Let's talk about sex

It's been over 50 years since Alfred Kinsey blew the door off the bedroom with "Sexual Behavior in the Human Male," and its follow-up, "Sexual Behavior in the Human Female." Since then, the world has changed dramatically: civil rights, the feminist movement and the burgeoning of the gay rights movement. In Kinsey's legacy, he established the field of sex research and made IU the premier university for exploring human reproduction. However, despite all the progress we've made concerning sexual attitudes, some of the old attitudes persist. \nJust like in 1948, there are those people who still do not think Kinsey's work is worthwhile. Introduced into the Indiana House of Representatives in January, House Bill 1841 seeks to permanently end any state funding involved in the administration, operation or programs of the Kinsey Institute. \nThis is just one of many recent attempts to drastically limit or prevent the academic exploration of sex and reproduction. To detractors, the Kinsey Institute isn't a worthwhile institution because they don't see sex as a legitimate topic for discussion.\nInstead of acknowledging human beings as sexual creatures and learning from our actions, some legislators want to dismantle Kinsey's legacy.\nWhy is Kinsey still a controversial figure? To many people, the man should be punished for bringing private matters out of the home and into the forum. There's nothing more private than sex, and openly discussing it brings up nasty questions that many might not want asked. Critics of Kinsey feel a more open discussion would lead to greater reckless sexual activity among the populace, especially for teenagers. While there is nothing wrong with thinking sex is a private matter, denying any sort of discussion can only cause more problems than solutions.\nThe Kinsey Institute's mission states that "sexuality, gender and reproduction are fundamental elements of human life and prominent in the organization of human societies. As such, these are critically important areas for research, scholarly interpretation, instruction and debate." \nIn December 2004, the Washington Post reported on a study by Representative Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) which displayed the misconceptions we still have about teaching sex. \nWaxman examined 13 abstinence-based sex education curriculums in high schools across the country. Out of those 13, 11 curriculums contain "unproved claims ... or outright falsehoods" concerning human reproduction. Among the false or misleading facts of the congressional study: AIDS can be transmitted through sweat or tears, condoms fail 31 percent of the time and 10 percent of women who have abortions become sterile. All of these claims have been proven false by federal researchers. \nIgnoring what we've learned about reproduction will not make the problems go away. Since sexuality affects every person, we owe it to our culture to be as honest as possible about the situation. Programs that teach only abstinence and do not deal with contraception do not prevent the rise of teen sexuality. According to a Feb. 1 Reuters News Service article, A study by Texas A&M University showed abstinence-only programs have little or no impact in preventing teen sexuality; in fact, teens were more likely to have sex after receiving abstinence-only sex education than before taking the class.\nBy 1954, Kinsey had already touched topics long considered taboo by mainstream culture: Woman can receive sexual gratification. People's sexual orientations can change during their lifetimes. Both men and women masturbate. If House Bill 1841 passes, the progress of human sexuality will hit a roadblock.\nIt's almost criminal to give people the wrong information concerning sex. Even if House Bill 1841 does not pass -- and it seems unlikely that it will -- it is still indicative of the current climate in our country. We refuse to acknowledge the effect sexuality has in this country. Until we do, we will continue to repeat the mistakes of the past.