl you called not hot.

[KrokHead]

Wow, Campbell isn't even hot. WTF?

Ugly people have sex too.

[Philhelm]

I'd MUCH rather have sex with a condom than not have sex.

I'd rather have sex with a woman, but that's your choice I suppose.