Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site oliven.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!oliveb!oliven!barb From: barb@oliven.UUCP (Barbara Jernigan) Newsgroups: net.abortion Subject: Re: Re: Planned Parenthood posting Message-ID: <398@oliven.UUCP> Date: Thu, 22-Aug-85 13:35:04 EDT Article-I.D.: oliven.398 Posted: Thu Aug 22 13:35:04 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 24-Aug-85 20:07:11 EDT References: <598@mit-vax.UUCP> <932@bunker.UUCP> <655@mit-vax.UUCP> Organization: Olivetti ATC; Cupertino, Ca Lines: 138 > > >> If I may be so bold, Ray: when were you a teenager? 50's? 60's? (I'd be > >> hard pressed to believe 70's). > > > >What makes you think that ten or twenty years make so much difference? > > Remember 1965? (I must admit that I don't!) There was no MTV. "Prince" > was not singing "Little Red Corvette". The Pill was new. The sexual > revolution was STARTING. People who wanted to assert their sexual > freedom had the support of a vocal counter-culture. > Remember 1985? (I do.) MTV sells sex (50% off :-), Maddonna shows us > that a woman (and a girl) can have power through sex. The sexual > revolution is taken for granted. People who want to assert their sexual > freedom are given conflicting signals in an increasingly conservative > atmosphere. > > Is that enough difference? Am I reading into the meaning of many postings here, or are many netters suggesting that teenage (and otherwise out of wedlock) promiscuity is a new development? I realize the following is a bit off the subject of abortion, *per se*, but I would like to relate a conversation had with a marvellous woman, Mimi, who happens to be at least 85. (There was conversation last year about an upcoming 90th birthday, but I can't remember the exact figures.) Now, with Mimi, it's any guess where the lively conversation will go, and this time, to my husband and my suprise (and delight) we touched on the sexual revolution. Mimi is nothing if not frank, and I quote: "I MUCH prefer a time of liberation to a time of [sexual] supression [read, 'Victorian morals'] . . . although," she said wistfully, "there was something to be said for having to scurry back to your room before breakfast call." Ergo, although they did NOT talk about sex -- and the moral literature certainly spoke to the contrary -- sex was certainly going on between young (and not so young) unmarried people. If you think bawdiness is new, I suggest you take a course in English Literature -- and Shakespeare is not the only example. The DIFFERENCE (and there is one) is that, in years past, ADULTNESS -- and it's responsibilities -- came at a MUCH earlier age. My parents, for example (and no, I, typically of my society, have NOT inquired as to their premarital sexual habits, if any), were married as teenagers (my father was 18, my mother was 17). BOTH had been supporting themselves for several years. There are tales of field commanders as young as 15, or younger . . . And, let's face it, in many cultures unmarried at 20 (at least for women) meant you were an old maid! > > Did you ever read Romeo and Juliet? I'm sure their parents were highly > responsible... > Juliet was what, say, 13? And if Romeo weren't enough encouragement, her PARENTS were seeking suitors -- by the end of the play she was to MARRY Paris. Today, teenagers are given the bodies (and urges) of adults by Nature (and you can't reset Her time), but are often treated like children -- so how can we expect them to make adult decisions about something as seemingly innocuous (I said SEEMINGLY, so flame off) as sex? They don't have the perspective. And some don't have the nerve to discuss it with their parents. MOST probably don't have the nerve to discuss it with their parents -- although the external stimuli (commercials, MTV, movies -- I've been watching BOND films since I was five -- popular music, etc.) say 'yes' to sex, SEX is still a taboo subject in the home. Dragon Flame! I had, like Charles, a great relationship with my parents -- and I knew where, and how, babies come at a very early age -- but I will always remember my mother's advice before I left for college: "If a boy tells you, if you love him you'll go to bed with him, tell him, 'hold that thought a month,' and get on the pill." It knocked my socks off, for it was THE FIRST TIME we'd dicussed the possibility of MY having sex! And I come from what I consider a pretty 'liberated' family! So, yes, it IS the parents' responsibility to educate their offspring about the 'dangers' of sex -- but very few are able to handle it objectively enough to, as Charles so aptly stated, > ... tell them WHY to do [or not do] something, [so] they might think about > it. Is there an answer? The obvious one is to teach the Parents how to talk about sex with their children beyond, "DON'T DO IT BECAUSE I [or the Bible] SAYS SO!" Few of us are ever satisfied with that line of reasoning -- indeed, there is a perverse nature (sometimes tempered by time, but not always) that tempts us to do the opposite, just to assert our independence. So, if parents can't talk about sex -- and birth control -- where can the teenagers go? Their peers? As Charles so aptly pointed out, that is a WONDERFUL source of misinformation. That leaves finding another third party -- ah, Planned Parenthood -- its title suggests they should know the facts, and the teenager can maintain his/her anonymity (I know, we WISH they wouldn't need to do that -- but if they *thought* their parents understood, they wouldn't be there, anyway); and, HOPEFULLY (it being an imperfect world, alas) the teenager will get some objective answers. Rather than abolish PP -- those of you who advocate that -- why don't you volunteer to work for it???? Then you have a possible medium to get your pro-life message to the teenagers. (And PP isn't JUST for teenagers, by the way -- it is PLANNED PARENTHOOD not TEENAGE BIRTH CONTROL.) Rather than talking ideas -- which is good exercise for the fingers, but not necessarily for the facts (please, no offense intended, I point the finger at myself as well) -- get out in the trenches. See what is *REALLY* happening, why it is really happening, from the *perspective* of those to whom it's happening, and perhaps, unlike the many minds before you, come up with a solution. I would really love to see abortion abolished -- BECAUSE IT IS NO LONGER NEEDED. (I know, I'm opening myself to napalm here.) But it is not a perfect world -- sadly. So what is the answer? I'm sure many of you will tell me. Me, I'm not so sure. Except that I believe as much objective information as possible should be available -- which means it is OUR responsibility (pro-lifer and pro-choicer, alike) to see that it IS. If you think that your local PP is advocating abortions as birth control -- DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT! Talk to the management first hand and find out the facts! Don't berate us with it, we're easy (unless you wear your ego on your keyboard). If you are doing something, more power to you. And now I've said more than I've intended -- you should never place keyboards in the hands of a writer, we don't know when to stop :-). To quote an art teacher of mine (who was standing on a desk and wondering how he got there)(exciteable fellow): GET DOWN, YOU PROTESTANT FOOL! YOU'RE BLOCKING TRAFFIC! Adieu. ___________________ ______________\ ___________ | ______ / . / / o .ooo. ./ /. . o@ooo0 .ooooo. .ooooo. .oooo Barb oo..oo oo...ooo ooo..ooo \ .oo oo oooooo oooooo ooo ooo