Anal or Abstinence
A look at the Bush administration's new sex education policy

January 2006

President Bush's recent announcement of the new "Anal Only" policy [as some jokesters are calling it] for sex education came as a pleasant surprise to those on both sides of an always contentious issue. Officially titled "Anal or Abstinence Only," this revision to the administration's controversial "Abstinence Only" stance -- an idea seen by many as unrealistic in light of youthful libidos and human nature -- was greeted as a genuine expression of compassionate conservatism that should satisfy those on the left requesting a plan less behaviorally stringent and those on the right who do not want to make any concessions in the direction of intercourse.

It is not only abstinence, but anal sex too, that is one hundred percent foolproof in preventing unwanted pregnancy, the president said this week in his regular radio address. He added that protection obviously would be required to insure against disease.

A woman's ability to remain a virgin -- an issue important to religious authorities and men across denominations -- seems to be the fulcrum beneath this new argument, its main selling point to an increasingly church-attending public. The President added that with use of this method of gratification a woman can retain the integrity of her hymen, and can still be a virgin for her husband when it comes time to wed, while still enjoying a healthy sex life before wedlock.

Such frank talk on sexual matters is nothing short of revolutionary for a president and more unusual still emanating from an administration seen as very conservative and even openly friendly to the religious right. But surprisingly, aside from some harsh words from predictable sources, the general reaction has been positive.

The announcement has been applauded by many leaders within the Catholic Church already. Sex-ed proponents, feminist groups and those working for women's health and reproductive rights in impoverished countries so far appear in agreement that this is a positive move. And groups as disparate as the American Psychological Association, the American Council of Churches and the National Rifle Association have made favorable comments.

On the opposing side, some have questioned whether by starting a public discussion of anal sex the president may be opening a Pandora's box of sex talk that will include homosexuality and gay sex and other practices deemed aberrant by many consumers.

Some are saying the president should have pointed out that oral sex as well can be listed in the activities that can in no way cause pregnancy, but it is asking too much to expect Mr. Bush to list all sexual activities that are outside intercourse. Only extremists would demand the entire cornucopia of human sexuality be officially recognized by the government.

We should accept this new policy wholesale; steps in the direction of progress are never completely easy, and the more radical the idea the more flaws it likely has -- whatever minor problems this new idea may have can be tweaked between now and implementation. It is best we are thankful for what is a gesture of concession by the president, and groups who think this policy does not go far enough should realize how difficult the decision to bring this forward must have been especially in light of Bush's constituency.

 

All contents copyright © 2005 Rat Blood Soup