Our Deist Forefathers November 8, 2010

“Question with boldness even the existence of God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear,” wrote Thomas Jefferson to his nephew in 1787. Thomas Jefferson and the other early writers of the American colonies, understood the ideals behind the Enlightenment. The Enlightenment was, by definition, “a movement of intellectuals who popularized science and applied reason to human affairs” (Bishop 301). Reason – that, oh-so taken for granted trait that sets humans apart from the other primates – was the driving force behind the Age of Enlightenment, the impetus behind the movement’s key values, and is clearly seen in the United States Declaration of Independence.

The Age of Enlightenment began in the marketplace of ideas. As nobles rubbed elbows with the middle class in the salons of Paris (Bishop 301); as the upper and lower classes mingled in the coffeehouses of England (Jurich 5); as the ideas of the one were shared with the other and vice versa, “new ideas percolated” through them both (Bishop 301). Just as the “exploration and colonization” of the New World widened their physical horizons, this exposure to new people widened the horizons of the mind. The philosophy behind the Enlightenment was largely “[i]nspired by the Scientific Revolution” resulting in an increase in “intellectual inquiry” (301).

This newfound increase in questions and the tool of Science with which to answer them led to many key values, three of which were: 1) the belief that “politics and history” follow natural, universal laws just as gravity does; 2) the understanding that reason could bring a “prosperity” that superstitious beliefs could not; and 3) an understanding that the “chief barrier to human progress and happiness was not human nature,” as was taught by the Christian faith, but rather “social intolerance and injustice” (301).

The Declaration of Independence, the paper that formally severed ties between the thirteen colonies and their overseas oppressor, is a document which embraces these ideals of Enlightenment. With language such as “Laws of Nature” (retrieved from ushistory.org) regarding the rights of the people, the writers reveal their belief that politics are governed by natural, universal laws, not just the laws put in place by men. By the fact of their parting with the King, who the Christian church taught was appointed by God (Romans 13:1 “Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God.” NKJV), the writers revealed that they understood the second key value: reason trumps religious superstition. They did not see a god appointed king. They saw a king who was not doing his job. They looked at the facts, applied reason to their situation, and decided that a merit based, rather than religiously based, government would bring the colonies greater prosperity. They revealed their understanding of the third value with the famous sentence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” (ushistory.org). The traditional belief was that human nature, being corrupt, needed to be ruled by one appointed by god, be that a religious leader such as the Pope or a civic leader such as a king. The writers of the Declaration of Independence believed, in accordance with the Enlightenment, that the impediments to happiness, success, prosperity, and progress, rested not in a fundamental flaw in humans but in the flaws of the systems surrounding them. They understood that injustice, inequality, intolerance, and ignorance were the obstacles that needed to be overcome. It is clear from this early American document that its writers were writing in agreement with Enlightenment philosophy.

The Enlightenment had many impulses and factors affecting its development but the primary force was reason. It was reason that led to the Age of Enlightenment, reason which formed the key values, and reason that led Thomas Jefferson and others to draft the Declaration of Independence. As Benjamin Franklin said, “The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason,” and it is clear from the Declaration of Independence, that was not an option.

Works Cited

Bishop, Philip E.  Adventures in the Human Spirit. 6^th Ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2011.

Declaration of Independence. 24 October, 2010. <http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/&gt;.

Franklin, Benjamin. Poor Richard’s Almanack. 1758. 24 October, 2010. <http://atheistempire.com/greatminds/gmtext2.html#BenjaminFranklin&gt;.

Jefferson, Thomas. 1787. Letter to his nephew. 24 October, 2010. <http://atheistempire.com/greatminds/quotes.php?author=2>.

Jurrich, Nick. Espresso: From bean to cup. Seattle, WA: Missing Link Press, 1991.

Read a Fairy Tale, Find a Value September 29, 2010

Here is another brilliant essay from yours truly. Am I proud of this and the last few? No. Are they earning me an A in a class I detest? Yes. So here it is. Another brilliantly bullshitted piece of work from Becky “makes-shit-up-better-than-anyone” Walker. Without further ado, I give you “Read a Fairy Tale, Find a Value.”

Betrayal is how The Arabian Nights begins. It is a betrayal of such magnitude that it births the rest of the story into existence. The betrayal of one unfaithful spouse leads to the revelation of another, which leads to a King who seeks “refuge from women’s malice and slight” (7) by marrying anew each night and having his ‘wife’ executed each morn, least she dishonor him the next day. Three years later, this leads a young girl to offer herself as ‘a ransom for the virgin daughters of Moslems and the cause of their deliverance from his hands” (8). In order to forestall her death, Scheherazade, for that was the girl’s name, begins to tell tales, each leading to the next, and thus, The Arabian Nights is told. Every culture has values and those values are revealed in the culture’s literature. Just as one will find that the Western European culture values childhood by reading the stories of Hansel and Gretel or Little Red Riding Hood, or beauty by reading Sleeping Beauty or Snow White, so will reading through the introduction and the first two tales Scheherazade tells the King, The Fisherman and the Jinni and The Ensorceled Prince, reveal to the observant reader values which are important to the Islamic culture; the values of faithfulness, justice, and cleverness.

It is clear from the very beginning that faithfulness is highly valued in the Islamic culture. Before the tales truly begin, we are introduced to two kings whose wives are both unfaithful. Shah Zaman, upon seeing the adultery of his queen, was overcome with “excessive grief” (2) and his health began to suffer. When his brother, King Shahryar, had his wife’s unfaithfulness revealed to him, he cried, “By Allah, life is naught but one great wrong” (5) and together the brothers left their kingdoms until they could find another who shared their “calamity” (5). After finding such a one (who, the kings said, had suffered a “greater mishap” (7) than they), King Shahryar returned to his kingdom with the aforementioned vow which led Scheherazade to tell her tales. The second of her tales features yet another example of unfaithfulness. Again a man, this time a young Prince, had been “cockolded” by his wife. When he saw the betrayal with his own eyes, he was mad with grief. Repetition of a theme reveals its importance and thus, it is revealed that in the Islamic culture, as in many others, unfaithfulness is a thing to be dreaded and avoided while faithfulness is something to be valued and valued highly.

As faithfulness is valued, unfaithfulness is met with justice, another value the Islamic culture merits highly. Shah Zaman enacts the death penalty upon his adulterous wife and her lover immediately upon discovery. King Shahryar commands his Wazir to take the Queen and “smite her to death for she hath broken her plight and her faith” (7). The young Prince who was betrayed by his wife is unable to enact his own justice as she, through dark magic (another betrayal, this time of Allah himself), turned his lower body to stone. However, in his stead stands a Sultan, who upon learning of his plight, promotes the cause of justice by restoring the Prince to health, his people to humanity, and his kingdom to its form, and also by bringing the sorcerous to justice by ending her life. These punishments, harsh as they are by modern standards, show how deeply the Islamic culture values justice.

Unfaithfulness leads to justice and justice to the manner in which it is enacted and that is through cleverness. Cleverness, Arabian Nights reveals, is also seen as a virtue. It is, perhaps, valued higher than the others as its theme is repeated more often – in every tale, in fact. It first appears in the introduction. The two kings, while searching for one who had shared the injustice of infidelity, come upon a Jinni who has stolen away a woman on her wedding night and has kept her locked away at the bottom of the sea so that no man may have her but himself. In retribution to such a heinous act, she has taken over 570 lovers saying, “Of a truth this Ifrit bore me off on my bride night…that I might remain chaste and honest, quotha! that none save himself might have connection with me. But I have lain under as many of my kind as I please” (7). Scheherazade, before going into the King’s chamber, told her sister, “Note well what directions I entrust to thee!” and proceeds to instruct her in how to convince the king into letting Scheherazade tell a story, “delectable and delightsome” (12). Her first tale is The Fisherman and the Jinni, which tells of a fisherman who finds a stoppered bottle while he is fishing. He removes the stopper, releasing a Jinni who had sworn to kill whomever opened the bottle. The fisherman pleads and begs the Jinni to spare his life but the Jinni is adamant that the fisherman must die. It is only when the fisherman is able to trick the Jinni into returning to the lamp, using the old “How didst though fit into this bottle which would not hold thy hand…I will never believe it until I see thee inside with my own eyes” trick, that he is saved (16). The Sultan, who released the young Prince from his curse in The Ensorceled Prince, also uses trickery to enact justice. He pretends to be a slave (the infirm lover of the adulterous woman), convincing the sorcerous queen to restore the Prince to his previous mobility, the people of the Prince’s kingdom to their rightful forms (having previously turned them into fish) and his kingdom also to its rightful form (from a pond back into a kingdom), before revealing his trickery and ending her treacherous life. Thus, in each story, cleverness, or ingenuity, plays a pivotal role, which communicates to us how highly it is valued.

Faithfulness. Justice. Cleverness. Three values which, as revealed by The Arabian Nights, are highly regarded in Islamic culture. Just as a pure heart and kindness to strangers is a cultural value seen in Grimm’s Fairy Tales, so are faithfulness, justice, and cleverness seen as cultural values throughout the tales of The Arabian Nights.

Works Cited:

Sir Richard Burton. The Arabian Nights. 21 September, 2010. <http://www.library.cornell.edu/colldev/mideast/arabnit.htm#BULL> (page numbers come from cutting and pasting into OpenOffice, Font: Times New Roman, Font size: 12)

Romerican? September 27, 2010

Pantheon

The Roman empire may have fallen but many examples of their architecture and sculpture remain. The United States of America, a living and breathing nation, has many architectural and sculptural examples in its capital of Washington D.C. There are many similarities between the way Romans and Americans created art; similarities of style and form, similarities in statuary, and similarities in the symbolism within. There are as many differences between them as well. Looking at the art of these two powerful nations will shed light on some of the similarities and differences between them.

Thomas Jefferson Memorial

Looking first at style and form in architecture, the Pantheon in the Roman capital city of Rome, one of the more iconic buildings in the world, comes foremost to mind. Copied for centuries by architects the world over, it was the inspiration that blossomed into the Thomas Jefferson Memorial in Washington D.C. nearly two thousand years after the Pantheon’s creation. Both feature domed roofs and drum-like supporting walls. The Pantheon was originally on a pedestal but the surrounding land has crept up and access to the Pantheon is now at street level. The Jefferson Memorial is also elevated by a series of steps. Pillars support the triangular pediment of both buildings, though the Pantheon has three rows of pillars, eight across the front and two rows of four behind, while the Memorial has two rows, eight in front and four in back. The D.C. Monument also has 26 columns surrounding the “drum” of the building and four more at each of the monument’s entrances while the Pantheon’s drum is free from adornment. Aside from the aforementioned differences, there are a few others as well. The Pantheon’s dome features an opening at its apex, called the oculus, which is open to the elements while the building itself is not. The memorial, on the other hand, features a solid dome but the building itself is open to the elements. The Pantheon’s spheric interior is not repeated in the memorial nor is its grand scope. The two buildings, one inspiring the creation of the other, have many similarities and as many differences.

Augustus of Primaporta

Lincoln Statue in the Lincoln Memorial

Moving from buildings to statues, specifically statues crafted to represent and honor specific real people, we find more similarities than differences between Roman and American statuary. Roman statues were lifelike, accurately representing the human form, often recognizably the person they were supposed to be. Augustus of Primaporta, c. 20 B.C. and the bust of Cicero, 1st century B.C. both show “the Roman era’s keen interest in realism” (Bishop 83). The statue of Abraham Lincoln featured in the Lincoln Memorial and the equestrian statue of Ulysses S. Grant are also very realistic (if larger than life) and excellent portrayals of realism. Augustus of Primaporta, the bust of Cicero, and the statue of Lincoln were all sculpted from marble and Grant from bronze. The Romans did create sculptures from bronze but as a more reusable medium than marble, fewer have survived to be studied by modern peoples. The above American statues were created to honor men who had lived and served their country. The Roman statues, on the other hand, were created during the lifetime of their subjects. This is an important difference between Roman and American statuary of real people. There are similarities and differences, as well, in why Roman and American artists created sculpture and architecture the way they did.

The Washington Monument

Comparing the Column of Trajan with the Washington Monument reveals much about what motivated the two cultures to erect stone sculptures in their capital cities. The Column of Trajan was designed by Apollodorus but was commissioned by the Roman Senate (wikipedia) and was constructed during Trajan’s lifetime,

Column of Trajan

between 106-13 (Bishop 75). The Column features a spiral of sculptural pictures which tell an uninterrupted story – that of Trajan’s conquest over the rebelling Dacian forces. It served as a powerful propaganda tool for “the gold from  Dacian mines funded public welfare and imperial construction during Trajan’s reign” (Bishop 77). The Washington Monument, while much larger in scale (over 555 feet tall to the Column’s 125 feet including the pedestal) (National Park Service), is perhaps more modest in motive. The monument was built almost 100 years after the life of George Washington, the first President of the United States, had ended. It was built not to glorify a living god-man but to honor the memory of a good man. The Column of Trajan’s pictorial sculptures showcase the suppression of rebel forces. The Washington Monument memorializes the victorious rebel general. The Roman emperor was believed to be a god and, just as lavish and opulent cathedrals are built “for” god(s), so buildings and monuments were built “for” the emperor. American leaders, on the other hand, having been chosen by the people, are seen as a reflection of the people and, as such, are honored, not for their status as “gods” but for the characteristics that Americans like to imagine themselves as having – independent, self-sufficient,  freedom-loving. Perhaps, there are not so many differences after all. The Roman emperors built to honor themselves as gods and the American people build to honor themselves through the men they have chosen to lead them and the ideals they espouse to have.

The dreams of the Roman leaders – to bring the entire world under Roman rule – largely remained unfulfilled but their architecture and sculpture lives on. Only time will tell if the American dream of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all will come to fruition or not and only time will tell if America’s contributions to architecture and sculpture will be as lasting. As shown, there are many similarities between the two cultures’ architecture and sculptures and there are many differences. There are not, however, as many differences as might be expected for two cultures separated by nearly 2000 years.

We are all naked . . . September 23, 2010

Humanity has always had one thing in common: under our clothes we are all naked. Throughout the ages artists have drawn, chiseled, shaped, cast, painted, sculpted and in every conceivable way represented the naked human form. The artistic rendering of the nude has changed over the centuries, from the symbolic sculpture of early humanity to the lifelike sculptures of the classical era and from the near photorealism of the Renaissance to the abstractions of artists such as Picasso. A closer look at the the ancient sculptural nudes Kouros, Riace Warrior, and Praxiteles’s Aphrodite of Cnidos and the modern painting Venus by Fernando Botero, will reveal some crucial differences between the views of the ancient world and those of the modern world. Differences include the setting of the nude, the artistic representation of the human body, and what the nude reveals about society’s views on sexuality.

The stiff formality of the ancient nude Kouros, sculpted around 590 BC, contrasts sharply with the stark informality of Botero’s Venus, painted in 1989. Kouros stands stiffly, “fists clenched,” marking or guarding a tomb or temple (Bishop 45), while Venus stands relaxed, her hands loose and busy while she goes about her mundane, everyday tasks. Kouros’s hair is “geometric” and his body rigidly symmetrical (Bishop 45), the epitome of order and ‘correctness.’ Venus, on the other hand, has her pair pulled back in a relaxed, informal manner. Her body is not presented symmetrically as she stands unevenly and is turned somewhat away from the viewer. Clothing drapes out of an open bureau drawer and her bed is not made. She is, in contrast to Kouros, not especially orderly. Kouros, whose creation served a very formal purpose, is presented very formally – his hair orderly, his body straight and symmetrical – whereas Venus, whose creation serves no higher purpose than the pleasure of the artist and the viewer, is presented in a ‘slice of life’ manner – relaxedly preparing for the day ahead.

Turning our eyes to the Riace Warrior of mid-5th century BC (photo on page 55 of Bishop), and comparing it to Botero’s Venus, we see how the artist’s representation of the human body reveals something about how they (and by association their society) view the human body. Riace Warrior is lean, his muscular body well defined and apparently, ready for action. In contrast, Venus is round and soft, her muscles buried under ample flesh. Her shape is over exaggerated so much so that she would not fit on the bed pictured in the background. The Riace Warrior is perfectly crafted, from the curls of his head to the toenails on his feet. Whereas every curl is defined on Riace Warrior, Venus’s hair is fuzzy and unclear. Her hands, and the rest of her for that matter, are free of wrinkles and lines, creating a much softer, laid-back quality to the art. Though now missing, the Riace Warrior was equipped with a sword and shield, the weapons of a warrior. It is clear that a warrior’s body – strong, capable, ready – was very important to society at the time Riace Warrior was cast. So important, in fact, that the sculptor saw fit to equip this warrior with sword and shield but not armor. Botero, on the other hand, said he wanted to “create sensuousness through form” (Faerna) and he does so. However, in doing so, he reveals that society no longer needs a utilitarian reason to honor the body. The human body is now seen to be for pleasure above purpose, alluding perhaps to an increase in hedonism. By recognizing these differences, we can see that the warrior ethos of 5th century BC has given way, perhaps, to the hedonistic pleasures of the modern era.

Differing levels of hedonism may explain some of the differences between Praxiteles’s Aphrodite (sculpted around 350-340 BC) and Venus and what they reveal about society’s views of sexuality and the ‘place’ of sex in society. Looking first at Aphrodite, she stands, legs crossed slightly, her hand covering her groin. She has just removed her robe as she prepares for her bath (wikipedia.com). Venus, on the other hand, stands with one leg brought forward and her arms over her shoulders, making no effort to hid her groin. She is nude, not because she is getting dressed or undressed, preparing for a bath or some such task requiring a state of undress. She is nude, apparently, for the sheer pleasure in being nude. Aphrodite’s hair, which it is believed would originally have been gilded (Bishop 54) is pulled neatly away from her face and coiled at the base of her neck, suggesting a certain amount of reserve. Venus, on the other hand, sports full bangs and unrestrained hair cascades down her back, suggesting an increase in personal freedom. Aphrodite’s gaze captures a hint of the demure and the diffident. She is nude, save for the arm band and jewelry she may have been adorned with originally (Bishop 54), not for sake of pleasure but of necessity. It would indicate a certain hesitancy to fully expose oneself, a feeling of reserve in regard to sexuality. She does not stand as proud and unselfconscious as the male nudes of the same time frame.  Venus is unadorned, save for a simple hair ribbon and a pair of shoes, yet her nudity seems much more natural and comfortable, suggesting a more open attitude towards sexuality. Venus’s lack of shame or demurral appearance would also suggest a more equitable sexual relationship between male and female. Both pieces of art center around a nude female and yet are wildly different because the worlds they sprang from are wildly different. While all of a society’s views can not be seen in two snapshots of life such as these two pieces provide, by comparing them, we can see some broad differences in how sexuality is viewed.

Perhaps no amount of study will ever reveal all the differences between the ancient cultures and more modern cultures but the art that a society produces does bring some revelation. From the stylized and simplified Kouros to the strong and sturdy Riace Warrior, from the demure and diffident Aphrodite to the supple sensuousness of Venus, we see that what artists produce is, at least in part, due to how society views the object that is the subject of their art.

Works Cited

Bishop, Phillip E. Adventures in the Human Spirit. 6th Ed. Upper Saddle River:  Prentice Hall, 2011.

Faerna, Jose Maria. “Fernando Botero: The Praise of Opulance.” 9 Sept. 2010 <http://www.all-art.org/art_20th_century/botero2.html&gt;.

Wikipedia. “Aphrodite of Cnidus.” 9 September, 2010 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aphrodite_of_Cnidus&gt;.

Home Birth and Reproductive Rights April 16, 2010

by Becky Walker

On February 6, 2008, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists released their statement on home births and reiterated their “long-standing opposition to home births” (ACOG 1). The American Medical Association, at their 2008 annual meeting, made a statement of support to the ACOG’s claim that the safest place for birth was within a hospital or birthing center (which meets their standards), to the extent of supporting legislation stating such (AMA). The American College of Nurse Midwives believes that “[e]very family has the right to the birthing environment of their choosing” (ACNM 1), including the home. Great Britain’s Royal College of Obstetricians and Gyneacologists (RCOG) and the Royal College of Midwives (RCM) “support home birth for women with uncomplicated pregnancies,” finding no reason it should not be offered to low-risk clients (Cresswell 1) as does the American Public Health Association (APHA), and the World Health Organization (WHO). The Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada, while not taking a specific stand on home birth, calls for more research but considers it the woman’s decision as to where to labor and birth (CBC 1).

Despite the ACOG’s claim that home birth places undue risk upon the mother and child, there is little conclusive evidence to support such a claim. As they themselves say, “…studies comparing the safety and outcome of births in hospitals with those occurring in other settings in the US are limited and have not been scientifically rigorous” (ACOG 1). This is due largely to the ethical concerns of randomized control trials and their infeasibility (Johnson and Daviss 4). Large prospective studies are the best available method of compiling data and the studies that have been done have come to contradictory conclusions in regard to mortality and morbidity. When the studies that have been done are looked at (weakness accounted for) along with the many other factors effecting the decision of where to birth, the evidence is such that every woman must continue to have the freedom to choose where and with whom she will labor and deliver. There simply is not evidence for restricting a woman’s right to this reproductive choice.

There are, as mentioned earlier, studies that show home birth to have a higher risk of adverse outcomes than a hospital birth. Dr. Michael H. Malloy’s study is one such study. Jill Stein, reporting on the study for Reuters Health Information, tells that Malloy is a professor of neonatology at the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston. He did a study comparing adverse outcomes among place of birth and birth attendant. He compared hospital birth with doctors, Certified Nurse Midwives (CNMs) and other nurse-midwives, birth center births with CNMs, and home births with CNMs and other nurse-midwives. He found the risk of neonatal mortality was two times higher for home births overseen by a CNM than for hospital births overseen by a CNM (Stein 1). Home birth with a nurse-midwife other than a CNM was the highest risk at 1.77 per 1000, home birth with a CNM next at 1.035 per 1000. Hospital birth overseen by a CNM was 4.96; other nurse-midwife 4.03; and doctor 6.77. Birth center with a CNM was 6.32 per 1000 (Stein 1).

However, there are also studies that have found the mortality rate of home birth to be comparable to that of hospital birth. Kenneth C. Johnson and Betty-Anne Daviss conducted a large prospective study of planned home births in North America. They looked at 5,418 woman who planned on delivering at home and found the mortality rate of 1.7 per 1000 low risk pregnancies to be consistent with mortality rates of low risk hospital births (Johnson & Daviss 1-2). Dr. Patricia Janssen, from the University of British Columbia, et al. conducted a study which compared the outcomes of 2,889 planned home births attended by regulated midwives, 4,752 planned hospital births with the same group of midwives and 5,331 planned hospital births attended by physicians. Janssen et al. found comparable mortality rates between home and hospital births, about 2 per 1000, though the rate of deaths per 1000 births in the first month of life was quite different: .35 for home birth, .57 for midwife attended hospital birth, and .64 for hospital birth attended by a physician (CBC 1-3).

Malloy attributes his findings on infant mortality to correlating Apgar scores (an Apgar score is the measurement of certain attributes – Appearance, Pulse, Grimace, Activity, and Respiration – to “access the health of newborn children immediately after birth.” A score under 3 is critically low, 4-6 is low, and 7-10 is normal (wikipedia)). Apgar scores of less than four were eight times higher for CNM home births than for CNM hospital births (Stein 1). Malloy suggests the low Apgar scores are the “casual pathway” to the higher rate of neonatal death through “asphyxiating conditions at birth that are not as easily handled in the home environment” (qtd. in Stein 1).

Yet, Ursula Ackermann-Liebrich et al., authors of a prospective study which matched Swiss women planning a home birth with comparable women planning a hospital birth, found that the one minute Apgar scores were higher for the hospital birth group (8.03) than for the home birth group (7.78). However, at the five minute mark and at the ten minute mark, the home birth group’s Apgar scores (9.26 and 9.7 respectively) were higher than the hospital birth group’s scores (9.01 and 9.48) (Ackermann-Liebrich 7). Janssen et al. found that home birth infants, compared to midwife attended hospital birth infants, were less likely to need resuscitation or oxygen therapy after 24 hours (.23 times less likely) and also less likely to “have aspirate meconium (inhaling a mixture of their feces and amniotic fluid)” (.45 times less likely) (CBC).

As seen, mortality rates and rates of other adverse outcomes alone can not be used to show one place of birth as superior to another. What then motivates a woman to consider birthing at home if there’s not concrete evidence that it is safer? What motivates the ACOG and the AMA to make such a strong stance against home birth without solid research to back them up?

The ACOG defends their stance against home birth by saying, “Complications can arise with little or no warning” (ACOG 1) and hospitals are designed to deal with those complications – especially those complications which can quickly become emergencies. From IV fluids to electronic fetal monitoring, from epidurals and spinal blocks to cesarean sections, hospital birth has “technological advances” over home birth (Raymond 9-10). These technological advances may be what caused Malloy’s study to show the safest place to give birth is in the hospital with a CNM (Stein 1). Complications can and do arise quickly but home birth practices have shown that “most complications can be anticipated in enough time to transfer the mother/infant to the hospital with enough time to deal with the complication successfully” (Raymond 3). A receptive and non-hostile environment is essential to quickly caring for complications that require a transfer to the hospital (ACNM) and a delay in the process “may have serious consequences” (Cresswell 2).

The occurrence of complications may be lessened by the reduction in obstetric interventions. A desire to have fewer interventions is a big reason why some women choose home birth and the research solidly backs that up. Interventions among the home birth group in Janssen et al.’s study occurred with much less frequency than among the hospital group, even among women transferred to the hospital, suggesting the lowered rate may be due to the mother’s determination to not have them. Those having home births were .32 times less likely to have electronic fetal monitoring and .41 times less likely to have an assisted vaginal delivery (CBC). Johnson et al. found the same occurrence with an even greater difference. They looked at electronic fetal monitoring, episiotomy, cesarean, and vacuum extraction between planned home births and planned hospital births among low-risk women. Home birth had rates of 9.6%, 2.1, 3.7, and .6 respectively while the hospital group had rates of 84.3%, 33, 19, and 5.5 respectively. Johnson and Daviss reported electronic fetal monitoring rates of 9.6% for the home birth group and 84.3% for the hospital group; episiotomy: 4.7% home birth, 33% hospital births; forceps: 1% home birth, 2.2 hospital; vacuum extraction: .6% home birth, 5.2% hospital birth; cesarean section: 3.7% home birth, 19% hospital births (Johnson and Daviss 4).

Women may be motivated to consider home birth because they wish to have fewer interventions. As Tina Raymond explains, there are pros and cons to every intervention (9). One of the cons is the increased “risk of subsequent complications for the mother” (Ackermann-Liebrich 8). Ackermann-Liebrich et al. did not find the advantages of lower intervention (and subsequent lower rate of complications) to be outbalanced by an increase of adverse neonatal outcomes (8), leading the researches to the conclusion that “home delivery has advantages over hospital delivery” because of the lower rate of interventions and increased comfort of the mother (Ackermann-Liebrich 9). Janssen et al. came to similar conclusions: “Women planning birth at home experienced reduced risk for . . . interventions measured and similar or reduced risk for adverse maternal outcomes” (CBC 1).

As the RCOG and the RCM state, physical safety is not the only factor. Emotional and psychological health should also be considered when making the choice of where to give birth (Cresswell). Increased comfort and relaxation are two such reasons. As Raymond urges, “ . . . relaxation should not be underestimated when considering the safety of home birth” (9-10) and home is, generally, more relaxing and comfortable than the hospital, regardless of how “home-like” a hospital has attempted to be. Having only the people she has chosen present and not being distracted by nurses bustling about or by other laboring women, leaves a woman free to focus on her own labor (Raymond 9-10). Being able to move as one wishes greatly increases a woman’s comfort as well. In the Swiss study, “. . . ninety per cent [sic] of women delivering at home reported that they could always move freely” as opposed to only 57% of those birthing in the hospital (Ackermann-Liebrich 8).

Women having a home birth are also freer to choose what position they will birth in. Midwives in the home environment, as opposed to doctors in the hospital environment, monitor labor, help the mother change positions, and, when it is time, “catch” the baby from whatever position suits the mother best and not what is most convenient for the midwife (Lake et al. 1). Fifty-nine percent of the women in the home birth group reported that they were able to choose their birthing position, according to Ackermann-Liebrich et al (8). In the hospital group only 35% were allowed to choose the position they wished to birth in. They also found that while mothers in the hospital typically gave birth while lying down, women at home typically gave birth on elbows and knees, standing, or sitting (6) – mostly vertical positions in which labor is aided by gravity.

It is this autonomy that draws suspicion upon the ACOG and the AMA’s motivation in their drive for legislation limiting home birth. The ACNM, the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada, the UK maternity policy and the ACOG all agree that a woman has the right to make her own choices in regard to her pregnancy and birth but only the ACOG does not acknowledge the right of a woman to choose home as her place of birth. The ACOG and the UK maternity policy both state that birth is a normal life event but the UK maternity policy goes on to say that a mother’s experience of having “choice and control” throughout the birthing process can have a substantial, positive effect on her children’s healthy development (Cresswell 3).

By coming out against home birth the way they have, proclaiming their lack of support to those that provide home birth and partnering with the AMA to:

support state legislation that helps ensure safe deliveries and healthy babies by acknowledging that the safest setting for labor, delivery and the immediate post-partum period is in the hospital, or a birthing center within a hospital complex, that meets standards jointly outlined by the AAP and ACOG, or in a freestanding birthing center that meets the standards of the Accreditation Association for Ambulatory Health Care, The Joint Commission, or the American Association of Birth Centers (AMA 15).

the ACOG is, by default, limiting a woman’s reproductive choices. Some physicians fear the ACOG’s statements could be used to make having a home birth more difficult if not impossible.

Distrust between home birth providers and the hospitals and doctors they must, in order to remain within the ACNM guidelines of safe home birth, have as a back-up plan is the first way choice is limited. If through their statements, the ACOG and the AMA, very influential organizations, convince most doctors and nurses to see home birth as irresponsible and a woman’s choice to have a home birth as her simply following a trend or “cause célèbre” (ACOG 1), they will resent being called upon to pick up the pieces. Hostility between home birth practitioners and the medical establishment may create delays in the transfer process and is not going to achieve “best practice” (Cresswell 2). As such, women’s choices will become limited.

Secondly, the ACOG’s statement against home birth may, as Dr. Stuart Fischbein, a dissenting member of the ACOG, fears, affect insurance companies and their willingness to provide coverage to midwives who provide home births and to the doctors who oversee those midwives (Hunter 2). If those doctors are unable to get insurance or unable to get affordable insurance, they will cease to provide support to home birth providing midwives. The midwives, in turn, will either stop providing home births or practice home birth without a doctor’s support, stepping outside the safety guidelines. If the midwife is unable to get insurance for herself, she will either cease to provided home births or move her practice underground, further removing herself from the guidelines of safety. A woman’s choices becomes limited either because her midwife is no longer practicing or is practicing unsafely.

Thirdly, although the ACOG does not call for a ban against home birth, Dr. Fischbein fears that is the direction they are headed (Hunter 2). The AMA, pledging support to proposed legislation, “Resolution 205,” supports the ACOG’s position that home birth is unsafe. Gregory Phillips, ACOG spokesman, said that criminalization of home birth is not the goal (Hunter 2) and yet, as Aina Hunter asks, if not seeking criminalization, why “legislation?” Why not just issue a public service statement (Hunter 2)? Dr. Erin Tracy, in an interview with ABCNEWS.com, said that though the AMA is calling for legislation, there was no “talk of criminalizing women who have home birth” (Hunter 3). What is also not mentioned is whether they plan on not criminalizing those who provide home births. Criminalization of midwives who provide home birth would effectively limit women’s access to home birth.

As Lake et al. writes, anti-home birth legislation flies in the face of the “right to privacy, to bodily integrity, and the right of every adult to determine her own health care” (Lake et al. 2). The ACOG and the AMA’s actions prompted Dr. Andrew Kataska to write to the ACOG board saying, “If ACOG and the AMA are passively-aggressively trying to coerce women into having hospital births by trying to legally prevent the option of home birth, then their actions are a frontal assault on women’s autonomy” (Hunter 3).

Women must be allowed to maintain their reproductive freedoms. The ACOG does not have sound reasons for their claims, beyond scare tactics in an attempt to restrict access to more care options. There is simply not clear evidence that home birth places mother and child at higher risk of adverse outcomes and the ACOG’s willingness to limit a woman’s access to reproductive choices casts a shadow of doubt as to their altruistic intentions.

References:

Ackermann-Liebrich, Ursula. Et al., Home Versus Hospital Deliveries: Follow up study of matched pairs for procedures and outcome. September 1996. British Medical Journal 31, March 2010 <http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/313/7068/1313>

American College of Nurse Midwives. Position Statement: Home Birth. Dec. 2005. p. 1. American College of Nurse Midwives. March 27, 2010 <http://www.midwife.org/siteFiles/position/homebirth.pdf>.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG News Release: ACOG statement on Home Births. 6 Feb. 2008. American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. 27 March 2010 <http://www.acog.org/from_home/publications/press_release/nr02-06-08-2.cfm>.

American Medical Association. http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/38/a08resolutions.pdf, retrieved 4 April, 2010.

American Public Health Association. Increasing Access to Out-of-Hospital Maternity Care Services through State-Regulated and Nationally-Certified Direct-Entry Midwives. 1 Jan. 2001. American Public Health Association. 27 March, 2010 < http://www.apha.org/advocacy/policy/policysearch/default.htm?id=242>.

CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Company). Home Birth with Midwife Safe as Hospital. 31 Aug. 2009. CBC News. 31 March 2010 <http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2009/08/31/midwife-home-births.html>.

Cresswell, JL, and Stephens, E. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the Royal College of Midwives Joint statement No. 2: Home Births. April 2007. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the Royal College of Midwives. 25 March, 2010 <http://www.rcog.org.uk/womens-health/clinical-guidance/home-births>.

Lake, Ricki., Block, Jennifer., Epstein, Abby. Huffingtonpost.com. 18 June 2008. Docs to Women: Pay No Attention to Ricki Lake’s Home Birth. 26 March 2010 <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ricki-lake-jennifer-block-and-abby-epstein/docs-to-women-pay-no-atte_b_107845.html>.

Hunter, Anita. “Are Home Births Dangerous?” abc News 11 June 2008. 19 March 2010 <http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=5340949>.

Johnson, Kenneth C., and Daviss, Betty-Anne. “Outcomes of planned home births with certified professional midwives: large-prospective study in North America.” British Medical Journal n.d. 23 March 2010 <http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/330/7505/1416?ehom>.

Raymond, Tina. “Home Birth, Birth Center, or Hospital Birth: How to Help Your Clients Choose.” International Journal of Childbirth Education (May 1992): page 9-10. 17 March 2010 <http://proquest.umi.com.ezproxy.umuc.edu/pqdlink?RQT=306&TS=1269770266&clientId=8724>.

Stein, Jill. “Midwife-Attended Home Births Less Safe Than In-Hospital Deliveries.” Reuters Health Information. 5 May 2009. Baltimore, Maryland. 19 March, 2010. <http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/702351>.

World Health Organization. Dept. of Making Pregnancy Safer. WHO Recommended Interventions for Improving Maternal and Newborn Health. 2009. 28 March 2010 <http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2007/WHO_MPS_07.05_eng.pdf>

Wikipedia. Apgar Score. 3 April 2010. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apgar_score>.

Stephenie Meyer is an anti-feminist, no-talent-hack. November 17, 2009

*This post contains spoilers*

Bella Swan stars in four anti-feminist novels, the Twilight series. She and the other main characters are gender stereotyped to a fault. Abusive misogyny and an embracement of lookism run rampant throughout the 500 pages of the first novel, Twilight, and her experiences with teen romance and/or love are truly a masterpiece on how to have an unhealthy relationship.

Her story is simple enough. Bella is an average teenage girl. She moves to Forks, Washington during her junior year of high school to live with her dad after her mom remarries a traveling baseball player. Bella gets situated at school where she meets Edward Cullen, a disturbingly beautiful and strange boy. He is initially hostile but warms up to her after a while, though his moods swing wildly between tender care and open aggression. In the first half of the story, he saves her life twice, both times by exhibiting extraordinary abilities—super human speed and strength and apparent clairvoyance.

After hearing an ancient Quileute legend about a group of “cold ones” who drank animal blood instead of human blood and went by the name of Cullen, Bella realizes that her gorgeous hero is a vampire. Instead of deterring her from pursuing a relationship with Edward, Bella realizes that nothing, not even the threat of death, could make her life worth living if Edward weren’t in it, and yet the reader is left wondering what exactly it is about Edward that Bella finds so captivating beyond his good looks. Stereotypical teen infatuation and simple physical lust seem to be about it.

Edward, despite repeatedly telling Bella he’s no good for her, is unable to stay away. He find the scent of her blood so alluring that it is a constant temptation to kill her. When she responds to his kisses with equal or greater passion, he draws away least he be overcome with temptation and kill her. Despite this obstacle, the two quickly fall in love and in short order, are professing their undying (?) love for each other.

When a conventional vampire sets his sights on ending Bella’s life, Edward and the entire Cullen family spring into action. Bella is whisked off to safety with Edward’s “sister” and her husband, while Edward, his brother, and their nearly four hundred year old father set a trap for the hunter. The hunter is able to trick Bella into leaving the relative safety of Alice and Jasper’s care. Bella meets the hunter in an abandoned dance studio (claiming he has her mom held hostage) and she is almost killed before Edward and company show up to save the day.

She returns home with a well fabricated cover story and the stage is set for them to live happily ever after…provided Edward is willing to turn her into a vampire so she can live forever with him.

The story is simple enough. Boy meets girl. Boy and girl fall in love. Girl (i.e. damsel) is in distress. Boy (i.e. knight in shining armor) comes to the rescue. Happily ever after.

Unfortunately, for readers, there is a dark undercurrent that flows throughout Twilight. Earlier, I wrote that Bella was “an average teenage girl.” I say “average” because there is nothing to set her apart. She is not especially smart or dumb. She is not particularly ugly or beautiful. She has no particular talents or shortcomings (aside from being chronically clumsy). Bella’s physical appearance is not described, aside from making note that she is about 5’4” and weighs about 110 pounds. In fact, Stephenie Meyer, the author of Twilight, purposefully wrote Bella as a mostly undefined character so that, as she said on her website, “the reader could more easily step into [Bella’s] shoes” (www.stepheniemeyer.com). Meyer’s intent, then, was for the reader to put themselves into Bella’s place, which is understandable. I think most writers want their readers to be able to do the same. What is insidious is that, after carefully not defining a character so the reader is more easily able to insert herself into the story, Meyer’s main characters unapologetically promote traditional gender roles, blindly accept society’s unrealistic expectations of feminine beauty, and condone abusive and controlling behavior.

As Leonard Sax, writing for the Washington Post, said, “the girls are still girls, and the boys are traditional men…The lead male characters…are muscular and unwaveringly brave, while Bella and the other girls bake cookies, make supper for the men and hold all-female slumber parties.”

Traditional gender roles are assigned to the main characters from the book’s beginning. The story opens with Bella’s move into her father’s home. Within the first 48 hours, she has assigned herself to kitchen duty as her father can’t “cook much besides fried eggs and bacon” (p. 31). Bella comments on her father being aware of the upcoming school dance; “Only in a town this small would a father know when the high school dances were” (p. 81). Bella fully embraces the stereotype that social events such as dances are the realm of mothers (females) and not fathers (men) even though it would make perfect sense for her father, the chief of police, to be aware of an upcoming teen gathering. Bella makes this even clearer when she tells her dad about an upcoming shopping trip…which is the only time she spends with female friends outside of school, by the way. Bella, explaining that even though she isn’t attending the dance, she is helping her friends pick out dresses, thinks, “I wouldn’t have to explain this to a woman” (p. 149), embracing the idea that men could not possibly understand the female mind while a woman would naturally have an intrinsic understanding of all things “feminine.” Her father quickly embraces his own gender stereotype. As he turns back to the television, Meyer writes, “He seemed to realize that he was out of his depth with the girlie stuff” (p. 149).

Bella’s shopping trip with her friends supplies more gender stereotypes. Bella wanders into a dangerous neighborhood, distracted by the wallowing despair she finds herself in over not having seen Edward in two days. She runs into one group of people—four men. And naturally, these men are rapists who quickly scheme together to lead her away from the more populated areas so they can gang rape her. Edward shows up in the nick of time and saves the day, playing the part of the knight in shining armor to Bella’s damsel in distress who forgot her pepper spray at home.

Edward then takes Bella to a restaurant where he dazzles the, naturally straight, waitress with his unbelievable good looks. He asks Bella how she’s feeling, explaining, “I’m actually waiting for you to go into shock” (p. 168), because, naturally, that is the first reaction a female has to physical danger.

As mentioned earlier, Bella assigned herself kitchen duty for the duration of her stay in Forks. After school and obsessing over Edward, cooking is the only other activity the reader regularly sees Bella engage in. Bella listens to music in passing, reads a bit in passing (romances such as Wuthering Heights and Pride and Prejudice), but she has no other hobbies. She doesn’t paint or write. She doesn’t scrapbook or play an instrument. She doesn’t play video games or read voraciously. She doesn’t talk on the phone or play a sport. She thinks about Edward, talks to Edward, schemes to be with Edward, does some homework, and cooks for her dad, who is largely ungrateful as he watches sports on television and goes fishing on the weekends.

Besides promoting traditional gender roles, Bella fully embraces society’s current standard for female beauty. Bella observes Rosalie, one of Edward’s “sisters,” narrating, “The tall one was statuesque. She had a beautiful figure, the kind you saw on the cover of the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue, the kind that made every girl around her take a hit on her self-esteem just by being in the same room” (p. 18). Three paragraphs later, she remarks, regarding why she couldn’t look away from the five “siblings,” “…their faces, so different, so similar, were all devastatingly, inhumanly beautiful. They were faces you never expected to see except perhaps on the airbrushed pages of a fashion magazine” (p. 19). Bella believes that beauty is found in the glossy pages of mass media and nowhere else. There is no place for the beautiful, full figured woman, or the beautiful woman who looks like a human. Nor is there a place for the physically unattractive person who is still valuable. Bella’s only definition of beauty is that which conforms to the airbrushed models found in fashion magazines. Over seventy times, Bella mentions how beautiful the vampires are, in one way or another. Often it is in reference to Bella’s reaction to Edward’s “outrageous perfection” (p. 322). Other times it is within the context of Bella’s perceived plainness in comparison. Bella’s view of herself and her value has been completely and totally shaped by modern definitions of beauty, shallow as they are. As such, she sees herself as plain and therefore, without value.

As disturbing as Bella’s embracement of gender stereotypes and feminine beauty are, what is truly disturbing is her apology for abusive and controlling relationships. As Wendy Nosid of community.feministing.com said, “Bella’s choices are troubling, sure, but it’s the blatant romanticism of what she and [Edward do], excuses of him doing these things “out of love” and “to protect her” that makes her an anti-feminist figure” (http://community.feministing.com).

When asked if Bella is an anti-feminist heroine, Meyer, believing the accusation springs from Bella’s choice to marry early and carry a unexpected and life threatening pregnancy to term, argues that the accusations are invalid because Bella exercises her right to choose—the right to choose that feminists have fought for. Meyer says, “I never meant for her fictional choices to be a model for anyone else’s real life choices…she’s in a situation that none of us has ever been in, because she lives in a fantasy world.” (www.stepheniemeyer.com)

Meyer is correct. Bella does live in a fantasy world, filled with vampires and werewolves. However, if the vampire and werewolf aspects are removed from the story, you are left with a story which fits the description of an abusive relationship: “a pattern of abusive and coercive behaviors used to maintain power and control over a[n]…intimate partner” (http://stanford.edu/group/svab/relationships.shtml). Stanford.edu gives sixteen “signs or ‘red flags’ to assist people in identifying a potentially abusive person” (http://www.stoprelationshipabuse.org/signs.html). Edward exhibits 13 of the 16.

Rachel Allen, a California mom, whose daughter defended Twilight with the “it’s just a fantasy” argument, writes, “[T]he thing is, the romance is not really the fantasy part. The romance is presented as the realistic part.” (www.canow.org)

And therein lays the danger. Feminists have fought for women to be free to make their own choices, even if those choices are not perhaps the wisest. Bella, however, is not really free to make choices. She has been so convinced that she is unappealing that when an attractive boy shows her the slightest attention, she swoons completely. She spends the entire first novel marveling that such an attractive boy would deem her worthy of attention, much less love. She is utterly convinced that she has so little value that she believes it will hurt her parents less to lose her completely than to experience even a modicum of danger. She spends most of the second book (2006, New Moon) in the depths of depression (for which she receives no professional help) because Edward has left her.

It is only when she becomes a vampire herself, gaining the beauty and strength she so admired in Edward, that she gains any value (in her own eyes). Instead of working hard and making choices to better herself, Bella waits for Edward to “rescue” her from her humanity (and its inherent plainness, clumsiness, and fragility) by turning her into vampire.

Again, while no reader can make that exact decision, ten minutes flipping through a stack of popular magazines or surfing through television channels will reveal many other “miracle” cures. From diet pills, hair care products, teeth whiteners to Wonder bras. The “cure” to all of a girl’s problems is just waiting, furthering the belief that something outside oneself can fix the inside.

It is not Bella’s decisions to choose a “traditional” role that makes her an anti-feminist heroine. Meyer’s is mistaken if she believes that is the root of the issue. The root of the issue is the glorifying and romanticizing of gender stereotypes, cookie cutter beauty standards, and abuse. These are what makes Bella Swan an anti-feminist heroine and Twilight inappropriate reading for…well, everyone.

References

Allen, Rachel. (2008, November 24). Feminist mom talks Twilight. California National Organization for Women. Retrieved November 6, 2009, from http://www.canow.org/canoworg/2008/11/feminist- mom-talks-twilight.html

Meyer, Stephanie. (2005). Twilight. New York, NY: Little, Brown and Company

Meyer, Stephanie. (2009, August 28). Frequently asked questions: Breaking Dawn. Retrieved November 6, 2009, from http://www.stepheniemeyer.com/bd_faq.html

Nosid, Wendy. (2008, September 20). Stephenie Meyer side-steps anti-feminist allegations. Retrieved November 6, 2009, from http://community.feministing.com/2008/09/stephanie-meyer-side-steps-ant.html

Sax, Leonard. (2008, August 17). “Twilight” sinks its teeth into feminism. The Washington Post. Retrieved November 6, 2009,, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/15/AR2008081503099.html

 

After all that, I found this video and it’s just too perfect to not share. Enjoy!

Abstinence-Only Education is No Education At All August 29, 2009

Abstinence-only education isn't

Abstinence only education is insidious. It does not teach students the things they need to know but instead attempts to indoctrinate them to a religious standard through the clever use of misinformation and outright lies. Curtis Porter, writing for the Administration for Children & Families (ACF), a division of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, laid out the guidelines for abstinence only education. These guidelines for “educating” students are an affront to progressive thinkers everywhere and abstinence-only curricula distorts the truth, bending it as far as it can without breaking it and, in some situations, snaps it completely.

Abstinence-only curriculum, according to ACF, must teach that a person’s life will turn out better if he or she waits until marriage to have sex. However, researchers Else-Quest, Hyde, and DeLamater, writing for The Journal of Sex Research, found that any attempt to form a causal relationship between premarital sex and negative life outcomes to be “unwarranted” (2005).

The curriculum must define marriage as “only a legal union between one man and one woman as a husband and wife, and the word ‘spouse’ refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife” (p. 1), effectively sentencing homosexual teens to a lifetime of celibacy, along with any who do not believe in traditional marriage. The “one man and one woman” definition of marriage is one of a religious sentiment and one that the Iowa courts, among others, have deemed unconstitutional.

The curricula “must teach the psychological and physical benefits of sexual abstinence-until-marriage” (p. 1), yet the National Association of School Psychologists “believes comprehensive sexuality education is essential to promote the mental, physical, academic and emotional health of our children” (2003) and Lawrence Finer, writing for Public Health Reports, has found that 95 percent of the populace has had premarital sex by the time they are forty-four years of age (2007, p. 1).

The curriculum, and its teachers, are restricted on how much information than can provide to their students. The ACF states that “[i]nformation on contraceptives, if included, must be…presented only as it supports the abstinence message being presented. Curriculum must not promote or endorse, distribute or demonstrate the use of contraception or instruct students in contraceptive usage” (p. 1) (emphasis mine). The reason for the omission of comprehensive contraceptive education is explained by abstinence-only supporter, Linda Klepacki, who says that teaching children about condoms and abstinence, sends them a mixed message. She says, “In other areas of health education as well as abstinence, the highest health standard is communicated (i.e. alcohol, drugs, cigarette use, weapon carrying, etc.) The healthiest choice for school-age youth is to remain sexually abstinent.” However, this logic falls apart when applied to other activities. There are risks to playing football or riding in a car and yet we do not teach our children to abstain from those activities. Instead, he or she is taught the proper way to wear his or her protective equipment and a passenger is taught to wear his or her seat belt. In the same manner, so should students be taught the proper way to use sexual protection. In addition, they should also be taught the “rules” of the game. They need training in making good choices, choosing quality friends, developing and maintaining healthy relationships, sexual and not.

The ACF also states that the curriculum must contain material consistent with eight principles.

A. It is essential that the abstinence education curriculum has as its exclusive purpose, teaching the social, psychological, and health gains to be realized by abstaining from sexual activity (p. 2).

Abstinence-only supporters claim there are benefits to abstaining and yet Alan Farnham (Is Sex Necessary?), reports that regular sexual intercourse has many mental and health benefits, ranging from decreased depression to a reduced risk of heart disease (2003).

B. It is critical that the abstinence education curriculum teaches abstinence from sexual activity outside marriage as the expected standard for all school-aged children (p. 2).

During an evaluation of five years of abstinence-only education in Arizona, “eighty percent of students reported that they were likely to become sexually active by the time they were 20 years old” (Hauser. 2004). Why is abstinence until marriage the expected standard? It certainly is not based in reality. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that over 70 percent of girls and 60 percent of boys report having had sex before they turn twenty (2009, p. 7). The expectation of abstinence until marriage is an expectation based on the morality of the religious and is, quite frankly, a ridiculous one. Time would be much better spent teaching students how to have sex in as safe a manner as possible once they choose to become sexually active; physically safe and psychologically safe as well.

C. Abstinence education curriculum must teach that abstinence from sexual activity is the only certain way to avoid out-of-wedlock pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and other associated health problems (pp. 2,3).

Subthemes to “C” are to give students the statistics and rates of failure for condoms and other contraceptives. Representative Henry Waxman found that “abstinence-only curricula contain false and misleading information about the effectiveness of contraceptives.” Several of the curricula cite a 1993 study (which was rejected by the Department of Health and Human Services), which states that condoms only reduce HIV infections by 69 percent. One curriculum states: “[T]he popular claim that ‘condoms help prevent the spread of STDs,’ is not supported by the data” (quoted in Waxman. 2004, pp. 8-10).

Uganda’s fight against the spread of HIV would suggest otherwise. Professor W. Phillips Shively summarizes Uganda’s success in Power and Choice. In 1991, the AIDS infection rate had reached about 15 percent. By 2005, it had dropped to 7 percent. President Musevini achieved this successful reduction when he began promoting the usage of condoms with his simple, straightforward plan. Titled ABC (Abstinence, Being faithful, and Condoms), his program was able to promote condom usage while embracing and encouraging the traditional values of abstinence until marriage and monogamy. Without the addition of increased condom usage, Uganda would not have seen the 50 percent reduction in HIV infection they’ve been able to achieve. (2008. pp 93, 94) Obviously, condoms work.

D. It is required that the abstinence education curriculum teaches that a mutually faithful monogamous relationship in the context of marriage is the expected standard of human sexual activity (p. 3).

Buss and Shackelford, authors of Susceptibility to Infidelity, found that about fifty percent of married people will not remain monogamous (1997, p. 194). Marty Friedman, author of Straight Talk for Men About Marriage, cites on his website that 41 percent of the population is not married and 24 percent have never been married (2009) and yet, according to Lawrence B. Finer, PhD, 80 percent of unmarried men and women will have had sex by the time they are 44 years old (2007. p. 74). Obviously, sexual activity regulated to within only a “mutually faithful monogamous relationship in the context of marriage” is not the expected norm of human sexual activity and it is erroneous to prop up an unrealistic standard for youth and expect them to meet it when most adults to not.

E. It is essential that the abstinence education curriculum teaches that sexual activity outside of the context of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects (p. 4).

Representative Waxman found no scientific support for these statements. In fact, he writes that “one curriculum tells youth that a long list of personal problems – including isolation, jealousy, poverty, heartbreak, substance abuse, unstable longterm commitment, sexual violence, embarrassment, depression, personal disappointment, feelings of being used, loss of honesty, loneliness, and suicide – ‘can be eliminated by being abstinent until marriage’” (2004, pp. 20-21). Alan Farnham writes, “Having regular and enthusiastic sex…confers a host of measurable physiological advantages, be you male or female. (This assumes that you are engaging in sex without contracting a sexually transmitted disease.)” (2003). However, it is hard to engage in sex without contracting a sexually transmitted disease when one has had no education in how to go about protecting oneself. Abstinence-only education’s omission of education on correct condom usage is more likely to cause “harmful psychological and physical effects” than “regular and enthusiastic sex” practiced safely is.

F. It is critical that the abstinence education curriculum teaches that bearing children out-of-wedlock is likely to have harmful consequences for the child, the child’s parents, and society (pp. 4-5).

Teaching a student about the harmful consequences of something but not providing him or her with the resources to avoid it – resources beyond abstinence – is worse than a pointless waste of time and money, it is negligence to the extreme.

G. Abstinence education curriculum must teach young people how to reject sexual advances and how alcohol and drug use increase vulnerability to sexual advances (p. 5-6).

H. It is required that the abstinence education curriculum teaches the importance of attaining self-sufficiency before engaging in sexual activity (p. 6)

Some of the principles of abstinence-only education are commendable. Attaining a degree of self-sufficiency before becoming sexual active is a good goal to shoot for. However, like many goals, there may be bumps along the road that abstinence-only education does not prepare a teen to handle. Teaching teens how to avoid unwanted sexual advances is good. Teaching them that condoms are ineffective is wrong. Teaching kids about the cost of parenthood is good. Blaming mental health problems on premarital sex is bad.

While abstinence-only education may appear to be the answer to STDs and unwed teen parents, it is doing much more to exacerbate the problem than to solve it. Logical fallacies, misinformation, outright lies – these seem to be the standard for abstinence-only education. As such, abstinence-only education needs to be removed from our school curricula. It has no place there; certainly not funded through public funds. Teens need to have real information, real facts. In short, they need the truth and not a thinly veiled religious curriculum based on unrealistic expectations of morality and lies about the effects of sexual activity. Sadly, many adults are unwilling or unable to teach their children the lessons they truly need: how to choose friends; how to choose significant others, for marriage or not; how to make good life decisions; how to be themselves in a healthy and beneficial way. These lessons are not easy. They are not easy to learn nor are they easy to teach but we are definitely not going to find an answer by propagating misinformation, religious bias, and lies.

References

Buss, David M. and Shackelford, Todd K. (1997). Susceptibility to infidelity. Journal of Research in Personality, 31, 193-221

The Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Sexual and reproductive health of persons aged 10-24 years – United States, 2002—2007, Morbidity and Morality Weekly Report. July 17, 2009/58(SS06);1-58

Else-Quest, N. M.; Hyde, J. S.; DeLamater, J. D. (2005, May). Context counts: long-term sequelae of premarital intercourse or abstinence. Journal of Sex Research. Retrieved August 22, 2009, from Find Articles database, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2372/is_2_42/ai_n13822486/pg_8/

Farnham, Alan. (2003, August 10). Is sex necessary?. Forbes.com. Retrieved on August 23, 2009 from http://www.forbes.com/2003/10/08/cz_af_1008health.html

Finer, Lawrence B. PhD. (2007, January-February). Trends in premarital sex in the United States, 1954 —2003. Public Health Reports, 73-78

Friedman, Marty. (n.d.). Marriage and divorce statistics. Retrieved August 23, 2009, from http://www.meninmarriage.com/article05.htm

Klepacki, Linda. (n.d.). Abstinence Education: Myths and the Truth. Focus on the Family Issue Analysis. Retrieved August 23, 2009, from http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/abstinence/A000002153.cfm

National Association of School Psychologists. (2003, April 12). Position statement on sexuality education. Retrieved August 22, 2009, from http://nasponline.org/about_nasp/pospaper_sexed.aspx

Porter, Curtis (2006). Guidance regarding curriculum content. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children & Families, Family and Youth Bureau Retrieved August 23, 2009 from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/fysb/content/abstinence/cbaeguidance.htm

Shively, W. Phillips. (2008) Power and choice: An introduction to political science. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill

Waxman, Henry A. (2004, December). The content of federally funded abstinence-only education programs. The United States House of Representatives, Committee on Government Reform – Minority Staff, Special Investigations Divisions

Unexpected Hero August 2, 2009

What makes someone a hero? Is it a person risking her life for someone else? Is it a person putting the greater good ahead of his own good? Is it helping others? There are as many definitions of hero as there are people on the earth. While there may be many definitions of “hero,” one definition stands out to me.

My definition of a hero is someone who inspires me to better myself. There are not many people who do that but are a few. The one I’m writing about here is not considered by many to be very talented. I have heard people say he is, at best, a mediocre actor and, at worst, a terrible one but I have cried as he acted the part of broken hearted husband. I have read interviews in which directors he chose not to work with have accused him of being egotistical and his response was, “If my ego is healthy enough to say, ‘I’m not going to do a . . . rehash of the same film just because you want me to do it quickly,’ that’s my ego! My ego is that big!” and I applaud him for remaining true to his principles. I have heard his co-workers tear him down spitefully and I have seen him time and time again, turn the praise to others; the directors, his mentors, his co-actors, or the audience. I have read posts by people accusing him of being nothing but a meathead, his success running on nothing but his biceps. The truth is, he has worked very hard and sacrificed a lot for the success he has had. More than all this, he has inspired me; inspired me to better myself, to make my own dreams come true, through his journey to do the same. Who is this man?

This man is Vin Diesel.

Many only know Diesel as an action movie star and, for many years, that was the only way I thought of him. This began to change during a season of boredom. I wanted to find some new movies to watch and, having just seen Pitch Black and The Chronicles of Riddick for the second time, I began to look for other movies he had appeared in. What I found was a career history I knew nothing about. There were the movies I expected, The Fast and the Furious, xXx, and The Pacifier, in which Diesel plays “tough guys.” What I didn’t expect was Multi-Facial, Strays, and Find Me Guilty, in which Diesel plays serious and deep roles. I didn’t expect to find that he had written screenplays and directed and produced films. I didn’t expect to find a fellow Dungeons and Dragons fan. I didn’t expect to find a man willing to turn down millions because “the script just wasn’t right.” I didn’t expect to have a life altering experience by him encouraging me to invest in making my dreams become a reality.

Vin Diesel knows a little something about investing into one’s dreams to make them become a reality. He started acting when he was seven years old in the New York theater scene. In his early twenties, he arrived in Los Angeles, expecting to become a star. After a year of auditions and rejections, he returned to New York, as he has said, with his tail between his legs. He had not secured so much as an agent. Unwilling to let his dreams die, realizing he could no longer rely on others to dictate where his future was going to go, he started writing a short film. Two weeks later, he was shooting and, as he said to Charlie Rose, “That’s where it all started.”

There had been no scripts for Vin Diesel so Vin Diesel had decided to make his own. He saved $3000 and instead of spending it on a flat screen T.V., he took the money and invested it into his career. He wrote, directed, produced, and starred in his short film titled Multi-Facial. The film is about an actor who can’t get hired because he’s too multi-cultural. He’s not “black” enough or “white” enough or “hispanic” enough, just like Vin. Vin and the friends who helped him produce it took it to Cannes Film Festival but were unable to procure buyers for it.

Disappointed but not defeated by this set back, Vin returned to Los Angeles and, again, began saving money. He and a friend worked as telemarketers, selling tools and light bulbs. In the course of a year they saved $47,000. Like before, instead of buying something to “look” cool, like a new car, Vin invested into his career, returned to New York and wrote Strays. Again, he produced, directed and starred in his film. This feature length film was accepted into Sundance Film Festival and, like Mulit-Facial, received rave reviews but no buyers.

Luckily, Diesel’s investment into his career was not without gain. Steven Spielberg saw Multi-Facial, wrote a part for Vin into Saving Private Ryan and introduced him to the Hollywood movie scene. Following Saving Private Ryan, Diesel starred in a low budget but well crafted science fiction film, Pitch Black. The year after that he starred beside Paul Walker in The Fast and the Furious. The next year he starred in xXx. And with those two, Vin Diesel reached the stardom he had aspired to.

It is not this stardom, however, that made Diesel a hero of mine. No, simple stardom is not enough. Many people are movie stars. Many people work hard to achieve their dream of being a famous actor or actress. What caused Vin Diesel to stick out to me is his commitment to the art; the art of story telling, the art of character development, the art of cinematography; a commitment which I share deeply.

Vin is, at heart, an artist. Vin Diesel chooses parts that present a challenge to him as an actor, preferring multidimensional characters and anti heroes to picture perfect heroes who are hard for people to identify with. Regarding his character Xander Cage in xXx, he said, “where as the predecessors [James Bond and the like] represented a country, I think xXx represents the world. He’s kind of this proletarian hero, this rebel hero that’s recruited…Xander…doesn’t want to be a secret agent but he is a guy that’s called to duty and he rises to the occasion.” Vin chooses scripts that tell original but relevant tales. During an interview with Shawn Adler he talked about The Chronicles of Riddick, which he helped develop. Regarding pressure he was feeling to make the film successful, he said, “The second I was able [to make] this epic that didn’t spawn from a book that was in existence for 50 years, that didn’t come from a comic book character, that was completely an original project, I felt like I was satisfied.” He loves the craft so much that he turned down over 25 million dollars when he chose to forgo starring in the sequel to The Fast and the Furious. He turned it down simply because the script was shallow and did not advance the characters or the story line.

Diesel attributes his commitment to the story and his love of the role, largely to his love of Dungeons and Dragons, a fantasy role playing game. He will freely admit to a long history of playing, calling it the training ground for imagination and credits it for much of of his love of story. His ability to create and imagine stories comes largely from his experiences playing this game. Not only does he freely talk about his experiences developing characters or acting as Game Master, he also wrote the introduction for “Thirty Years of Adventure: A Celebration of Dungeons & Dragons.” In it he says, “[W]hat kept us hooked [on the game] was the search for the character that represented our higher self. Playing D&D was…an opportunity to explore our own identities.”

It is this, this love of imagination, this love of storytelling, this love of developing real and relevant characters that made Vin Diesel a hero. He said to Charlie Rose, “There was a point in my life when I realized I could no long rely on everyone else…I could no longer empower the negatives or empower others to dictate where my future was going to be.” To Jay Leno he said:

If there’s any message that I could tell people about making their dreams become a reality, it would be to invest everything you have in it and instead of going off and buying things that you think may raise your profile amongst your peers, go off and spend that money on something that’s going to help you realize your dreams.

When he said that, my heart responded with a cheer. My heart also broke with the knowledge that I had not been taking the responsibility for making my dreams become a reality. I was not reclaiming the control over the direction of my life. I was sitting by, relying on others to make my dreams come true.

A month later, after many talks with my husband and many thoughtful days spent pondering what my dreams really were, I enrolled in college. I was 28 years old and I was no longer going to rely on others to make my dreams come true. I was going to take what I had and invest it all into my dreams. I was not going to sit by and let others dictate where my life was going to go.

Vin Diesel is a man worthy of respect. First and foremost he is a man of integrity, remaining true not only to his art but also to himself. Secondly, he is a hero because he encourages others to look within themselves to see how they could better themselves by taking control of their lives and their dreams. These two things are what caused me to see Vin Diesel through different eyes; to see him as an inspiration to us all and especially to me.

Goddess of Horses July 16, 2009

She stood up and putting her hands in the small of her back, stretched, arching her back and letting her dark hair cascade down her back. She straightened and pushing damp curls away from her face, smiled at me. My brown eyes locked on her hazel ones as she extended a calloused and dirty hand to me. I took her hand in mine, marveling at the strength in it. I saw her beautiful, full lips moving and knew she was asking me a question but my ears heard nothing. I knew I was staring and also knew I would stare at her forever if she’d let me. As I felt her begin to pull her hand out of mine, I snapped back to myself and my brain registered what she was saying. As she asked again, what she could do for me, her voice was strong but gentle at the same time. Exactly the type of voice you would expect a goddess of horses to have. As I stumbled over myself, trying to explain about volunteering at the riding school for disadvantaged kids next door and asking if she was looking for any extra help, anything at all, I felt my hands begin to sweat and my face begin to flush. As I inhaled, trying to still my racing heart, she smiled, brightening the dark stall. “I’m always looking for good help. Let’s go into the office and see what you are interested in.” As she walked past me, I caught the scent of soap, both body and saddle and it made my stomach do flip-flops. When I walked out of the office twenty minutes later, a copy of my work schedule in my hand and love deep in my heart, I knew without a shadow of a doubt this was going to be the best summer of my life.

I wrote this for my writing class. Israel asked if I was writing about a lesbian love story. The answer is, “What do you think?”

Sleepless Nights and Jazz February 14, 2009

The other night, in an attempt to settle Jael down with some quiet activities, as both Israel and I were sporting severe headaches, Israel put on some jazz and instructed us to draw what the music made us see in our minds. I closed my eyes, leaned back against our wonderful couch and let the music flow through my head. And this is the picture it made:

Jazz; in colored pencil and charcoal

Last night as I fell asleep, I was thinking of a picture I’d like to draw and paint. I’d bought a few things at Micados, watercolor paper, water colors, and a new sketchpad, and I wanted to try them out. So while trying to pin down something to paint my mind slipped off to another thought. German. I began running through the German phrases we are working on in class and remembering vocabulary words (or trying to remember). I began to count as high as I could before falling asleep when the following picture popped into my mind and I knew it was what I would draw and paint. I call it, “Danke schön, Herr Trost, for all my sleepless nights.”

Danke schön, Herr Trost, for all my sleepless nights; watercolor and felt tip marker

These are the pencil drawings I did first. They are pretty cool in their own right.

Sleepless Nights; pencil

Sleepless nights, detail; pencil

That’s what I’ve been up to. That and having dreams which made me realize afresh that I am committed to always being the best Becky Walker I can be, wherever I am, whatever life situation I am in. The dream involved an old crush and you know how dream emotions are. When you wake up, you still kind of feel them. So as I tried to fall back asleep (which I was unable to do) I thought about what might have happened between this crush and I if my life situation had been different when we met (I was married). Then I wondered what might happen between us if something were to happen to Israel (which I in no way want but it’s always a possibility. Death grabs many people by surprise.). I felt a stab of guilt before I realized that there should be no shame in living life to the fullest. When we first met, I was very happily married and so there could be nothing beyond friendship. I would not trade what I have with Israel for anything. However, if something were to remove Israel from my life, I would not have any guilt about living my new life to the fullest. Each life situation has it’s advantages and disadvantages.

As a single person, all I wanted to do was get married. I missed out on a lot of things that a married person simply can’t do, like take off across the country on a whim, bungee jump, sky dive, things like that. I could have had an art room and really pursued various interests with no expectation put upon me. I love my family and again, would not trade them for anything, but having a family does put limitations on a person, as does being single. When I was single, I did not have a husband to spoon with at night. I didn’t have the stability of eating three square meals a day. I didn’t have the accountability of sleeping well. Of course, I had the option of staying up late and being crabby in the morning. I don’t have that option when I have a child to care for. There are advantages to both sides and I wish I would have taken advantage of those more when I was single.

I am incredibly happy that I’m living my married life to the fullest. There are so many things that are wonderful about being married. Fifty percent of my college tuition is paid for because of my husband’s job. I am living in Germany because of my husband’s job. I have one of the most amazing children in the world, who I could not have had without Israel. I have an expectation placed on me of cooking healthy meals, three times a day, which at first glance seems like a disadvantage but for my health, it’s an advantage. I have an expectation put upon me of being responsible with our money which results in me having better money skills and more money to spend. I have an expectation put upon me of not wasting our resources, which means I’m getting out walking more than I would if I were single. So beyond the obvious advantages of being married (I don’t have to go to work and I’ve got a built in bed warmer) the things that would appear as disadvantages are advantages if looked at through the right lens of living life to be the best you can be.

I love life.

I love where I am in life right now and I hope that whatever tomorrow brings, I will love that too. Life sometimes throws us curve balls that are truly horrible but I hope that no matter what I will live each moment as the best Becky Walker I can be. If life throws me tragedy, I hope I can be the best depressed artist/writer/blogger/crafter that Becky Walker can be.

Life is good.