Author: M. G.
On April 16th the Ohio House Finance Committee in the US voted a new state budget that will significantly affect sexual education in schools. Representative Ron Amstutz - the Committee Chairman - provided a description where we can read that the measure will prohibit any sexual education course "that endorses non-abstinence as an acceptable behavior or promotes sexual gateway activity". Political language can be a bit tricky: what do they exactly mean with ‘sexual gateway activity'? In order to define this expression, the Committee used Ohio's Criminal Statues - a pertinent text to be used when you deal with sexual education: a sexual gateway activity is any "sexual contact with an erogenous zone". The measure we are talking about will allow student's parents to sue sexual education instructors who will dare to talk about anything connected with "touching of an erogenous zone of another, including without limitation the thigh, genitals, buttock, pubic region, or, if the person is a female, a breast, for the purpose of sexually arousing or gratifying either person".
I really don't know whether to laugh or to cry. I will use one of my favorite Ninette's slogans instead: "We are not politically correct, we are HUMANLY correct" to protect myself: what the f***?! Are you stupid? Statistics prove that pregnancies of young women increase as the level of sexual education lowers. Abstinence for teenagers is as realistic as a fairytale... How is it possible that these politicians do not understand that sex is a fundamental part of a youngster's life? Don't they have children of their own? Young people need sexual eduaction, because with or without it they will still have a sexual life, so it's better to keep them informed, no?
Ohio's administration really needs to find a progressive solution in order for religious beliefs - yes, it's all about that - to stop endangering teenagers' health.