Imagine if the Amish ran General Electric. If Jon Stewart suddenly became Commander-in-Chief. If Dick Cheney were in charge of, oh, I don’t know, fun.
What do all of these scary scenarios have in common? They all involve someone whose personal views get in the way of doing an important job. While the Amish are great at cheese and religion and Jon Stewart is hilarious (and Dick Cheney… has good aim?), it would be a supremely bad idea to have them run an institution whose goals they don’t agree with.
So why, for the love of anything at all, is anti-contraception, anti-abortion, anti-divorce, anti-CPS, generally evil Family Research Council member Susan Orr now in charge of family planning?
Did President George Bush suddenly grow a sense of humor or what? This is the woman who referred to contraceptives as part of “the culture of death.” She wrote an article called “Real Women Stay Married,” and it wasn’t for the Onion. She strongly supports abstinence-only education, which would be great except that, unfortunately, it doesn’t work.
All right, Penn, get started on that NSO sex-ed program, because with this woman in charge, incoming freshmen won’t have heard of the birds and the bees, much less the condoms and the pill. And with less federal money subsidizing birth control, prices at SHS will probably jump even higher.
Planned Parenthood, obviously, is in a state of pink panic. Sign their petition. That’s right, just by filling out a form, you can save low-income women (which includes many Penn students) from becoming this woman.
An RSS feed of The Spin is available
October 24th, 2007 at 1:33 pm
Your political jokes are old….never were funny and still aren’t.
November 11th, 2007 at 1:13 am
I’m sorry not to leave name or email - and I can’t seem to find your email - but it is an open website and it makes sense not to post it.
Are you allowed to go more in depth - look at both sides of an issue for SPIN? It just seems like this article is so one sided that you must not be allowed to - maybe not enough space?
So, I totally agree with you, it is way out of right field that Susan Orr would be put in charge – and just in terms of absolute culture shock I think it’s pretty crazy to think she’s going to be able to accomplish much in the turmoil. Also, I think it’s awful to withhold information about any failed program - but especially programs that are educating youth about identity! And some marriages need to be left and sometimes, the pill is the best answer.
It is, however, an odd day when educating youth about identity occurs primarily outside of families – which is also a response to your post “Under the Button” – we can acknowledge the reality that it’s necessary as well as the sense that it’s weird (please don’t tell me you think sitting in a class with some 20 odd peers and a teacher is a less weird environment to learn about sexuality than ongoing conversations with parents?). When over half of marriages end in divorce and there are billions of dollars being pumped into divorce lawyers and counseling – isn’t it time to do a little advocating for sticking through hard times? Is it really contestable that the fight for women’s sexual rights and freedoms has (doubtless unwittingly) contributed to aspects of our culture which have become commitment-phobic, responsibility-averse and downright self-centered? Why not note that condoms and the pill do in fact have failure rates too? That the side effects of the pill and abortions do include significantly increased chance of miscarriages (as in, even when you’d like to get pregnant)?
You write A LOT about sex and sexuality at Penn – I just think that it’s worth it for you to explore some opinions that differ from yours with an open mind – otherwise you make mean links (like the last one to the Duggar family). You don’t have to agree, but if you don’t explore difference with charity, you become as uninformed of reality as those you criticize.
November 11th, 2007 at 11:31 pm
Post = “If Alcohol Edu, Why Not Sex Edu?” - sorry, confusion