REVIEW: Sex Ed Show vs Porn (part 3)

Part 1

Part 2

Show #3, on Wednesday, dealt more with the changes on our bodies due to arousal and pregnancy, and the live models were a husband-and-wife (who had had 2 children), a woman who had never had children, and a woman who was 31 weeks pregnant.

The first claims were that sex has three types of purpose, which they called the three 'R's of sex:

• Reproductive
• Relational
• Recreational

The claim followed that "Most people find relational sex in a committed relationship most fulfilling".

It was then explained about how the hormones adrenaline, serotonin and dopamine increase during sexual arousal, before moving on to looking at male and female arousal separately.

Dealing first with female arousal, I was pleased to see at last some mention of vaginal self-lubrication, which yesterday I noted hadn't been mentioned in the show about female anatomy. However, the lessons given focussed almost entirely on the physical signs of arousal, and only when a girl said "it feels like you're on a roller-coaster" was even the slightest attention given to the emotional effects of arousal (the roller-coaster sensations seem to me to be associated with the hormonal increases already mentioned). So they mentioned nipples hardening, pulse quickening, labia expanding etc, some of which were mentioned in show #1 on female anatomy, some weren't. However, almost no time was spent on what these mean emotionally, and I am very concerned that the boys especially may have been left with the impression that if a girl's nipples get hard and she starts to "get wet", then it's proof that she wants it (even if she says "no!"). As I complained yesterday, there was no discussion of the fact that it happens whether you want to have sex or not, and that it can be a protection response by the vagina to prevent unwanted penetration from causing unnecessary damage. In terms of the process of arousal and how you get from "mmm, you're sexy!" to actually having sex, as a personal and emotional matter rather than just a physical one, was utterly ignored throughout the show.

In the male arousal lesson, the set-up was a gallery of 5 pictures showing various stages of erection. The first flaw, it seems to me, was the impression that this is the only thing that happens to a man's body when he gets turned on. We have nipples too, and we have hormones racing through our bloodstream too. Breathing and heartrate both increase to support the extra energy and bloodflow to the genitals, and the "phwoar!" reaction is, I am sure, in part due to the physical changes in our bodies. We certainly sweat a lot more (partly to release pheromones). It's difficult to know for sure, despite being pretty self-aware of my body even when wanking/fucking, but I imagine that there are other visible signs as well, distinct from the fact of a boner.

The presenter was very dismissive about the boys' embarassment when faced with this gallery, and her belittling attitude was really quite offensive. The underlying stereotype that boys/men don't really do emotions was being reinforced heavily.

The process of getting an erection was covered in some detail, and it was emphasised that once a boy has an erection, it doesn't mean he has to have sex or ejaculate otherwise he'll come to harm; instead, he should show emotional maturity and accept it if the girl says no. The following criticism still stands, and is quoted from my post yesterday about the "male anatomy" show:

[It] explained about the mechanics of an erection, but not really why it happens. The way in which hormones prompt the rush of blood to the cock was explained fully, but the things that prompt that to happen were not covered. That is, the emotional, visual and tactile stimuli were not discussed at all. Given that in sex education classes (I think aged 15) it was explained why teens especially get erections on a bus from the diesel engine's vibrations, and given that erections are usually embarrassing if we get them in public, I felt that this was quite a major omission.

So I was left with the impression that the presenter and instructors were okay with the idea that when a boy has an erection, it automatically means he's "up for it". Unfortunately, this idea has led to boys and men being effectively raped because they had erections but didn't want sex - but a woman decided "it's erect, therefore he wants it" and had her way with him. (Looking back at that now, I even wonder why I put the word "effectively" there. Guess I'm infected with ideas about male sexuality too. [frownie])

On the plus side, it was finally mentioned here (when it wasn't in Tuesday's show) that a big penis when flaccid may be only small-to-average when erect, and vice versa - flaccid size is no predictor of erect size.

There has been VERY little said so far in the shows about how to negotiate consent, and what counts as genuine, freely given, consent (the enthusiastic "yes" means "YES PLEASE!" that sex-positive feminists talk about so much).

There was a brief lesson on "The Rules of Attraction" which emphasised that attraction is more emotional than physical, relying on such things as trust, mutual respect, "emotional togetherness" etc. This was demonstrated by looking at celebrity couples and asking first "what do you think attracts X to Y?" and then showing quotes from the celebs about what they like about their partners. This was as close as it got to discussing negotiation and consent.

The other major section (that wasn't to do with the general "let's blame porn for everything" theme) was on pregnancy.

This section again focussed only on the physical changes in the body, and discussed the fact that a woman's body might not return to the same shape as before the pregnancy, once the child has been born. The presenter described this as being somehow a "badge of honour", when seeking to emphasise that these changes are nothing of which you should be ashamed.

See you all soon for Part 4!