Dr. Dan Gottlieb, the house psychologist of WHYY radio, revealed his erotophobia again in the interview he gave this morning on the Pennsylvania "sexting" case. I just submitted the following comment to the station:
I was disappointed, but not surprised, by Dan Gottlieb's comments on the "sexting" case. Not surprised, because the promo had made no mention of the nature of the court case, in which the judge threatened not just three, but dozens of teens, mostly girls, with charges of "child pornography" for sending pictures of themselves, not engaged in any sexual activity, to their friends -- unless they submitted to "sexual violence awareness" classes. Are we really supposed to believe that boys are less eager to show off their looks? Or isn't this clearly a case of one judge's attempt to enforce traditional standards of female modesty?
Yet Gottlieb made no mention of this context. Instead, he urged parents talk to their children about "long-term consequences," taking for granted that those same traditional norms of modesty, clearly already being challenged, will still be in place "when they're thirty."
By implying this, and urging parents to convey the same to their children, Gottlieb was in fact perpetuating the same puritanical attitudes as the judge is trying to enforce. It's time he thought about the long-term consequences of his own actions.
You can listen to the original story and post your own comment by going to http://whyy.org/cms/news/health-science/behavioral-health-health-science/2009/04/13/teens-technology-and-sex/6032/comment-page-1#comment-177.
Eric Hamell
Monday, April 13, 2009
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Support Freedom Through Ethics Education
The Woodhull Freedom Foundation recently forwarded this from the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the U.S.--
ACTION ALERT
Tell Superintendent Turlington: Teach Respect! Reinstate Teacher Debra Taylor!
ACTION ALERT
Tell Superintendent Ed Turlington: Teach Respect!
Reinstate Teacher Debra Taylor!
A number of organizations have been monitoring a school controversy in Grandfield, OK where a teacher was recently suspended for teaching The Laramie Project, an award-wining play about the murder of Matthew Shepard, a young man in Wyoming who was killed because he was gay.
Debra Taylor, who teaches the Ethics and Street Law class, was using pieces of the play to help her students examine how hatred and intolerance can be justified by attitudes within a community, a church, or in the home. Midway through the unit, Superintendent Ed Turlington told her to stop teaching the material. She held a mock funeral for the play to give her students closure and was subsequently suspended. She has now accepted a resignation agreement, as she feared that she would otherwise be fired.
Her students are standing behind the play and their teacher. “She always taught us to speak our minds and have our voices heard,” said one student. We need to tell Superintendent Turlington that Debra Taylor is a dedicated teacher who is willing to confront issues of respect and acceptance for all people regardless of sexual orientation and that she deserves to be immediately reinstated.
Tell Superintendent Turlington: Teach Respect! Reinstate Teacher Debra Taylor!
Advocates in Oklahoma, Texas, and surrounding states are strongly
encouraged to call or email in support.
TAKE ACTION NOW…call Superintendent Turlington at
580-479-5237 or send an email to eturlington@grandfield.k12.ok.us and tell him:
“Debra Taylor did not deserve this kind of treatment. Young people need dedicated teachers willing to confront issues of respect and acceptance for people of all sexual orientations. She should be commended for creating a safe space for all her students and should be reinstated immediately.”
=============================
Ricci Joy Levy, Executive Director
The Woodhull Freedom Foundation
1325 Massachusetts Avenue
Suite 700
Washington, DC 20005
p: 202.628.3333
f: 202-330-5282
Direct Line: 610.212.5555
Affirming Sexual Freedom as a Fundamental Human Right.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Counter Ageist "Warnings" Before Broadcasts
Another kind of "everyday action" against sex-negativity is prompted by "warnings" like the one I heard at the start of a segment on Weekend Edition Sunday, saying it was "inappropriate for children" because it dealt with sex. I sent them the following message:
Your story concerning a novel about an SS officer opened with a warning that the segment was "inappropriate for children." This statement was false and dangerous.
There is no evidence that information about sex is harmful to children. On the contrary, there is considerable evidence that hiding such information puts them at increased risk for psychosexual problems, and makes them more vulnerable to abuse.
If you feel the need to insure yourselves against complaints by erotophobic listeners, may I suggest you adopt the approach taken by Ira Glass of This American Life? When sexual subject matter is coming up, he advises listeners that what follows "mentions the existence of sex." This warning allows people to indulge their irrational fears without according them any legitimacy.
If you heard this segment too but didn't think to register an objection, it's not too late. (And if you didn't hear it you may be able to online at npr.org.) Sadly, there are sure to be plenty of future opportunities to do so as well.
Eric Hamell
Your story concerning a novel about an SS officer opened with a warning that the segment was "inappropriate for children." This statement was false and dangerous.
There is no evidence that information about sex is harmful to children. On the contrary, there is considerable evidence that hiding such information puts them at increased risk for psychosexual problems, and makes them more vulnerable to abuse.
If you feel the need to insure yourselves against complaints by erotophobic listeners, may I suggest you adopt the approach taken by Ira Glass of This American Life? When sexual subject matter is coming up, he advises listeners that what follows "mentions the existence of sex." This warning allows people to indulge their irrational fears without according them any legitimacy.
If you heard this segment too but didn't think to register an objection, it's not too late. (And if you didn't hear it you may be able to online at npr.org.) Sadly, there are sure to be plenty of future opportunities to do so as well.
Eric Hamell
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Help Keep Sex Worker Media Alive
The nation's premier magazine by and about sex workers, maintained by an all-volunteer staff, is in serious financial trouble. I'm going to help them in whatever ways I'm able and hope you will too. Here's a recent communication from outgoing editor-in-chief Rachel Aimee, including some special premium offers to loosen you generosity:
Help Us Keep the Hustle Up–And Get Cute $pread Stuff!
Back in August, I sent an email to the $pread staff list saying I thought we were going to have to stop publishing. Within the space of a year, most of our core staff members had left, and I was feeling burned out to the point where I had to accept that it was time for me to leave too. When we started this magazine, we optimistically figured it would only be a couple of years before we were able to start paying our staff. Turns out the publishing industry is a brutal place for an independent magazine like $pread, and four and a half years on this ass-kicking project is still completely dependent on an all-volunteer staff, many of whom put in 20 plus hours a week on top of their day—or night—jobs.
Fortunately the new team of $preadsters are still enthusiastic enough to see our daily struggles as challenges instead of defeats. (2008 has certainly brought its fair share of challenges: On top of our collective mass burnout, we’ve had to move offices twice in the past six months and are now operating our of a six by six foot closet packed from wall to wall with boxes of magazines.) The problem is that $pread is not going to be able to carry on like this forever. Eventually even our most devoted volunteers will burn out, and it’s really difficult to keep morale up—and the magazine going—with such a high staff turnover. We’ve talked about cutting our Outreach Program to move toward financial stability, but we don’t want to have to stop sending free magazines to low income sex workers. That’s why we need your support.
To inspire you to support $pread this holiday season we have two new cute giveaway items to tempt you with, both available until January 31st.
DONATE $50 or more to get the cute $pread tote bag, pictured above!
Or, DONATE $25 or more to get your very own $pread magnet.
You can also get your hands on either of these items by becoming a Member or Lifetime Member, and of course, you can always support us the old-fashioned way by subscribing!
The holiday season is upon us! A subscription to $pread, t-shirt, tank top, tote bag, back issues, and art posters are the perfect way to give to your friends while supporting an organization you love. Please help us keep the hustle up—and your favorite magazine in print—by buying, donating, and supporting. Thank you!
Eric Hamell
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Can a girl sexually abuse herself?
That's the question asked by Tracy Clark-Flory in column for salon.com (at http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/2008/10/11/child_porn/index.html) She writes:
This is unbelievable: A 15-year-old Ohio girl currently faces juvenile child pornography charges for allegedly taking and distributing nude photos of herself.
After Licking Valley High School officials discovered the photos on the girl's phone and tipped off police last Friday, she was arrested, held in jail over the weekend and charged with possession of criminal tools and illegal use of a minor in nudity-oriented material, ABC reports. If convicted, she could spend several years in juvenile detention and be forced to register as a sex offender for the next 20 years of her life (although, since she is a first-time offender and a minor, the judge could decide against making her register).
What's more, charges might still be filed against the students who received the photos, regardless of whether they received them unwillingly. State law holds that "anyone possessing material that shows a minor in a state of nudity is guilty of a fifth-degree felony," according to the Newark Advocate. If convicted, they could face registration as a sex offender for 10 years....
[C]alling this girl a sex offender for distributing pornographic images of herself is crazy-talk. We have to acknowledge that, however unprepared she was to make the decision, she does have ownership over her own body; her sexual choice is not the same as an adult making a sexual choice for her.
I'm as outraged as Clark-Flory is, and I've written the prosecutor. His name is Kenneth Oswalt and he can be contacted at:
Eric Hamell
This is unbelievable: A 15-year-old Ohio girl currently faces juvenile child pornography charges for allegedly taking and distributing nude photos of herself.
After Licking Valley High School officials discovered the photos on the girl's phone and tipped off police last Friday, she was arrested, held in jail over the weekend and charged with possession of criminal tools and illegal use of a minor in nudity-oriented material, ABC reports. If convicted, she could spend several years in juvenile detention and be forced to register as a sex offender for the next 20 years of her life (although, since she is a first-time offender and a minor, the judge could decide against making her register).
What's more, charges might still be filed against the students who received the photos, regardless of whether they received them unwillingly. State law holds that "anyone possessing material that shows a minor in a state of nudity is guilty of a fifth-degree felony," according to the Newark Advocate. If convicted, they could face registration as a sex offender for 10 years....
[C]alling this girl a sex offender for distributing pornographic images of herself is crazy-talk. We have to acknowledge that, however unprepared she was to make the decision, she does have ownership over her own body; her sexual choice is not the same as an adult making a sexual choice for her.
I'm as outraged as Clark-Flory is, and I've written the prosecutor. His name is Kenneth Oswalt and he can be contacted at:
| Licking County Prosecutor's Office |
| 20 S. Second St, Newark, Ohio 43055 |
| Hours of Operation (M-F, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) |
| General Telephone number: (740) 670-5255 - Fax 740-670-5241 |
Eric Hamell
Put Children's Needs Before Adults' Bigotry -- Stop Arkansas's Initiated Act 1
I just received the message below from BiUnity of Philadelphia's listserv. I've made a donation and hope you will too. --Eric Hamell
Hello,
This is Laura Bellows, Field Coordinator from Arkansas Families First, the campaign against Initiated Act 1 in Arkansas. Initiated Act 1, which Arkansas voters will decide on this November, would prohibit unmarried co-habitating couples from adopting or fostering children. Although this act is intended as an attack on the LGBT community, it also would prevent unmarried opposite-sex couples from adopting or fostering.
I am asking for your help and contributions because, although Act 1 has not received a lot of national attention, we believe that our campaign is very important. This is the first ballot initiative to threaten adoption/foster care rights of unmarried couples. If it passes, right-wing groups across the country may try to replicate its success.
Luckily, the campaign against Initiated Act 1 is working. Arkansas press coverage of the issue has been overwhelmingly positive, partially thanks to our extensive coalition of child welfare organizations, such as Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families and Arkansas Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics.
I am asking for your contribution because we still need an extra push. To do that, we need your organization's help. At this point, all of the money we raise will go directly to advertising.
Please share information about the campaign in Arkansas with your members. I am pasting a message below that you can email to your listserv, post to your blog, or use in a publication.
I would be happy to answer any questions you may have. You may reach me at laura@arkansasfamiliesfirst.org or on my cell phone at 832-489-6465. Our website is www.arkansasfamiliesfirst.org. Thank you for your time and for your assistance!
Laura Bellows
Field Coordinator
Arkansas Families First
---
www.arkansasfamiliesfirst.org
DONATE
____________ _________ _________ __
Arkansas Initiated Act 1 is the first ballot measure of its kind: if it were to pass, it would bar unmarried couples from adopting or fostering children. The only other state to have such a restrictive law is Utah. Arkansas Family Council, an offshoot of Focus on the Family, would rather deny loving homes to needy children than have committed unmarried couples raise children.
Luckily, Arkansas Families First, a coalition group made up of a variety of child welfare groups and progressive organizations, has been working to defeat this ban. Last week, the Arkansas Department of Human Services overturned a previous policy that barred unmarried couples in favor of case-by-case foster care: read more here. Governor Mike Beebe, who enjoys very high approval ratings in Arkansas, has stated that he opposes Initiated Act 1 and supports case-by-case adoption and foster care.
This week, Arkansas Families First released a video asking voters to vote NO on Act 1. This short video features adult former foster children and experts in the fields of child protection, psychology, psychiatry, pediatrics, and clergy who explain the negative consequences if the initiative were to pass. Watch the video here: http://www.youtube. com/watch? v=iVg8Y49OmMM.
We need to get this information out to more people in Arkansas; our research shows that voters are very likely to vote NO on Act 1 once they hear our message. Please help us defeat this ballot measure: go to our webpage at www.arkansasfamiliesfirst.org and make a donation.
To defeat this measure, Arkansas Families First needs your help: go to the website now.
Hello,
This is Laura Bellows, Field Coordinator from Arkansas Families First, the campaign against Initiated Act 1 in Arkansas. Initiated Act 1, which Arkansas voters will decide on this November, would prohibit unmarried co-habitating couples from adopting or fostering children. Although this act is intended as an attack on the LGBT community, it also would prevent unmarried opposite-sex couples from adopting or fostering.
I am asking for your help and contributions because, although Act 1 has not received a lot of national attention, we believe that our campaign is very important. This is the first ballot initiative to threaten adoption/foster care rights of unmarried couples. If it passes, right-wing groups across the country may try to replicate its success.
Luckily, the campaign against Initiated Act 1 is working. Arkansas press coverage of the issue has been overwhelmingly positive, partially thanks to our extensive coalition of child welfare organizations, such as Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families and Arkansas Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics.
I am asking for your contribution because we still need an extra push. To do that, we need your organization's help. At this point, all of the money we raise will go directly to advertising.
Please share information about the campaign in Arkansas with your members. I am pasting a message below that you can email to your listserv, post to your blog, or use in a publication.
I would be happy to answer any questions you may have. You may reach me at laura@arkansasfamiliesfirst.org or on my cell phone at 832-489-6465. Our website is www.arkansasfamiliesfirst.org. Thank you for your time and for your assistance!
Laura Bellows
Field Coordinator
Arkansas Families First
---
www.arkansasfamiliesfirst.org
DONATE
____________ _________ _________ __
Arkansas Initiated Act 1 is the first ballot measure of its kind: if it were to pass, it would bar unmarried couples from adopting or fostering children. The only other state to have such a restrictive law is Utah. Arkansas Family Council, an offshoot of Focus on the Family, would rather deny loving homes to needy children than have committed unmarried couples raise children.
Luckily, Arkansas Families First, a coalition group made up of a variety of child welfare groups and progressive organizations, has been working to defeat this ban. Last week, the Arkansas Department of Human Services overturned a previous policy that barred unmarried couples in favor of case-by-case foster care: read more here. Governor Mike Beebe, who enjoys very high approval ratings in Arkansas, has stated that he opposes Initiated Act 1 and supports case-by-case adoption and foster care.
This week, Arkansas Families First released a video asking voters to vote NO on Act 1. This short video features adult former foster children and experts in the fields of child protection, psychology, psychiatry, pediatrics, and clergy who explain the negative consequences if the initiative were to pass. Watch the video here: http://www.youtube. com/watch? v=iVg8Y49OmMM.
We need to get this information out to more people in Arkansas; our research shows that voters are very likely to vote NO on Act 1 once they hear our message. Please help us defeat this ballot measure: go to our webpage at www.arkansasfamiliesfirst.org and make a donation.
To defeat this measure, Arkansas Families First needs your help: go to the website now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
