Back to the OYC

It has been far too long since I've sat down to enjoy the pleasure of writing. I've missed this!

So, to catch you up on my world ...

Mark and I moved into our new home on Canada Day and have been busy unpacking and settling in. On Friday the house was hit by lightening, which has definitely been a challenging experience. We are now in the process of replacing the luxuries destroyed by the hit ... not to mention anxiously awaiting the repair of our a/c as we hit record temperatures today.

However, this post isn't about our new home (more on that soon!) ... it's about the following announcement:

I am pleased to say that I will be facilitating a workshop tomorrow night at the Orillia Youth Centre. If you haven't been following me for long, you may not know that the OYC is where I "started out" with workshops. I am excited to head back there for some thorough and honest discussion with the youth. We'll be talking about STIs and contraception ... as well as whatever topics come up! If you're in the area, you should stop by and check it out tomorrow (July 18) at 5pm!

I'll let you know how the workshop goes!

Candice :)

Teens having group sex, you say?

Thank you, FruitTaster, for bringing both of these articles to my attention!

 

Let's be honest ... the media is full of sensationalized articles written to shock us and make us think that things are much worse than they really are. What I'm about to share with you is a great example of this. The following article was posted on Canoe.ca on December 16, 2011.

[box]

Many teen girls have had group sex: Study

QMI Agency

Friday, December 16, 2011, 12:39 PM

One in 13 teenage girls in the U.S. have had group sex, a new study has found.

Researchers from Boston University School of Public Health also found those girls were more likely to have been exposed to porn and childhood sexual abuse than girls who had not participated in group sex.

The researchers surveyed 328 girls in the Boston area. The girls were asked about sexual partners and experiences. Of those who said they'd had group sex, more than half reported being pressured to do so, while 45% reported a male participant didn't wear a condom.

As well, 54% were younger than 16 at the time of the group sex.

"Group sex among youth is an important public health topic that has received very little attention to date," researcher Emily Rothman said in a release about the study. "It's time for parents, pediatricians, federal agencies, and community-based organizations to sit up, pay attention, and take notice: Group sex is happening, and we need to be prepared to address it."

The study was published in the Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine.

[/box]

Really? Is that all there is to this study? Before your teen-group-sex alarm bells start going off, you should read this article by Dr. Petra Boynton. She does an excellent job of reviewing the study and analyzing the results for us. Thank you, Dr. Petra!

[box]

Teenagers and group sex: a cause for concern?

By Dr Petra | Published: 21 December, 2011

Last week saw the publication of a paper Multi-person Sex among a Sample of Adolescent Female Urban Health Clinic Patients in the Journal of Urban Health (sadly not open access). This tackled the issue of young people having Multiple Sexual Partners (MSPs) and in particular raised concerns over coercive sexual practices.

Predictably the media reported on this story with scary headlines like:
Teen girls who engage in group sex are often coerced, study says – NY Daily
Group sex is the latest ‘trend’ for teenage girls, disturbing report reveals – Daily Mail (The research excited upset the Mail so much they ran coverage of it twice)
Teens as young as 14 engaging in group sex, study finds – ABC News
‘Sexting’ is related to teen group sex trend, says study – New Jersey News Room (the study doesn’t say this at all, in fact recent research suggests the phenomena of teen ‘sexting’ is over exaggerated).

While we sadly are used to the mainstream media sensationalising sex research (particularly on young people), other sex blogs and medical news outlets covering this study have been equally remiss at reading the original research and critiquing it. Which is depressing.

So let’s do the job the mainstream media should have done. Let’s critically appraise the research and see if we do need to worry about MSPs and young people.

First, a quick disclaimer. Researching young people’s sexual experiences is important. Such work should focus on their needs, report faithfully any adverse issues they may be at risk from, and take their mental and physical wellbeing seriously. Research on teens should always involve young people at all levels and avoid being a top-down process where adults define teenagers’ experiences. In critiquing this research I am not suggesting young people are not experiencing problems within their relationships. I am also not saying the researchers were anything other than well intentioned.

Strengths of the research

The paper’s plus points are that it tackles a topical issue. While group sex among young people is (as this paper acknowledges) pretty unusual, it is something that has gained media interest over the past few years. So trying to collect any data about this phenomenon is important to reassure and also to direct sex education and public health programmes. The researchers seem to have developed the study over time, basing the survey they used on a series of in-depth qualitative interviews. The paper does acknowledge early on that multiple sexual partner experiences may be consensual and non consensual (more on this in a bit).

Sampling and sample size

Participants were recruited from a youth sexual health clinic. This is not unreasonable at all. It’s an excellent place to find out about young people’s sexual health. But it does mean those going there may be in need of help or support so might not be representative of teens generally.

The authors acknowledge this but I suspect that fact will pass a lot of journalists by when they report this. Media focus, I imagine, will be on all teens, rather than a subset of teens.

The paper tells us researchers were aware of 1224 female clients at the youth clinics, with 747 identified suitable for the study. Why the other clients attending the clinic weren’t suitable for the study is not explained. That, I think, is a problem. Information about participants who were unsuitable for the study, or who refused to participate (and why) should have been clarified just to help us interpret this data. I’m surprised reviewers didn’t ask for it to be included in the demographics table as is standard practice. Of the 747 clients identified, 495 (65%) agreed to take part. A 65% response rate on a sensitive topic is not a problem, but it does reduce the number of people responding further, which in turn affects how representative the sample is.

It is not declared whether the participants were Cis or Trans Women. This would have been helpful to disclose.

Table 1 in the paper provides details of 328 participants. I’m unsure if these were the final sample that was used in the study/analysis. Regardless of all this we learn right at the end of the paper only 24 of those who completed the survey had had a Multiple Sexual Partner experience. And of those, their analysis indicates, 35% said the experience was consensual.

Does this represent a major new trend in youth behaviour?

No. The paper reports of the patients attending the youth clinic very few of them had experienced non consensual group sex. It does not mean we should not be very concerned about these young people or others like them. But it does mean journalists covering this story should put this into context. The study is not showing a major trend in teen girls being forced to have group sex. It is saying non consensual group sexual activity among teens does not seem to happen often, but when it does it is highly distressing and increases the risk of psychological and physical ill health.

My worry is the media coverage of this will not read the original paper and will suggest there is an outbreak of teen sex parties happening regularly, that young girls are forced to participate in. The study did not find this and nor has it identified a major public health problem. But I doubt that will be made clear. This in turn will worry parents, mislead teachers and healthcare professionals, and probably lead to slut shaming of young women (as this kind of coverage invariably does). All the while ignoring the role of boys at best, or presenting them as gang rapists at worst. None of which is directly helpful to the needs of young people.

Problems with phrasing and terminology

The paper seems to use terms like ‘sex parties’, ‘multiple sexual partners’ and ‘gang rape’ interchangeably in places. This is confusing for the reader but I imagine also for participants in the study. This is recognised as a limitation later in the paper where the authors talk about participants who’ve experienced gang rape not necessarily seeing what they experienced as a multiple sexual partner act.

The focus of the study appears to be on heterosexual teens, although this is not really clarified.

The age range of 14-20 is important as this is a wide age range in terms of young people. While some 14 year olds may be mature and some 20 year olds immature, in general the needs and experiences of those who are in the younger age group in this study will be very different from older participants. Any of these participants could be exploited, abuse has no age barrier. However, older teens/young adults may well be better able to consensually engage in sexual behaviours younger teens cannot. This was not explored in enough detail in this paper.

The main drawback with the study, to me, is the question used to identify if participants had engaged in Multiple Partner Sex. It asked:
“Have you ever had sex (vaginal, oral, or anal) with more than one person at the same time or with more than one person at the same place? (This might be called group sex, a threesome, an orgy, or pulling a train).”

The paper doesn’t clearly explain how participants were invited to answer this question, although does suggest it was via a yes/no response (or similar). Imagine I said ‘yes’ to this question. What am I saying ‘yes’ to? That I had vaginal, oral or anal sex? The wording of this question means there’s no way of differentiating between participants who had all of these experiences and those who had one of them.

There is also no way of identifying how often participants had engaged in these various activities and whether they experienced them positively or negatively. It could be completely possible for a participant to have experienced oral sex positively but vaginal sex negatively (or vice versa). But the question phrasing does not allow for this to be explored. It also doesn’t allow participants to indicate if they were giving or receiving these sexual activities (or both).

Once you get past this confusion participants are still being asked about these sexual activities AND whether they’ve done them with more than one person. How do you answer if you’ve engaged in said activities but with only one person? The question doesn’t allow for this.

Participants could also easily be confused by a question that doesn’t make clear if the mention of ‘sex’ here refers to penetrative sex (and if so is it via a penis, finger or sex toy) or oral sex. That is important as we know from sex research unless you are very specific about what you’re asking about you’ve no real idea what participants are reporting.

The question is also confusing a group sex act (i.e. having sex with more than one person at a time) with multiple partner sex over a period of time (i.e. sleeping with more than one person in a day, evening etc). In fact this becomes more confusing as these behaviours are asked as if they’re the same thing but with no time period specified. Most of us who’ve had more than one partner could easily answer ‘yes’ to the question, assuming you have been intimate with different partners on different occasions in your home.

Deconstructing this question may seem like nit picking but in fact is very important when we are designing surveys. Unless our questions are meticulously phrased we have no real idea what participants are responding to. This in turn makes a difference to the conclusions and recommendations we can make.

Elsewhere in the paper the researchers conflate group sex and an orgy (which usually involves several people) with a threesome. They also don’t clarify who might be participating in these activities. The assumption seems to be that it’s a girl and all boys. But it could well be all girls or a mix of girls and boys.

Does ‘pornography’ and ‘sexually explicit’ mean the same thing?

Participants were also asked
“Many people come into contact with pornographic, x rated, or other sexually explicit material. How many times in the past 30 days have you viewed pornographic, x rated, or other sexually explicit material?”

This is an interesting but again problematic question. What do the researchers mean by ‘pornographic’ or ‘sexually explicit material’? Are they the same thing? Are they including explicit mainstream media such as music videos or magazine articles talking about sexual positions? That could be considered sexually explicit but not necessarily pornographic. Is this a particularly accessible question to ask a young person? Asking how often they’ve viewed such material also isn’t clear. Do they mean how often someone has watched pornography/sexually explicit material and masturbated? Simply seen it in passing? Or perhaps laughed at it with friends (as is very common among teens)? Was it watched alone or with a partner? What did it feature?

This information IS important because the researchers did find an association with multiple sexual partners and reported porn use, but it isn’t clear what relationship the young women in the study really had with porn. In order to better educate women about issues around porn we need to know more about what they are watching and how they feel about it. It is worth noting if participants said anything other than ‘no times’ they classed this as having viewed porn. So that means someone might have seen porn once in passing and be categorised in the same way as someone who viewed porn regularly and was aroused by it and someone who was forced to watch porn occasionally but against their will.

Another question asked
“Has anyone ever insisted (without using force or threats) that you do sexual things they saw in pornographic or x-rated magazines, websites, or movies when you did not want to?”

This is not an unreasonable question, but it is not necessarily something that’s easy for a teen woman to answer. For example they may well have been coerced to do something they did not want to do, but unless they asked the person coercing them if they had seen this in porn they would not necessarily know for sure this was the case. They may have a good instinct they were being asked to perform something inspired by pornography, but they wouldn’t know for sure – and would not be in any position to ask if they felt threatened.

Given the age of participants it may be someone did coerce them to do something they didn’t like but had not got the idea for this from porn. They may have got the idea from a sex tips feature in mainstream magazines like Cosmopolitan or Men’s Health, or from their peers, or from a TV show. Much of the mainstream media talks about anal sex, threesomes, oral sex etc so this could have just as easily informed the coercive behaviour.

I would have liked to see more focus on the nature of the coercive behaviour, why participants felt this was linked to porn, and if it wasn’t linked to porn where they felt the driving force behind the coercion came from. I say this not to dispute porn may play a part, but to identify exactly what is driving coercive behaviour as if it’s features in mainstream magazines or peer pressure we need to tackle this just as urgently as any perceived threat from porn.

The focus here seems to present young women’s relationship with porn as something that is done to them by young men. Young men are presented as the consumers of porn and use it to get ideas to coerce young women into doing things they don’t want. This does not explore where young women may like or dislike porn, or young men having a critical view of porn. It does not include young people who have little or no exposure to porn. It presents young women as passive, as victims. And as heterosexual. This is often taken up by the media who use debates on sexualisation or pornification to demonise or ignore young men and victimise and slut shame young women. In both cases we find it becomes a situation where adults (either academics, medics or journalists) speak for young people.

Multiple Sexual Partners – a problem in itself?

In their reporting of the results the authors say:
“While there may be a subset of girls who initiate or make self-actualized decisions about MPS participation during adolescence, it is important to consider whether social norms that encourage hypersexuality may contribute to expectations about sexual activity that make it very challenging for adolescents to resist engaging in MPS, even though they would not perceive their MPS participation as nonconsensual. The strong association between exposure to pornography, having been forced to do things that their sex partner saw in pornography, and MPS suggests that pornography may have influenced directly the sexual experiences of the girls in this sample, as has been found elsewhere. Importantly, even if participation in MPS is voluntary for some adolescents, it is crucial to know how this early experience shapes their sexual behavior trajectory and affects their lifetime risk for negative sexual, reproductive, and other health risk behaviors”.

This statement concerned me for three reasons. Firstly it suggests a kind of false consciousness idea that no young woman could ever really consent to a MSP experience. This is disingenuous to the participants in this study who stated they had willingly enjoyed a MSP. I suspect it betrays more of the researchers own values about MSPs.

Secondly it implies that even if a young woman does consent to a MSP this will be because pornography has informed her choice. Yet we know from the way they asked about porn they don’t really have strong enough data to make this conclusion. It would have been interesting to explore if mainstream media might have influenced their choice as well, but not to have decided for participants that they didn’t really know their own minds.

Thirdly there is the implication that having a MSP as a young person will inevitably lead to problems in future relationships. That seems like a leap beyond the data and also I suspect unfair to those who consensually, as adults, explore non monogamous relationships. Moreover we know many people who never have MSPs as young people (or adults) have problems in their relationships as adults. So to make this claim really requires more than a small sample of 24 participants who were asked some confusing questions. The researchers do say this ought to be followed up in future research and I don’t disagree there, but I hope they would be less judgemental and aware of sexual diversity in doing so.

Where are the experiences of young men?

There is no focus on young men in this paper and I think any study that is tackling coercion in heterosexual youth (as this paper appears to be doing) really needs to also study young men. The assumption is they are coercing young women, but are young men also feeling coerced in relationships? Is the pressure of masculinity leading to risky sexual behaviours or are they acting respectfully with their partners? Are the experiences of young gay or bi men different from their heterosexual peers? How do young men feel about being portrayed as sexually coercive? Are there issues around communication and consent we need to focus on with young men and women – and how should we be addressing this issue?

I worry media coverage will report this as though young men have been included or present young men as predators, when again the number of participants reporting negative experiences from forced group sex or pornography was low.

Should this paper have been published?

I critically appraised this paper, but does not mean I think it should be ignored. Had I been asked to review it for publication I would have asked for major revisions (based on the comments above). I find many Public Health studies on youth sexual behaviour (and sexual behaviour in adults) are well intentioned but often problematic due to heteronormative approaches. In this case this can be seen with the focus on heterosexual activity and underlying subtext that group sexual activity is never truly consensual and non monogamous relationships are not presented positively. This can alienate or pathologize many people inadvertently, while trying to help another group of people. A better awareness of thinking around diverse sexualities would help ensure generalisations about group sex among consenting adults are not pathologised while trying to tackle gang rape of teens.

I hope coverage of this will be responsible but fear it will not. I suspect it will be further used to demonise young people and worry the public. In turn ignoring the fact most young people are not engaging in group sex or coercive behaviour. In fact that most aren’t having sex at all. They may well have questions and worries about sex, but these may not be addressed while we focus on more sensational topics.

Creating a moral panic in which we shout a lot about the behaviour of young people but do very little to actually help them. And in cases where research is poor or ambiguous it may direct our efforts to help young people in the wrong direction.

[/box]

Once again, thank you FruitTaster.

You can read this and other articles by Dr. Petra on her website.

Hey parents, it's time to get talking to your kids

Talking to your kids about sex, that is!

I've made a few posts on this topic, and I've also written an informative, parent-focused article with tips and suggestions for parents: Sex Education for Parents.

That said, I have recently come across an excellent article written by Vanessa Cullins, Vice President for Medical Affairs at Planned Parenthood Federation of America. While Vanessa's article speaks particularly to parents of African American youth, what she says applies to virtually all parents, everywhere. I've taken this post from The Huffington Post - BLACKVOICES - as posted on October 21, 2011.

[box]

There is one thing I can't stress enough about sex: The need to talk about it. My previous post on Black Voices was about how hard it is for adults to talk about sex -- with each other! So you can imagine how tough it is for us to talk about it with our kids. But talk we must! According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, African Americans ages 13-24 account for 56 percent of new HIV cases, and nearly half of all African-American girls between 14 and 19 are infected with a sexually transmitted infection such as chlamydia, herpes, or HPV.

Now is the time to have that conversation. October is Let's Talk Month, during which several national organizations, including Planned Parenthood, focus on encouraging parents to talk with their children about sex and sexuality. It can absolutely make a difference. Studies have shown, for example, that teens who talk about sex with a parent are more likely to delay sex, have fewer sexual partners, and use condoms and birth control when they do have sex.

But do parents really talk with their kids about sex? Planned Parenthood recently partnered with the Center for Latino Adolescent and Family Health at the Silver School of Social Work at NYU to find out. Released today, our new, nationally representative poll shows that most parents are talking to their kids about topics related to sexuality, agree that they are influential in the decisions their children make about sex, and are overwhelmingly supportive of sex education in schools.

Importantly, the survey of 1,100 parents of 10 to 18-year-olds found that African Americans were more likely than any other group to say that they would like help talking to their kids about sex. That's encouraging news when you consider that 64 percent of all parents surveyed said their own moms and dads didn't do a very good job talking to them about sex. That more of us are asking for help in figuring out how to best prepare our kids to make good decisions about their sexual health provides us the opportunity to set examples for how all parents can be successful in helping their kids navigate these waters. However, the poll also found that fewer parents are talking with their kids about tougher, more complicated topics. More than a quarter aren't talking about how to say no to sex, and, while 94 percent of parents believe they are influential in whether or not their kids use condoms or other forms of birth control if they do have sex, only 60 percent are actually talking with their children about birth control. Why? Many of us are too embarrassed or uncomfortable. But we must get over that.

The consequences of not talking are simply too great. A recent study conducted by Essence and the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy of 1,500 African American teen boys and girls found that nearly half of the 13 to 15 year-olds surveyed don't talk with their parents about sex because they think it would be too awkward. Yet two-thirds say there would be fewer teen pregnancies if more kids were able to talk with their parents. Two-thirds also said they would wait longer before starting to have sex if they were able to have open and honest conversations about it at home.

How can you make it less awkward? Talk openly and honestly, answer your kids' questions, and seize opportunities to help them make smart decisions about their relationships and behavior. Parents can begin the discussion as early as age six or seven. When a child reaches puberty, it's important to discuss love, relationships, and respect, but it's also important to teach teens how to say no to sex and how to access and make decisions about birth control when they do become sexually active. Throughout the teen years, it's critical to help your child understand the consequences of certain behaviors, and to help them establish boundaries. Should your teen become sexually active, you can help ensure that the relationship is emotionally healthy and that your child protects her/himself from pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections.

It's also essential that parents set guidelines that will make teens less likely to engage in sexual behavior before they're ready, and role-play with your kids, especially daughters, about how to negotiate boundaries in certain situations in age-appropriate ways.

Most of all, we need to help our children build self-esteem so they will want to take care of themselves and respect others. Parents can do that by giving their kids credit for their talents and accomplishments, and encouraging them to have long-term goals, like college. Talking with our kids about their plans will not only strengthen our relationships with them, it will also allow us to help them consider how the risks they take today may affect their dreams for tomorrow.

Planned Parenthood is an excellent resource for information on how to talk with your kids about sex and sexuality. Visit www.plannedparenthood.org to find out more. So, let's talk about sex!

[/box]

After the Guelph Sexuality Conference

The Guelph Sexuality Conference was last week, and it was excellent.  Held at my Alma mater, the University of Guelph, the conference brought together a variety of people from across Canada and the US, all of whom share a passion for human sexuality.  I thoroughly enjoyed the conference; it was my first poster session opportunity and it was great to get some exposure for the workshop that I spent so much time developing.   Perhaps the most exciting part of the conference (for me!) was the change to meet and network with people who have a great deal of knowledge, skill and experience and are willing to share that expertise with me.

Many of the workshop sessions I chose to attend were heavily focused on providing sexual health education to youth.  This youth-focused approach gave me the opportunity to learn about what other people have done and how they have made their programs successful with youth audiences.  As well, I left the conference with the realization (or perhaps reminder is the better word) that there is a lot more to human sexuality than I have been addressing in my workshops.  My focus has been primarily on risk reduction, and the things we discussed in several of the workshops I attended have broadened my awareness.  Stay tuned for more information about this in my "workshop" section!

Now that the Guelph Sexuality Conference is over, it's time to get back to the real work.  If you are looking for more information about my workshops or the work that I have done, please do not hesitate to contact me.  I will continue to post updates as things come together.

Stay tuned!
Candice

A Sneak Peek!

The Guelph Sexuality Conference is a little more than a week away - time is whipping by!  I have prepared the slides for my poster, and I thought I'd share a little "sneak peek" of what I'm preparing!

In addition to the excitement of the Guelph Sexuality Conference, I'm pleased to announce that I have reached - and surpassed - the 1,000 website visitor milestone!  THANK YOU for your ongoing support and encouragement, and positive feedback.  It does not go unnoticed!

More soon!
Candice :)

Let's be clear ...

As I mentioned in my previous post, this week's workshop was focused on the topic of Communication - specifically in the context of interpersonal (intimate) relationships.  It was an interesting and challenging week; five new youth for a total of twelve and some interesting group dynamics made for a different session than I am used to.

I think that the challenge of managing this week's group while presenting the material in a clear and understandable way was a really good thing.  Being continually challenged ensures that I am also continually thinking, e.g. "How would I revise this next time?".  I have the opportunity to assess what is working well and what I would like to change, which is certainly important when developing any sort of program.

Yesterday I attended a conference with two others from the Youth Centre; it was a leadership and equity conference focused on GLBTQ students in high schools.  There were approximately 150 students, teachers and allies in attendance and we were there as community supporters and to provide information about the OYC as well as my workshop.  The other two tables were occupied by an RN from Simcoe Muskoka District Health Unit and PFLAG, of which I am a proud ally member.  It was an interesting experience, and I would liken it to the proverbial "small fish, big pond" scenario.  I met some really great people and exchanged a few business cards and I enjoyed the opportunity to be there.

Since this is National Youth Week, the OYC hosted a BBQ last night.  The hot dogs were absolutely delicious and the OYC was the busiest I have ever seen it.  What a successful week!

Coming up next week: Teen Pregnancy!

Ciao for now,

Candice

More than words ...

Tomorrow night's workshop is all about communication.

In planning this session, I've come to the conclusion that it would be very easy to put together an entire workshop (6, 8, 10 weeks) about communication all by itself.  There are so many things to think about and I've had to make some tough decisions about where to focus my attention and what I think will most benefit the youth.  I've decided to focus on the basics ... the components of communication (what you say, how you say it, body language), I-statements, and miscommunication.

What we say only accounts for 7% of the message we send.  More than anything, it's our tone of voice and body language that we use to communicate with others ... how we say it, and how we act when we say it.  That's what I want to impress upon the youth.  There will be plenty of role-playing, role-modeling, and discussion, and my good friend Scott will be assisting me with this session.  I'm really looking forward to it!

We Live in a Beautiful World!

Good morning, sunshine!

Last night's workshop was entitled "Sexual Diversity & LGBTQ" and featured a phenomenal guest speaker.  Seventeen youth (biggest turnout yet!), lots of dialogue and plenty of great questions made for a productive and meaningful workshop.  My guest speaker gave the youth an opportunity to listen and talk to someone who has "been there" and I am happy to say that they didn't hesitate to take full advantage of her experience and knowledge.

I opened the discussion with "What do you think of when I say 'sexual diversity'?".  We talked about what different words mean to different people and how easily words can hurt and offend.  We also discussed how difficult it can be to struggle with something so fundamental to who you are as your sexual orientation; my guest speaker talked about her experience with internalized homophobia and the process of accepting herself as someone who did not identify as heterosexual.  I, like many of the youth, felt inspired and awed to talk with someone who has come through so much and, despite everything, is such a compassionate and loving person.

It was absolutely great!

Last night was Week 8 ... only two more sessions left!  This workshop has been phenomenal ... far better than I had ever anticipated!  The feedback from both the youth and the OYC staff has been consistently positive, and I've noticed a major improvement in the willingness of the youth to open up and talk about sex and everything related to it.  What a huge success!

Next week is all about communication ... I-statements, communicating clearly, saying what you mean and being honest with yourself and your partner(s).  I will have another guest co-facilitator.  He is also an amazing individual and someone who I can count on to help me role-model and facilitate discussion with the youth.

Stay tuned!

The controversy continues ...

Well folks, it looks like the Ontario sexual health curriculum won't be changing anytime soon.  After a good deal of public resistance, McGuinty retracted his decision and decided to avoid this battle for the time being.

Largely as a result of all of this uproar, it's been an interesting week to be a sexual health educator!  I've been likened to a pedophile more than once (eek!) and have heard several people exclaim "They want to teach them anal sex in grade three!".  The first of these statements (that I am a pedophile) is more than a little silly so I will skip right to the second.

The second statement, that this curriculum involves teaching anal sex to eight year old children - is absolutely outrageous and completely inaccurate.  For one, the curriculum does not involve "teaching anal sex" to anyone.  It includes teaching about what anal sex is, and the risks associated with it, and about safer sex ... but not until the sixth or seventh grade.  Why, you may wonder, is it even necessary to teach our young people anything about anal sex?  The answer to that is both simple and complex -- because they need to know.  More and more young people are engaging in anal sex, and anal sex is a high risk behaviour.  Furthermore, many young people do not regard anal sex as "real sex" with "real consequences" so they don't take the steps necessary to protect themselves.

In addition, the topics that would be introduced in the third grade are basic and involve teaching about diversity ... "Some families have two mommies or two daddies".  This revision to the curriculum acknowledges the reality that homosexual, bisexual, transsexual, transgendered, queer, two-spirited (and anyone I've missed) people are people too.  These people have families and deserve as much recognition and validation as any other person or family.

I read something on facebook yesterday that I thought sums the situation up in an interesting and rather humerous way:

"So let me get this straight - Larry King is getting his 8th divorce, Elizabeth Taylor is possibly getting married for a 9th time, Jesse James and Tiger Woods are (having sex with) EVERYTHING, yet the idea of same-sex marriage is what is going to destroy the institution of marriage?? REALLY??"

I realize that many of those who have misinterpreted the intentions of the curriculum (see example above) have done so because of the way it has been portrayed in the media.  McGuinty, for one, could have handled things much more delicately than he actually did.  Of course, this kind of sensationalism is great at getting people watching and reading, so the media picked up on the fire and ran with it.  Add in those who are strongly enough opposed to pull their kids out of school and we have quite the interesting scene!

I will be watching to see what happens next.  I have seen the OPHEA guidelines for our sex ed curriculum, and I can speak from experience in saying that they are minimal and insufficient.  There are definitely those out there who feel similarly to me; that it's extremely important to teach kids a comprehensive sex-ed curriculum.  After all, the decisions kids make around sex can impact the rest of their lives.

A Fine Balance

Teaching sex ed is a balancing act.  You want to be upfront and honest with the youth, and get the information to them.  At the same time, you don't want to come across as using "scare tactics" or being too graphic.  Also, you need to know how much each group can handle.  This is when having a good rapport with your audience really comes in handy.

As a CYW (Child and Youth Worker), one of the central features of my education is developing the skills to establish relationships with young people.  The awesome part about taking all of these classes and practicing these skills in my labs is that it really works! The youth like me and respond well to me, and almost without realizing it, I can build positive relationships with them.  Yet another reason I love the CYW program :).

When it comes to teaching sex ed, you need to keep it practical and relevant.  While it's great that I know that, in Canada, "the overall reported rate of gonorrhea increased by  124.2% between 1998 and 2007" (Public Health Agency of Canada, 2009), what the youth need to know is that more and more people are getting gonorrhea, and most of them are between 15 and 24 years old - and this means that they are at high risk for contracting gonorrhea.  It's not enough to spew information and statistics at them and expect that they will absorb it all because you're such a great speaker and it's important information.  Bite-sized chunks, clear language, repetition, and fun are all necessary to making your lesson a success.

On that note, it's time for me to get back to next week's lesson!

Thanks for reading,

Candice

STIs, anyone?

This week's session: An Intro to Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs)

Oh the joys of STIs ... you may think I'm strange, but I really enjoy talking about STIs.  Well, I enjoy talking about pretty much ANYTHING related to sexuality or sexual health, but STIs are just plain fun!  They're icky, nasty, and just plain yuck and yet they are completely avoidable and preventable!

And that, my friends, is what I like about them.  I like being able to tell a young person that they can take control and they can protect themselves from this icky nastiness.

Now before I get too far, I want to clear something up:  In no way, shape or form am I putting down anyone who has ever contracted an STI; nor am I making any sort of statement or judgement regarding having STIs.  My emphasis is on the fact that, from a harm reduction standpoint, STIs are a way to give a visual and descriptive (and hopefully, ickifying) reminder of a person's ability to take steps to protect him/herself.

I'm not going to get into the facts and figures in this post ... my blog is just that - a blog - and I'll save the statistics for another page (more content coming soon!  keep checking!).  I am, however, going to tell you that this week's session was AWESOME, that I had 14 youth (yay!!), and that I know that some of them are already excited about next week!  So I am thrilled and, of course, very excited (are you surprised?).

I learned something very important this week: it's a good idea to have several "levels of difficulty" with the jeopardy-like questions I use in my activities ... cuz these youth were way too smart for the ones I had made up!  Time to take it up a notch!

Questions?  Email me!  Comments?  Write one here, or email me!  There's now a "contact" page and you can use that to send me an email, OR write to candice@sexedcentral.com

I can't wait to hear from you!!!

Candice :)

p.s. Don't forget to "Share the Love" below!!!