A Ban on Kissing? The Right-Wing Sexual Fears in New Abstinence Bills
May 6, 2012 alternet
Imagine a high school
teacher having to separate a smooching pair outside the classroom door
to protect herself from being sued for condoning “gateway sexual
activity.” Envision a sex education class where the mention of
homosexuality is forbidden by law and discussion of contraception, or
even puberty, is deemed unnecessary.
Photo Credit: Pink Sherbet Photography |
That’s
the world that would be created by a recent raft of abstinence
education bills in Tennessee, Utah and Wisconsin. These initiatives are
frightening — but, viewed the right way, they shine light on extreme
conservatives’ deepest, darkest fears about sex. They’re veritable
inkblot tests for right-wing sexual pathos.
This week saw the passage of a Tennessee billthat
has the usual aim of abstinence initiatives — to “exclusively and
emphatically” promote abstinence until marriage. But the bill ultimately
goes above and beyond the usual. It allows parents to seek damages in
court if a teacher “promotes gateway sexual activity” to their child.
It’s unclear what exactly “gateway sexual activity” is because the
measure defines it vaguely as “sexual contact encouraging an individual
to engage in a non-abstinent behavior.” Critics of the bill have
suggested that this could include everything from hand holding to french
kissing. The bill also proscribes “implicitly” promoting or “condoning”
gateway sexual activity (the latter could mean simply turning a blind
eye to it, hence the example above).
The
potential legal implications here are what’s most important, but
understanding the philosophy behind this view of “gateway” sexual
activity is crucial, too. The thinking here is transparent: Premarital
or extramarital sex, even physical affection, is like a drug —
all-consuming, addictive and life-destroying. Sen. Margaret Dayton, a
co-sponsor of the bill, actually said, as the Salt Lake Tribune paraphrased,
“Teaching children about contraception is comparable to telling kids
not to do drugs, then showing them how to ‘mainline’ heroin.” Here we
have that fundamental fear of sex, of the power it holds over us, and of
the possibility of losing ourselves (or our kids) to it.
Shortly before the “gateway” bill, Tennessee lawmakers advancedSenate Bill 49,
dubbed the “Don’t Say Gay Bill,” which stipulated that “no public
elementary or middle school shall provide any instruction or material
that discusses sexual orientation other than heterosexuality.” The
measure managed to get Senate approval but, after intense public and
legislative outcry, it was yanked by one of its sponsors before it faced
a final vote in the House. An abstinence bill in
Utah, which breezed through the state legislature but was ultimately
vetoed last month by the governor, similarly banned any discussion of the gays.
Wisconsin’s abstinence bill doesn’t prohibit the mention of
homosexuality, but it does overwrite a current law requiring that
teachers “use instructional methods and materials that do not promote
bias against pupils of any race, gender, religion, sexual orientation,
or ethnic or cultural background.”
Here
we have that classic conservative view of homosexuality as a corruptive
idea rather than an inherent identity; as a social virus — one that can
be inoculated against through silence (or, as some of us might prefer
to call it, censorship) — rather than an inborn reality. (What always
strikes me about this attitude is that it seems implicitly to hold that
gay sex is so awesome that just hearing about it will make
folks want to try it; otherwise, it wouldn’t pose such a threat, now,
would it?) It also gets at that right-wing sore spot: The possibility of
sex for love or pleasure, rather than procreation.
No comments:
Post a Comment