One of the first resources I offered on the right column as "essential information" was the Independent Women's Forum, which is an endorsement of sorts. I valued many things they did in DC, especially tracking the down side of women in combat, and the dangers of hooking up. To that end, they sponsor a conference each year on sex and dating on Capitol Hill, and I'm increasingly uncomfortable with what's presented. Granted, I'm in my "family cocoon" where there's little connexion with the personal side of politics, the rough and tumble of being single in a fast-paced city, and here I'm language czar -- riding shotgun on what words are even permissible chez nous.
This year's guest was Drew Pinsky, who highlights the fact that many are uncomfortable with the hook-up culture. Speaking to four dozen Washington DC interns,
Pinsky advised the young nubile college aged co-eds that they have three options with sex:
A) Drink Juice 'em up and go. Liquor is quicker -- for girls. Beer Goggles -- for men.
B) Steady Joined at the hip. Live together shack-up. Trial marriage.
C) Hook-up Friends with benefits. Also known as f**k buddies.He mentions no fourth option.
IWF's Allison Kasic gives this account of the positive outcome that can come of such discussions.
One woman at the conference said that you have to get drunk before hooking up because it is so unnatural -- hooking up is akin to abandoning her core self. Dr. Drew confirmed that this is a common response from females: “Emotional instincts run counter to the hook-up experience, so women medicate them away.” If they were sober, they would make different decisions. A young male in the crowd said he needed to get drunk before a hook-up to medicate the anxiety associated with closeness and rejection. It is clear from this conversation that college students know that this isn’t healthy behavior (both emotionally and physically), and yet they aren’t sure how to change the culture.
Conversations like the one led by Dr. Drew are an important first step in changing the culture, helping student realize that they aren’t alone in their desire for something different.
So do we compromise and say, "Gee, tough crowd, they need a different approach. At least he sees that they need some restraint." Or do we say, "Completely unacceptable; we could never endorse that."
I realise that IWF board member Charmaine Yoest does not endorse the approach, and that it's a secular outfit at best. This calls to mind the abortion strategy, in which some folks say "no exceptions, now!" whereas others support an incremental approach in order to roll back the damage. In that battle, I'm with the latter group, and yet I'm torn on the IWF. I know we have to engage kids where they are and stimulate their hearts and minds to find a better way to live, but this is ever the problem when joining forces with groups with such different backgrounds. Reasonably similar goals, but widely divergent criteria for meeting them. I'll ponder it more.
Comments
“People have realized that the complete removal of the feminine element from the Christian message is a shortcoming from an anthropological viewpoint. It is theologically and anthropologically important for woman to be at the center of Christianity."
This is just another of the unintended consequences of the cultural acceptance of contraception and abortion! Men's sexuality has been robbed of its creative essence. It is now viewed as something that imposes a burden on women (when conception happens to occur), something used to control women or something that is purely recreational. Why would men bother?? In taking away their responsibility, we've also robbed them of their significance! In the big picture of humanity, men have been made into nothing more than a nuisance women have to figure out how to control in order to bring about the next generation. Men don't see it as their task to protect the vulnerable because they see themselves as the vulnerable ones. A few well preserved vials of sperm would make men entirely obsolete in the world's ethos today!!
That is astounding Robin, and good for you for standing up. At the heart of that matter, I think, is even worse than a gender mixing message. There is an increased sharper and sharper focus on the "self." Solid Catholic teaching returns our focus away from ourselves to Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The original sin, Eve denied her womanhood when she desired to be like "gods." Since the only god she knew was the Father. Where was Adam? He stood impotent... in other words, they were divorced. There's a young girl at Robin's son's high school who was just told that she is the center of the universe and it's a tragic disservice to her.
Ditto what Mary said! A lot of high schools have very poor math and science depts, for boys and girls. I also am educated as a chemical engineer, but chose to teach the two years before we had children because its hours were more suited to spending time with children. (I was looking ahead). When it came time and I was pregnant with our first, I realized that I did not want to leave him with someone else, and was able to stay home full time. I am not sure it would have been that easy if we were used to another engineering income and not just a private school teacher income. Also some of my first job offers were out on oil rigs - I had no interest in that at all even though I enjoyed my engineering classes and did well in them. No one discouraged me from an engineering job, on the contrary I got a lot of flack for my decision not to pursue an engineering career.
I've been lurking, but this is one that irritates me. Beats the heck out of me what these "barriers" are. I was educated as a chemical engineer, where 1/3 of our class was women. However, in electrical engineering, only 1 or 2 out of 30 were women. Is it possible that women are Just Not Interested in some areas? Nah, it must be The Man keeping us down so we must legislate (and, I agree -- when they say "legistlate", I hear "quota"). And actually, I have a friend that was also a chemical engineer. When she lost her job, she decided not to go back into engineering and started working from home so she could spend more time with her 3 kids. Also, if nothing else, there are all kinds of incentives for women to enter science and engineering -- scholarships not available to men, guaranteed housing on campuses that do not guarantee housing to the general population, etc. I think you hit the nail on the head when you said that schools in general are not preparing students for the hard sciences. It is truly a sad state of affairs, the lack of science education these days.