Last week's article in the New York Times about the rise of abstinence groups at top universities has garnered much attention - and debate. The controversy is not without cause: While the Daily recognizes the importance of respecting individual decisions about sexual conduct, the attitudes and information that many of these groups espouse is disturbing for several reasons. Respecting individual decisions means respecting those who choose to be abstinent, but it also means respecting those who choose not to be.
Choosing to remain abstinent is a difficult decision, especially in the hookup-heavy culture permeating college campuses. It's no surprise that those students who decide not to engage in sexual activity would want to band together, as they undoubtedly need support from each other in order to uphold their decisions and withstand criticism. It is not the existence of these groups that is upsetting, but rather their attitudes toward other, non-abstinent students.
A person's sexual activity is no one's business but his or her own. If it is not acceptable to persuade those who are abstinent to start having sex, then it is not acceptable to attempt the opposite.
The means by which collegiate abstinence groups, such as Harvard's True Love Revolution (TLR), attempt to sway students are unacceptable as well. Information on the group's Web site claims that "sexual activity and having multiple sexual partners is strongly associated with ... greater likelihood of maternal poverty, and higher rates of marital infidelity and divorce in future marriages."
These claims are attributed to the Heritage Foundation, a staunchly conservative group. According to the New York Times article, however, a spokeswoman for the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States said that "there's no legitimate research that says premarital sex has all these harmful consequences."
Besides using wrong or skewed information to convince others, True Love Revolution and other groups seem to espouse a condescending and judgmental attitude towards those who choose not to remain abstinent. They should remember and respect that while abstaining from sexual activity may make them happier or lead to more fulfilling relationships, the same is not necessarily true for others. Whether or not it was intended to be, TLR president Janie Fredell's statement that "it takes a strong woman to be abstinent" is insulting towards women who are sexually active, implying that they are somehow weak. Her comments that refer to oral sex as "disgusting and disrespectful" are tacit judgments towards all who choose to engage in such activity.
Perhaps even more upsetting than these judgments on others' sexual activities is the discriminatory nature of most abstinence groups. Despite claiming to want abstinence for all genders, these organizations tend to focus their efforts on women, implying that it is somehow more important for women to be virgins than men. Judging a woman's worth by her virginity is an outdated and sexist way of thinking that has no place in today's world.
These groups also discriminate against anyone who does not identify as a heterosexual male or female. By refusing to support gay marriage, they are demanding lifelong abstinence from gays - an unfair requirement that they are not asking of heterosexuals.
The Daily does not dispute the right of these groups to exist. We support everyone in their personal decisions and respect the choices they make. Those students in True Love Revolution and other abstinence organizations should learn to do the same.
