Just how effective is the rhythm method?

Natural family planning is different from the rhythm method, and it is not just guessing about when ovulation will occur. The natural family planning method requires a woman to monitor her body temperature every day of every month and matching it to a chart to determine when she is ovulating and then avoid intercourse during that time. And that's just the easiest way to do it. To really ensure that ovulation is occurring when predicted, the woman should also be comparing her cervical mucus viscosity (stickiness), to viscosity and temperature charts daily. In order to get the 75-87% effectiveness that Planned Parenthood predicts, the methods must be used correctly and consistently. This number drops considerably when only one measurement is used or the couple isn't really diligent about following the woman's temperature or cervical mucus.

The CDC just released results of a survey that said that more teens have been using the rhythm method--up 11% since 2002. If these teens are using the rhythm method IN ADDITION TO OTHER FORMS OF BIRTH CONTROL, that's great! Avoiding the most fertile times of the month, even when using condoms or other barrier methods is a great way to avoid pregnancy. However, if these young women are not measuring their body temperature and/or cervical mucus every day, but instead are just "guesstimating" when their most fertile period is, then this method is not really giving them the effectiveness they might be assuming. Many people confuse the rhythm method and natural family planning, which may lead to false assumptions about effectiveness as preventing pregnancy. Natural family planning takes a lot of work and knowledge about to be effective. If also will not protect partners from STI transmission.

All things considered, there are many options that are easier to use and are much more effective. Birth control pills take the ovulation out of the equation for you, so you don't have to measure any fertile period, and condoms both protect against fertilization and STIs when used correctly. Taking a pill every day is much less of a hassle than recording your body temp and cervical mucus data and comparing it to a chart. You can get condoms for free at any Planned Parenthood health center. Make sure to follow the directions!! They don't have to be a burden in the bedroom, either. If you think a condom as protecting yourself and your partner, and both of you help in the application process, condoms can be a pretty sexy addition to foreplay!

Newest accessory: Condom holders aren't just for convenience.

Condoms? Yes please. A cute, incognito way to stash my condoms…but still have them within reach? Yes again.

Lets be honest, girls will find any excuse to buy cute accessories, whether it’s for their outfits, apartments, or their condoms. Though it could be used as a shopping excuse, the practicality of the array of new, fun condom holders on sale is reason enough to buy. Not many want to display their array of condom choices in public view, but stashing them at the bottom of your drawer, or losing them in that giant “purse” you carry around is just not convenient. Well ladies (and gents) those days of fumbling blindly in your drawer or purse are gone!

There are now a ton of options and ways to store your protection. The Frisky has a great article showcasing different options for condom holders. There are clean, sleek condom dispensers that hold a significant amount and are perfect for a guy’s nightstand, so they are always within reach. If you’re main concern isn’t just convenience but instead want something a little more disguised and stylish, there are several vase-like options. The newest trend seems to be sleek cases meant to hold one or two condoms and stored in your purse. Many look just like a stylish compact. I even discovered a cool website where you can design your own!


Basically, your options are endless when it comes to storing your condoms. Whether you’re looking for an industrial-sized dispenser or a sleek, fashionable holder for your purse, there’s a condom holder out there for you…so get shopping!

p.s. if you’re not in the market for a holder but still want some cute protection, check out the different lines of Proper Attire condoms.

"The Pregnancy Pact"

This past Saturday night started off with the intentions of having a simple, relaxing night spent watching a movie with some girlfriends. However, it soon turned into us engaging in somewhat heated discussions over the contents of the movie we were watching. What were we watching you ask? Surprisingly, it was a Lifetime movie that got us all riled up.

Lifetime’s newest “inspired by true events” creation, “The Pregnancy Pact”, premiered last Saturday night at 9:00 pm. The movie followed four teenage girls at a high school in Gloucester, Massachusetts who all become pregnant at the age of fifteen. When the number of pregnant girls at their high school spikes to an astonishing 18, media from all over the nation start to focus on this tiny town. Even more controversy starts to arise when rumors surface that the pregnant girls made a pact to all become pregnant at the same time. Throw in the mother of the main character (pregnant 15 year old Sara’s) who believes in “abstinence-only education”, and Lifetime has quite the drama.

Most of the movie was inspired, not based-on, the 2008 events that occurred in Gloucester, Massachusetts. Though the movie portrays four of the pregnant girls making a pact, none of the real life pregnant Gloucester girls ever admitted to such a pact.

As my friends and I watched the movie, we found ourselves using each commercial break to discuss how irritated we were with the movie. The first thing that immediately got our attention was the immaturity, and seemingly-naivety of the girls who were getting pregnant. Whether this came from the abstinence-only education that their school system firmly believed in, or the way the director wanted these characters to be portrayed, we felt they had no idea how their decision to get pregnant was going to affect them and everyone around them for the rest of their lives. Though this clueless-ness continued throughout most of the movie, the last ten minutes showed the girls coming to the realization of what they had done and the consequences. Everything from the thought of adoption, financial strains, to losing a high-school love was shown as a consequence, and rightfully so.

While we could not come to a conclusion on how we exactly felt about this movie, the fact remains that it gets people to think about the topic of teen pregnancy. Overall, this movie can be used as a great tool for mothers and daughters to open the lines of communication about pregnancy, sex and birth control. I’m confident that no mother that has seen this movie wants to be put in the situation of Sara’s, who firmly believed that her daughter Sara believed in abstinence and was not having sex, only to be completely misinformed when 15 year-old Sara announces she is pregnant. After seeing that miscommunication, I think every mother with a daughter would want to sit her daughter down and watch this with her.

While the actions and thoughts of the movies’ teen girls are more than often very questionable, by the end of the movie I believe a strong message was put forth that teen pregnancy is a serious issue facing the entire nation, and is not something that should be accepted or ignored. Communication, education, and prevention were all ways the movie highlighted on how to deal with this issue, and overall, I believe Lifetime did a good job bringing teen pregnancy to the forefront of many families’ minds.

College regulates student sex..

So, a new policy at Tufts University regulates sex in dorms, which actually (to me) seems fair enough:

"The Office of Residential Life and Learning (ResLife) has added a new stipulation to its guest policy that prohibits any sex act in a dorm room while one's roommate is present. The stipulation further states that any sexual activity in the room should not interfere with a roommate's privacy, study habits or sleep."

The new regulations also state that non-Tufts overnight guests must be registered with the student's resident assistant ("RA") and the roommate must consent to the guest's stay.

You can read the full article here, but I'll give you my two cents if yer just not feeling like it.

According to Tufts, the new rule is meant to address a common conflict between roommates in dorms: sex and sexual activity. It claims to help open the floor for dialogue about sex, something that officials think students are uncomfortable about discussing.

Personally, I think it's a good idea. Now, normally I am pretty anti-rules and regulations, but as a former dorm resident I think that this type of rule is necessary in protecting the individual rights of students to have a comfortable living space (and the right to study and sleep!). In the two years I lived on campus there were numerous times where partners staying the night was an issue, and unfortunately sometimes mere reasoning and compromise is not enough. It's pretty amazing and unfortunate how stubborn and disrespectful people are.

Now, I'm all about sex. And I'm all about college. But when we must share small spaces with people who we don't really know... mutual respect has gotta come first. Wait... shouldn't mutual respect always come first for EVERYTHING? Ding ding ding - we have a winner!

So... what do you think???

Sexual Satisfaction May Lead to Greater Well-Being in Women

This article is really interesting, and at first glance, makes me want to say "of course! I'm so glad a study is finding this out!"

But upon further investigation, it kind of leaves me confused. From the headline, I think the article would go in details about how a new study proves that sex is good for women's self-esteem and health - but instead, most of the article is spent wondering if this could actually be the case.

Of course, the data needs to be scrutinized - and it's fair enough to say that the cause-and-effect here isn't so clear -

...it is impossible to determine if dissatisfied women had lower well-being because they were sexually dissatisfied, or if the reverse is true, such that women who started with lower well-being tended to secondarily have sexual dissatisfaction.

Ok. So this is in a journal of medicine - it's going to be critical of data, as it should be. But why can't we focus on the benefits of having a healthy sex life - not the doubts that this claim brings up? I appreciate a good analysis of data, but I'm tired of people not being ready to say "SEX IS GOOD! DO IT!" There's always a caveat, it seems there's never any decisive reporting on these types of issues.

And furthermore, I wonder why this is even a study to begin with. By focusing it just on women, it insinuates that there are certain scientific doubts about women having sex in the first place (has anyone noticed this article that keeps showing on the CCN homepage? jeez). Why are we questioning why women have sex, and whether it is good for women? Nobody seems to be asking these questions about male sexual behaviors...hmmm....

I guess this study is important to dispel beliefs about female pleasure and women being sexually active, but the tone just puts me off, somehow. There has got to be a better way to report on these issues, and a more unambiguous, frank way to present this data.

Learning to Embrace Your Sexuality - or - How I finally stopped listening to judgmental jerks and you should, too!

(I filled in this month for KaeLyn on the Vagina Dialogues column.. and I decided to share it here so the rest of y'all can check it out.)

I’m sure many of you are reading that title and thinking “Yeah, alright… I got there five years ago,” but I know there HAVE to be more of you (no matter what age) out there like me who just haven’t quite been able to do your own thing without letting the disapproving looks of your friends and peers burn a hole in your face.

By “do your own thing,” I assume you know I mean “have sex.” Freely. Making your own individual choices. I am talking about sex that is consensual, sex that is safe, sex that happens because you want it to, and sex that makes you feel good.

I want to make something very clear: nothing you are doing is wrong. “Wrong” is a social construction. Your sexual choices may not work for everyone, but if they make you happy and don’t threaten the safety of yourself or others, then gosh darnit please keep doing what you’re doing.

The problem is sex is still hard to talk about for many people. I grew up in a loving and accepting family, but we never talked about sex. Ever. I couldn’t say “sex” to my mom until I was 17. And don’t get me started on the lack of comprehensive sexual health education in schools, or worse, the lack of sex-positive sexual education in general.

If we can’t talk about sex then how will we ever figure it out? And if sex continues to be characterized as bad, as scary, as wrong… then where does that leave us? Stuck in a world where a group of people who think sex is the end of Western civilization try to control the dialogue. And that’s just not fair. It means that for the 95% of Americans who are having sex before marriage, there is a lack of comfort, resources, and openness for talking about sex.

So, how did I finally accept my own sexual identity and expression? I realized that I wasn’t wrong, that I make my choices for me and not the people judging me, and that thinking about and talking about sex help make sense of it. Really, it’s true. The first step was to be honest and frank with myself.

The bottom line: you’re sexuality is YOURS. Not your neighbor’s, not your brother’s, not the person sitting across from you at lunch. I may not know a whole lot in this world but I can tell you that life is far more rewarding and fulfilling when you find your own path and follow it.

So, what steps should we take when embracing our sexuality, however and with whomever we choose to experience it with?

1. Remember that the choices you make are yours. They need not apply to your best friend, your neighbor, or your parents. You have power over your individual choices.

2. Always, always, always make sure you are well stocked with safe sex materials: condoms, dental dams, finger cots, whatever. Besides that, keep some fun stuff around, too: lube, toys, whatever. And please make sure you and your partner(s) aren’t allergic to things like latex, certain lubricants, et cetera.

3. Communicate your needs and expectations, and be certain that your partner(s) is/are, also. And while you’re communicating, you might as well talk about your fantasies, too!

4. You can have erotic experiences without even having sex. And they don’t even have to be with people – they can be with the sky, the way the air smells, the way your cotton sheets feel. Get in tune with your erotic, sensual self.

5. Masturbate! Please. That way you know what you like and you will feel far more comfortable with talking about and having sex. Sex with yourself is just as legitimate and fulfilling as sex with other people.

6. Support age-appropriate, medically-accurate sex education that gives young people all the resources they need to make informed and safe decisions about sex and sexuality. You can learn more about how to support real sex ed at www.plannedparenthoodaction.org.

Get out there and enjoy your sexuality, no matter how you express it. But always remember, it’s about making choices that you feel good about.

The dreaded FIRST TIME

When we hear stories about "my first time," what to they tend to focus on? I feel like they usually hone in on negative experiences - hearts were broken, someone felt used...We focus on the messiness, the awkward moments, pain, potential regrets - leaving out that sometimes, people have a great time - with no looking back.

Promoters of abstinence-only education use negative experiences to convince students that the only "right" way to have sex is within marriage, and only then if the goal is procreation. In reality, 95% of people have sex before marriage - and not all those experiences are regrettable!

This article over at Sex Etc. tries to turn all that around. It provides stories of a few people's first sexual experiences, and does so in a really positive way, in an effort to change the way we view the "first time." It's refreshing to hear about people who are happy with their sexual choices - happy enough to talk about them openly.

I, for one, had a great experience my first time. It wasn't unplanned or unexpected - i knew exactly what was going on. We were both ready, and had discussed (in serious detail) what would be happening. It was very clear that if either of us wanted to stop, it would be completely ok. Of course, it wasn't perfect - it had those awkward moments and confusion that doing something new is bound to have - but I can definitely look back and smile.

When I began reading this article, I was worried that they wouldn't include a homosexual or queer experience - a group that often gets left out when talking about "virginity." But at the end, they surprised me with a story about two teenage boys deciding to take their relationship a step further. I was really excited to see the even hand they gave to that relationship, in comparison to the others. There was no hint of anything different treatment, which I liked to see.

I did have a few minor qualms with the site, though. First of all, it was generally assumed that sex meant penetration. Admittedly, this might be some of my own close-mindedness, but it didn't seem to me that any of the couples were talking about oral sex. But maybe I'm wrong. Either way, the various definitions of "sex" weren't really explored (no lesbian couple? Should I read too far into this?), and neither were the complex definitions of "virginity." Maybe it was left open on purpose, and I created my own ending, though. Hm. My other thought was that it seemed that all these couples stayed together. I know it was meant to be a positive view of that "first time," but it all seemed extremely rosy. In my case, my partner who I lost my virginity with have since broken up - and we haven't spoken in months. Regardless, I haven't let that tarnish my memory of the first time we had sex. It's ok if you don't stay together afterwards, as long as you feel good about your decisions.

Either way, it's a good read, and gave me a lot to think about. Go check it out!

Just How Much Should Love Hurt? Or, Don't Claim Your Orgasm, Ladies.

Just how much should love hurt? According to Christina Nehring, a lot. And you won't just hurt, you'll suffer. But oh will it be worth it.

In fact, you can expect to feel miserable, alone, on the edge of insanity... all for the plight of love and romance.

And sex? What sex? Nehring argues that the "availiablity" of sex in our age of internet technologies and mass mediated communications makes true love impossible; that romance depends on "other-ness, tension, and reserve." Well, I guess Nehring and I have different definitions of love and romance. It's difficult for me to imagine any deep feelings of companionship and compassion to come out of that blockade that she thinks must be built between partners.

Nehring uses the romance stories of centuries past as her models - Jane Austen, in particular. As a book nerd, I can even somewhat understand Nehring's sense of Romanticism and idealism towards love and romance, but I don't understand why this tortuous angst is required. Yes, love when it is towards an unwilling object, love when it is unreciprocated, is taxing on our emotions and bodies. But those are situations where the rational and self-respecting thing to do is walk away.

Out of all the things that Nehring says about the disintegration of love in our time, the most problematic to me are her sex-negative and even female body-negative opinions, paraphrased in an article by Laura Sessions Step for sexreally.com:

"It is not, for example, 'sex-on-tap,' or 'the relentless emphasis on sexual climax that…has a largely depleting effect on the life of the emotions.' 'When erotic intimacy is available at the tap of a mouse,' she writes, or, indeed, at the amiable request of one’s household partner (“what about a quickie before lunch, dear?”); when magazines nudge us to 'claim' orgasms as we do receipts at the end of our transactions at Starbucks; when Broadway hits like Eve Ensler’s The Vagina Monologues have women hollering the names of their genitals and baking cakes in their shape, then sex has simply become too available.”

Wait... what? Since when does it make sense to link a woman's positive sense of self and body image with bad types of love? And, last time I checked, the Vagina Monologues have been nothing but positive for women all over the globe for over 10 years.

Sessions Stepp goes on, saying:

"Love is also not an equal partnership, in her view. It is the ardor of a college student for her professor, a young man for an older man."

This view on love is troubling. It means that we would be denied real human connection, openness, and comfort. It also would mean elevated levels of depression, partner abuse, and so on. I, for one, do not think that love means despair.

An interesting and maybe even enlightening or liberating exercise that I suggest all our readers do is to take a moment and think about what sex, love and romance mean to you. How do you define them? Do they involve two people? Can't they involve just you? Perhaps they involve more? I urge you to rethink those three vague ideas outside of their social constructions (p.s. this originally was an exercise in Dr. Sekile Nzinga Johnson's Psych of Women class in spring 2009, so I can't take all the credit for it!).

National Day to Prevent Teen Pregnancy

Today, May 6, is the eighth annual National Day to Prevent Teen Pregnancy!

Though teen pregnancy is often discussed in the media in a sensationalistic manner, we rarely have a chance to sit down and have a serious discussion about the causes of teen pregnancy and how the rates of teen pregnancy can be lowered. Among comparable countries, the U.S. has the highest teen pregnancy rate (pdf). That might be shocking to hear, but it's also important to know! Because with rates like that, it's about time to get serious about the issue.

Study after study has shown that comprehensive sex education works, and abstinence-only education fails. Teens who use condoms, of course, are less likely to become pregnant -- and in order to use condoms, teens need to know both how to put them on and how to negotiate condom use with a partner.

Read more at Stand Up South Dakota, and while you're at it, tell Congress to support comprehensive sex education. Because isn't it about time we gave all teens the information they need to keep themselves safe?

(If you're a teen looking for information on how to prevent pregnancy, head on over to Teenwire to find what you need.)

Abstinence-Only Education Sends Dangerous Messages to Youth

As per usual, the Amplify blog, run by the great organization Advocates for Youth, has some chilling information on what is being actually taught in publicly-funding abstinence-only education programs.

We talk about these programs in the abstract an awful lot, and how they're not teaching teens the tools they need to keep themselves safe and make smart choices about their sexual health. But it's also a good idea to take a look at what they actually are teaching teens. And the truth about what they're up to goes far beyond even the dangerous myths that "condoms don't work," and into the realm of reinforcing out-dated and oppressive gender roles with regards to sex.

Just a couple excerpts from what Amplify found:

In South Carolina, Heritage Community Services (currently receives a CBAE grant of $600,000 per year from 2006-2011) teaches girls that conservative attire is necessary, or those poor boys will virtually attack you. Here is an excerpt from their classroom curriculum:

“Males and females are aroused at different levels of intimacy. Males are more sight oriented, whereas females are more touch oriented. This is why girls need to be careful with what they wear, because males are looking! The girl might be thinking fashion, while the boy is thinking sex. For this reason, girls have a responsibility to wear modest clothing that doesn’t invite lustful thoughts.”

Yes indeed, girls. It is your duty to the country. More from HCS’s website:

“a good minimum guideline is to declare everything covered by a bathing suit as off limits. Everyone needs to know his or her boundaries before getting in a risky situation. Once someone is excited physically, it can be difficult to stop.”

Far from teaching girls the useful skills of how to assert themselves in sexual situations and clearly say what they do and do not want to do, this kind of curriculum doesn't even acknowledge that girls and women have their own sexual thoughts and desires. Indeed, another example found over at Amplify's blog post shows curriculum that asserts male sexual desire as erratic based on physical attraction, with female sexual desire as harder to come by and based in emotion.

And worst of all, these kinds of attitudes are the exact same ones that promote victim-blaming with regards to rape and sexual assault. These attitudes being taught to students put the onus on girls and women to not "provoke" the sexual attraction and attention of men, rather than the onus on boys and men to control themselves and act respectfully. Amplify has even yet another example, where this attitude gets particularly explicit -- in an abstinence-only story which asserts that a girl who claimed to be raped is not credible, due to her promiscuous reputation.

Read the full Amplify post here, and remember that not only are our teens being given dangerous, harmful and sexist messages -- they're also being funded by our tax dollars! You can ask President Obama to zero-out funding for abstinence-only education here.

Rates of Teen Sex Are Lower Than Most Think

Parents everywhere will likely be relieved to hear this news. The idea of today's teenagers engaging in rampant, promiscuous and unprotected sex is just what many of us have been claiming all along . . . a myth.

The news is troubling, but it’s also misleading. While some young people are clearly engaging in risky sexual behavior, a vast majority are not. The reality is that in many ways, today’s teenagers are more conservative about sex than previous generations.

Today, fewer than half of all high school students have had sex: 47.8 percent as of 2007, according to the National Youth Risk Behavior Survey, down from 54.1 percent in 1991.

A less recent report suggests that teenagers are also waiting longer to have sex than they did in the past. A 2002 report from the Department of Health and Human Services found that 30 percent of 15- to 17-year-old girls had experienced sex, down from 38 percent in 1995. During the same period, the percentage of sexually experienced boys in that age group dropped to 31 percent from 43 percent.

The rates also went down among younger teenagers. In 1995, about 20 percent said they had had sex before age 15, but by 2002 those numbers had dropped to 13 percent of girls and 15 percent of boys.

[. . .]

As for that supposed epidemic of oral sex, especially among younger teenagers: national statistics on the behavior have only recently been collected, and they are not as alarming as some reports would have you believe. About 16 percent of teenagers say they have had oral sex but haven’t yet had intercourse. Researchers say children’s more relaxed attitude about oral sex probably reflects a similar change among adults since the 1950s. In addition, some teenagers may view oral sex as “safer,” since unplanned pregnancy is not an issue.

In other words, the fact that teenagers are seemingly somewhat more comfortable discussing sex than their parents were doesn't necessarily mean that they're engaging in risky behaviors. Of course, proponents of comprehensive sex education have been arguing the same thing -- that being open and honest about sex isn't the same as having more of it -- for many years!

It is, however, important to note that while promiscuity among teens is not a major problem, there are other sexual issues involving teens that need addressing. The fact that the teen birth rates have risen for the first time in 15 years, as well as the high rates of STD transmission, both need our immediate attention. And as the NY Times notes, if these trends are not due to increased rates of sexual activity, they're almost certainly due to a decrease in the use of condoms and other contraception. That's something important to chew on -- and to remember when abstinence-only supporters try to take credit for this study's findings.

Take Care Down There

Planned Parenthood Columbia Willamette has started a new website called Take Care Down There, designed to promote positive attitudes towards sexual health. It's filled with educational and irreverent videos. I personally like this one a whole lot:



The other videos are funny and reference the fact that talking about sex can often be uncomfortable, but is still necessary. You can watch them all here. Due to the frank and unembarrassed nature of a lot of the videos, anti-choicers have already taken issue with the material and labeled it "revolting." In my book, that's how you know it's honest, quality stuff -- especially since the videos contain material less explicit than that on most cable networks. And in any case, if you want to teach about sex, you've got to talk about sex.

Nice work, Planned Parenthood Columbia Willamette! Keep it up.

Ode to Birth Control

Several weeks ago, I wrote briefly about my own abortion, in an effort to encourage open discussion of the topic. This week, I’d like to focus on preventing pregnancy which is, of course, a major component of reducing the need for abortion. Especially in light of recent shenanigans on the part of Bush Co., I thought it important to discuss the wonders of modern birth control.

Once again, I don’t put my experience out there as representative of anyone but myself. However, I will say that the one time in my life I got pregnant was the one time in my life I wasn’t consistently using birth control. Ironically enough, it was that one unplanned pregnancy that sparked my belief in, and heart-felt devotion to, birth control. The fact that I have since become a devout user of birth control and have not experienced another unplanned pregnancy speaks volumes; to me, anyway.

As a believer in the right to pleasure (so long as the pursuit of pleasure doesn’t infringe on another’s right to safety and bodily autonomy) I am a strong advocate of sex for pleasure. It’s wonderful and amazing that two people can literally join each other and create a brand-new, third person. But there are so many other benefits and potential outcomes of sex that I’m incapable of looking at it from a “procreation only” stand point. And I don’t hesitate to assume that most people engage in sex for reasons other than procreation, more often than not. Actually, I don’t have to assume anything. Several studies have shown that procreation is pretty close to the bottom of the list of reasons why people have sex.

Enter birth control. What an amazing concept, what an amazing human endeavor modern birth control is! It allows heterosexuals to explore parts of themselves that might be inaccessible if every penetrative encounter was wrapped up in the fear of pregnancy. It can remove a large component of fear and anxiety from sexual encounters. It can give a sense of freedom and security. It has helped lower the maternal mortality rate by allowing women to time and space their pregnancies. Women are no longer at the mercy of their biology. Effective, easy to use birth control has enabled women to more effectively enter public spheres such as business, politics, sports and the like.

Birth control isn’t (or at least shouldn’t be) soley the concern of women. I believe that men have just as much right and responsibility to prevent pregnancy as women do. Obviously there are biological and societal factors that can make it less of a concern for men. But that doesn’t mean it should be a non-issue for them. I strongly encourage everyone to take a look at the website http://www.malecontraceptives.org/. This site has a lot of great information on methods of male birth control that are in development.

What this all boils down to are the basic facts that humans have a right to sex for pleasure, comfort, expressions of love or lust and just plain fun. Women deserve the right to manage their reproductive health in a way that allows them to participate in society to the fullest degree. Both women and men deserve the right to prevent pregnancies they’re not ready for. And effective, accessible birth control makes all of that possible!

Next week I’ll be posting a companion piece to this post – Giving Thanks for Joyful Quality Sex! I’ll expand on the idea of “the right to pleasure” and take a look at meaningful consent.

LGBT Pride Month

June is LGBT Pride Month!

LGBT stands for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender individuals, and Pride Month is a time to reflect on the history of the LGBT rights movement. It's also an opportunity for those in the community to come together to reflect on progress, discuss challenges and celebrate in a safe and accepting atmosphere.

Why should those who believe in reproductive rights care about LGBT equality? Causes in Common, a group that allies LGBT rights advocates and reproductive rights advocates, notes that there are several connections between the two causes. The movements absolutely benefit from each others successes. For example, the availability of birth control helped to normalize sexual activity for purposes of pleasure rather than procreation – and therefore helped to normalize sexual activity between women and between men. The desire of some right-wing forces to control sexuality also affects LGBT individuals as much as it affects heterosexual women who need access to birth control and abortion.

Additionally, it's important to note that LGBT sexual rights and the right to an abortion are based off of the same legal principle: that of privacy. In 2003, astonishingly late, the Supreme Court decided in the landmark Lawrence vs. Texas case that same-sex sexual relations could not be criminalized. The ruling relied heavily on the principle of reproductive and sexual privacy found in the decision in Roe vs. Wade.

When looked at in that light, it's hard to see how the two movements could not be connected. Forming alliances is in each other's and our own best interests!

For more education on LGBT social issues and sexual health, check out our MySpace page, where we'll be discussing the theme all month!

Most Teens Not Having Oral or Anal Sex as a Substitute for Vaginal Intercourse

A new study by the Guttmacher Institute has debunked the myth that heterosexual teens have increasingly engaged in oral and anal sex as a way to "technically" remain virgins. In fact, straight teens are much more likely to engage in oral and anal sex after they've had vaginal intercourse.

The analysis of a federal survey of more than 2,200 males and females aged 15 to 19, released yesterday, found that more than half reported having had oral sex. But those who described themselves as virgins were far less likely to say they had tried it than those who had had intercourse.

"There's a popular perception that teens are engaging in serial oral sex as a strategy to avoid vaginal intercourse," said Rachel Jones of the Guttmacher Institute, a private, nonprofit research organization based in New York, who helped do the study. "Our research suggests that's a misperception."

Instead, the study found that teens tend to become sexually active in many ways at about the same time. For example, although only one in four teenage virgins had engaged in oral sex, within six months after their first intercourse more than four out of five adolescents reported having oral sex.

"That suggests that oral and vaginal sex are closely linked," said Jones, whose findings will be published in the July issue of the Journal of Adolescent Health. "Most teens don't have oral sex until they have had vaginal sex."

A criticism of abstinence-only sex education has been that it defines virginity as having abstained from vaginal intercourse, and therefore may lead teens to engage in other sexual activity that puts them at risk for STDs. But there are in fact many other criticisms of abstinence-only education -- and as supporters of comprehensive sex ed have noted, oral and anal sex do carry a risk of STD transmission, and the study shows that teens are engaging in these acts at high rates. So the findings actually further prove that the need for proper education about safer sex is increasing.

"More than half of our teens are having sex -- vaginal and oral," said James Wagoner, president of the group Advocates for Youth. "We can't afford the luxury of denial. Abstinence-only programs are the embodiment of denial. They have been proven not to work, and it's time to invest in real sex education, including condoms."

[. . .]

"More than half of our teens are having sex -- vaginal and oral," said James Wagoner, president of the group Advocates for Youth. "We can't afford the luxury of denial. Abstinence-only programs are the embodiment of denial. They have been proven not to work, and it's time to invest in real sex education, including condoms."

There definitely are teens engaging in oral and anal sex before having had vaginal sex. Twenty-three percent of straight teens who did not report having vaginal intercourse did report having oral sex, and one percent reported having anal sex. But those numbers are very drastically lower than among those who have engaged in vaginal intercourse.

The study had other important and interesting findings. Researchers found that the longer the amount of time since a teen had first engaged in vaginal intercourse, the more likely he or she was to report having had oral or anal sex. They also found that many more teens of both sexes reported receiving oral sex than giving it, with male and female teens reporting having receievd oral sex at similar rates, but with more females having reported giving oral sex. This indicates that performing heterosexual oral sex is seen as more taboo than receiving it, particularly when it comes to oral sex performed on female partners. Differences in willingness to report having given oral sex also fall along racial lines.

You can read the full results here (pdf). One thing seems certain: teens are engaging in a wide variety of sexual activity, and that means they need more than abstinence-only education, or even pregnancy prevention education, in order to keep themselves safe and make informed choices.

National Masturbation Month

There may be some graphic images or language on the pages this post links to. PPRSR is not responsible for the content on other websites!

April was both Sexual Assault Awareness Month and STD Awareness Month -- both very important issues, but also somber ones.

This month, we've got something a lot more fun. May is National Masturbation Month! What’s not to like about that?

National Masturbation Month was started in 1995 by the adult store Good Vibrations, in protest to the firing of Surgeon General Dr. Joycelyn Elders – who lost her job simply because she said that masturbation should be taught as a part of safer sex education.

Elders was right! Masturbation is the safest sex around, and it’s a perfectly normal part of human sexuality. Almost all people masturbate or have masturbated, whether single or in a relationship, gay or straight, young or old and male or female. And why shouldn’t they? Self-pleasure is healthy, and there are no STDs or pregnancy to worry about. As teenwire points out, masturbation relieves stress, can act as a painkiller, boosts your immune system and can even reduce the risk of depression. Who knew? Most people just do it because it feels good!

Of course, there’s nothing wrong with that, either. There are a lot of myths about masturbation -- that it's dirty, immoral, you shouldn't do it when you have a partner, or even that it will cause hairy palms or blindness. Girls and women especially are taught that masturbation is something that they just shouldn't do.

But there’s nothing wrong with touching your own body or wanting to feel physical pleasure. In fact, one study showed that women who masturbate have higher self-esteem. They just might have better sex with partners, too: masturbating allows people to learn what feels good, how to have orgasms, and gives them the confidence they need to point their partner(s) in the right direction. People who masturbate might even be able to learn how to speed up or slow down their orgasms!

Isn't it about time that we talk about masturbation the same way that we talk about partnered sex: as something fun and normal?

PPRSR is also running a fundraising campaign around National Masturbation Month. Click on the button below to donate, or head over to our MySpace profile for the code you'll need to post but badge on your own page or blog.




If you want to know more, Scarleteen has a great article on the basics. For the ladies, I can recommend my favorite book about sex: I Love Female Orgasm. It’ll teach you just about anything you know about going solo – and might teach you a thing or two about partnered sex, as well.

You can also just check out our MySpace blog, where we'll be writing about masturbation all month. Stay tuned, because this week we'll be talking about sex toys!

In Teen Relationships, Communication is Safest

An interesting new study has been released on the sexual habits of (heterosexual) teenagers. The results show that sexually active teens in trusting relationships are more likely to use contraception than those having more casual sex. The study involved 4,500 teens in grades 7 through 12.

An analysis of national data conducted by Child Trends, a research center that focuses on children and youth, found that sexually active teens who identify their relationships with a partner as romantic and who go out socially with that person are more likely to use contraceptives than similar teens in more casual relationships. This may be because they feel more comfortable talking about contraception with a partner they know and trust, said Jennifer Manlove, a scientist at Child Trends and one of the study's authors. Among girls, good communication and the quality of the relationship play a role in decision-making.
It's an educated guess to say that those in a trusting relationship are more likely to communicate about contraception. Research does indeed show that those couples who talk about contraception are more likely to use it.

Though the news is reassuring for parents whose teenage children are in committed relationships, there is cause for concern. Pregnancy is always a risk for teens having vaginal intercourse, but despite being less likely to use protection, teens having sex casually or with multiple partners are at a higher risk for STDs. And using contraception in one relationship does not necessarily determine whether or not a teen will use contraception in a future relationship:

The analysis, taken from information on more than 4,500 unmarried, sexually experienced young people, also found that girls were more likely to use contraception with boys their age than with older males. The teens were, on average, 16 years old when they first had sex. A fact sheet released by Child Trends contained some sobering news drawn from the study. For example, a teen's contraceptive use may change from partner to partner. Using birth control consistently in one relationship doesn't necessarily mean that a young person will do the same with another partner.

Use of contraception, in fact, is not as regular as health officials might hope. Four out of 10 sexually active students reported not using contraceptives at all or using them infrequently.

The news is certainly troubling, particularly in light of recent information showing that one in four teenage girls has an STD. But there is a bright side. In facing such a widespread STD problem, knowing what may lead teens to use or not use protection is absolutely vital to finding a solution.

One of the study's authors gives some good, practical advice:

Manlove said, it's not enough for parents to focus on whether their kids are having sex. They should engage their kids in conversations about what healthy relationships look like, pay attention to the power dynamics of any relationship and stress the importance of contraception.

Of course, having a single committed partner is important to STD prevention, and also to building trust in sexual relationships. But though ideal, it's not practical to assume that everyone will have only one partner, or one serious partner, at all times. Instead, the study's results support sending a slightly different but universal message: communication is sexual relationships is a must. We need to teach teens that if they trust a person enough for sex, they also need to trust that person enough to talk about contraception.

Iowa Rejects Abstinence-Only Funding

Iowa Governor Chet Culver has rejected federal funding for abstinence-only sex education. The move is the result of a law passed last year, which requires all sex education to be medically accurate.

"There's been discussion on whether or not we should be accepting these federal monies at all because the criteria for abstinence-only programs at the federal level is not medically accurate," said [Rep.] Mascher, who is sponsoring Thursday's policy briefing. "The standards that [organizations] have to abide by for the federal money do not call for scientifically-based information. In essence, [the guideline conflicts] would prevent schools from getting those monies. They could still teach abstinence-only sexual education, but they can't use the federal dollars in order to do it."

Representatives from FutureNet, the Iowa Network for adolescent pregnancy prevention, parenting and sexual health, are scheduled to speak at the briefing and to call for the complete refusal of Title V abstinence-only education funding. Iowa currently receives roughly $319,000 from the program, which is administered by the Iowa Department of Public Health. Prior to Bethany Christian Services of Northwest Iowa being awarded a $600,000 non-matching grant last September from the Administration of Children, Youth and Families (part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services), the Title V monies were the only such federal abstinence education funding in the state. Nationally, Title V provides more than $40 million a year in matching funds to states.

What exactly are the guidelines that Mascher refers to? In order to qualify for federal abstinence-only funding, a sex ed program must meet eight criteria:

A) has as its exclusive purpose, teaching the social, psychological, and health gains to be realized by abstaining from sexual activity;

B) teaches abstinence from sexual activity outside marriage as the expected standard for all school-age children;

C) teaches that abstinence from sexual activity is the only certain way to avoid out-of-wedlock pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and other associated health problems;

D) teaches that a mutually faithful monogamous relationship in the context of marriage is the expected standard of human sexual activity;

E) teaches that sexual activity outside the context of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects;

F) teaches that bearing children out-of-wedlock is likely to have harmful consequences for the child, the child's parents, and society;

G) teaches young people how to reject sexual advances and how alcohol and drug use increase vulnerability to sexual advances; and

H) teaches the importance of attaining self-sufficiency before engaging in sexual activity.

Several of these required lessons are entirely inaccurate, and none of them are scientifically-based.

Saying that out-of-wedlock sex is not the "expected standard" is just plain false -- 95% of people have sex before marriage. The claim also completely ignores the existence of gay and lesbian students, who cannot legally marry a member of the same sex. Telling these students to remain celibate for their entire lives simply isn't going to work, but it will result in a lost moment to teach about reducing the risk of STDs.

The requirements impose a value judgment on sexual activity and leave no room for flexibility. Claiming that out-of-wedlock births are harmful to children and society is demeaning, incorrect, and embarrassing to students who were not born into or raised in a family with two married parents. Similarly, it's simply untrue that sexual activity outside of marriage is likely to cause harmful psychological effects. The argument is a scare-tactic, without regard for the effect it will have on students. Telling teenagers that having sex at their age is not normal and will result in harmful psychological effects isn't exactly the way to win them over. This is particularly true for students who have already had sex and have not experienced these effects -- if they know that what they are being taught is untrue, how can we expect them to trust their teachers on the genuinely good reasons for abstaining from sexual activity (like pregnancy and STD prevention)?

In practice, abstinence-only programs go beyond the required rhetoric. Students are often taught that condoms don't work -- which is entirely false. Programs also tend to include language that promotes dangerous stereotypes about gender-- including the ideas that men cannot control their sexuality, a couple abstaining from sex must rely on the woman to do so, and women don't feel sexual desire based on physical attraction. A common lesson is that people who are not virgins are "used" and ruined for their future partners. They can be compared to "spoiled food," a once-beautiful rose that has lost all of its petals, and chewed candy.

On top of it all, abstinence-only curriculum doesn't even work! Students who receive abstinence-only education are just as likely to engage in sexual activity but less likely to use condoms. And most parents want their kids to be taught comprehensive sex education, including how to prevent pregnancy and STDs using contraception.

Late last year, our own Governor Spitzer made the wise decision to no longer accept abstinence-only funds from the federal government. This doesn't mean that NY teens will no longer be taught abstinence -- comprehensive sex education programs include information about abstinence, and abstinence-only programs can still exist but do not have to meet the federal criteria that includes false information. Rejecting abstinence-only education is an important move for states to make; it protects their teenagers and also encourages the federal government to reconsider setting aside so much money for programs that produce negative or no results. Iowa is the 17th state to reject abstinence-only funding. It seems like people are starting to realize the importance of quality sex education -- let's hope that federal lawmakers start to listen!

Escape From Fear: A Planned Parenthood Comic

Comics With Problems is an online magazine that reproduces old comic books that had a "message." Comics have long been used as a way to spread awareness about social and political issues through a narrative -- more or less After School Specials or political commercials in print. Some comics come from as early as the 1940s and some as late as the 1990s. Some are corny, some are offensive, and some are just plain weird. Often, they also give us an insight into the times in which they were written.

Recently, Comics With Problems managed to dig up an old Planned Parenthood comic that was distributed in the 1950s and 60s. It was called Escape From Fear and followed the story of a couple whose marriage was on the rocks because they were afraid of unplanned pregnancy.



Reading the comic today, it looks pretty silly. Over the top dialogue and melodrama fuel the story. But in terms of the history of Planned Parenthood and family planning, it's also pretty interesting.

Despite the fact that it was taboo in the day, the comic discusses the reality that couples have sex for pleasure and may want to prevent pregnancy even as a married couple. It shows us a time when birth control was not widely available or known about, but still desperately needed -- the very reason that Margaret Sanger opened her first birth control clinics in the 1910s. It even allows women to shamelessly express sexual feelings Joan talks about her sexual desire and frustration early on in the comic, and then later alludes to her concern with sexual pleasure by asking the doctor if birth control would make sex "unpleasant." The doctor herself even openly admits to using birth control, no embarrassment involved!

Lastly, we see that even from the early days, Planned Parenthood was about more than just preventing pregnancy -- Planned Parenthood recognized that allowing couples to plan their families also helped to keep families healthy.

Sure, it's corny. And certain aspects, like the traditional gender roles, wouldn't make it through the editing process today. But it also provides a window into life before knowledge about birth control was common and sex could be talked about openly -- and shows that Planned Parenthood was on front lines promoting change.

And hey, it's kind of funny, too. What's your take?

Via Pandagon