should Harvard club promotes abstinence?

[karyn]

from yahoo



By JESSE HARLAN ALDERMAN, Associated Press Writer Thu Mar 22, 2:39 PM ET

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. - Sometime between the founding of a student-run porn magazine and the day the campus health center advertised "Free Lube," Harvard University seniors Sarah Kinsella and Justin Murray decided to fight back against what they see as too much mindless sex at the Ivy League school.

They founded a student group called True Love Revolution to promote abstinence on campus. The group, created earlier this school year, has more than 90 members on its Facebook.com page and drew about half that many to an ice cream social.

Harvard treats sex — or "hooking up" — so casually that "sometimes I wonder if sex is even a remotely serious thing," said Kinsella, who is dating Murray.

Other schools around the country have small groups devoted to abstinence. On most campuses, they are religious organizations. Princeton and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology have Anscombe Societies, secular organizations named after an English philosopher and Roman Catholic. True Love Revolution is secular as well.

Some feminists, in particular, have criticized True Love Revolution's message.

Harvard student Rebecca Singh said she was offended by a valentine the group sent to the dormitory mailboxes of all freshmen. It read: "Why wait? Because you're worth it."

"I think they thought that we might not be `ruined' yet," Singh said. "It's a symptom of that culture we have that values a woman on her purity. It's a relic."

Others on campus have mocked the group. Murray said his friends take pleasure in loudly, and graphically, discussing their sex lives just to taunt him.

"On campus there is such a strong attitude of pluralism and acceptance, but then it doesn't extend to this," Kinsella said.

In the student paper, The Harvard Crimson, columnist Jessica C. Coggins praised the group's low-key approach and scolded Harvard students for their "laughter at the virgin." She said students on the campus, which has 6,700 undergraduates, should "find a different confidence booster than making fun of celibate peers."

True Love Revolution members say the problem starts with the university. They say Harvard has implicitly led students to believe that having sex at college is a foregone conclusion by requiring incoming freshman to attend a seminar on date-**** that does not mention abstinence, by placing condoms in freshmen dorms, and by hosting racy lecturers. (Harvard students have also launched H-Bomb, a magazine featuring racy photos of undergraduates.)

"Sometimes that voice on campus is so overwhelming that students committed to abstinence almost feel compelled to abandon their convictions," Murray said. He acknowledged he "slipped up" and had sex earlier in college but said he has returned to abstinence with Kinsella.

Dr. David Rosenthal, director of Harvard health services, disputed the notion that the university promotes sex.

He said students mistakenly think everyone on campus is having sex. The National College Health Assessment Survey, which included Harvard and hundreds of other campuses, found that about 29 percent of students reported not having sex in the past school year. For the 71 percent who are having sex, it is crucial to promote safety, Rosenthal said.

"Some students may have a feeling that acknowledgment is condoning," he said, "and it's not."

[Cafe_Post_Mortem]

As long as they are not spreading misinformation I have no beef with them.

Also, with no definitive evidence of condoms' effectiveness against HPV, chlamydia, genital herpes, and syphilis,7 abstinence is the only way to completely avoid the risks of STI transmission.

Oh, wait there is quite a bit of evidence on the effectiveness when they are used properly. They do not completely avoid the risk but, when used with eduction about the diseases they can massively reduce the risk. Misleading statements like this are why people like me get to hating these groups, not because they are religious.

My big problem with abstinence group is that they always seem to include not talking seriously about sex.

[Janiac02]

I don't see anything wrong with promoting abstinence, but maybe focusing on the virgins of the campus isn't quite the right approach. Maybe they could instead make people realize that just because they've had sex before doesn't mean they HAVE to put out. I think people should absolutely make informed choices, and there really isn't anything wrong with the message of abstinence, as long as they aren't attempting to belittle those who don't share the same viewpoint.

[Morning Glory]

I am all for it. people that go to harvard shouldn't breed. take the rich off welfare.

[inox]

Promoting abstinence almost always derives from ingrained religious dogma. They should focus less on what others are doing, and make their own high & mighty choices in silence.

[Janiac02]

Promoting abstinence almost always derives from ingrained religious dogma. They should focus less on what others are doing, and make their own high & mighty choices in silence.

I hardly think it's fair to assume a group of people you've never met is "high and mighty". I've met and argued with my share of groups that are anti birth control, and anti abortion (it's really interesting how they tie those two together, if you've never heard them), but I don't see much wrong with a group promoting self worth, as long as they aren't making those who choose to have sex feel worthless.

[inox]

I hardly think it's fair to assume a group of people you've never met is "high and mighty". I've met and argued with my share of groups that are anti birth control, and anti abortion (it's really interesting how they tie those two together, if you've never heard them), but I don't see much wrong with a group promoting self worth, as long as they aren't making those who choose to have sex feel worthless.

I think you can infer a lot from the circumstances that people put themselves in, the causes they support, and the ways in which they phrase things. Gods, even the statement, "sometimes I wonder if sex is even a remotely serious thing" just radiates haughtiness.

All of the data here points to high and mighty. You might not see it, or might not believe it, but it's a "fair" (and I would suspect highly accurate) conclusion.

Also, they aren't promoting self worth, they're promoting abstinence. "Respect yourself" and "don't have sex" are two entirely different messages. They are celibate, and their goal is to get other people to be so also.

If we had any sense left as a counterculture, we'd treat this Junior Anti-Sex League with the contempt that they deserve.

[Janiac02]

I think you can infer a lot from the circumstances that people put themselves in, the causes they support, and the ways in which they phrase things. Gods, even the statement, "sometimes I wonder if sex is even a remotely serious thing" just radiates haughtiness.

All of the data here points to high and mighty. You might not see it, or might not believe it, but it's a "fair" (and I would suspect highly accurate) conclusion.

Also, they aren't promoting self worth, they're promoting abstinence. "Respect yourself" and "don't have sex" are two entirely different messages. They are celibate, and their goal is to get other people to be so also.

If we had any sense left as a counterculture, we'd treat this Junior Anti-Sex League with the contempt that they deserve.

I still don't see that from the given information, but I judge group by group. You really can't get to know that much about a group by one article.
As far as the difference between respecting yourself and not having sex, they used a pamphlet saying "Why wait? Because you're worth it." That was where I pulled the respecting one's self message from. Pretty sure that's what they were going for.
In any case, I don't have the same belief, and I'd rather people were educated on health and birth control instead of abstinence, but similarly I think anyone who shares that view point ought to have the opportunity to express it without contempt from another group, until they actually start attacking and insulting people. That's when they earn contempt.

[Velvet-Tongue]

Mindless sex is rather offensive to me and most people that I know in general. Since its something rather special and intimate for me and my associates.

That being said..as long as you love the person alot I dont really see a problem with it.

Just randomly hooking up seems like a good way to spread disease and is just very emotionally immature and low class imo.

[inox]

I still don't see that from the given information, but I judge group by group. You really can't get to know that much about a group by one article.
As far as the difference between respecting yourself and not having sex, they used a pamphlet saying "Why wait? Because you're worth it." That was where I pulled the respecting one's self message from. Pretty sure that's what they were going for.
In any case, I don't have the same belief, and I'd rather people were educated on health and birth control instead of abstinence, but similarly I think anyone who shares that view point ought to have the opportunity to express it without contempt from another group, until they actually start attacking and insulting people. That's when they earn contempt.

Actually, I can derive quite a bit about these types of groups from one article, because they tend to be a lot the same.

They are celibate and promote abstinence. What they are going for is an attempt to get others to follow their dogmatic moral path. They aren't concerned with just making sure everyone feels respected and comfortable with their sex lives.

Also, some viewpoints deserve mockery. I think that their message is unhealthy, and tied up with antiquated notions of purity that tend to inhibit social evolution. Of course, they can feel free to express their judgments masquerading as choices, but they should not expect that it will be accepted with a smile and a nod, either.