Derailment
I stumbled upon an interesting article while looking for something completely different. I think this paragraph expresses the gist:
Talk about “readiness for sex” pervades current conversations about teen sexuality.
As such, we can no longer afford to ignore how this discourse limits teens’ ability
to make sense of their sexual experiences. The above analysis reveals at least three
such limitations. First, in asserting that readiness is a mysterious state known only to
oneself, the discourse can shut down talk about the relational or power-laden dynamics
around sexuality. Indeed, this assumption can make it seem only natural that we
focus on the “technical and tangible” aspects and “let individuals decide for themselves”
when it comes to this relational realm. Second, the underlying formula that
all will go well if one “waits until ready” fosters unrealistic expectations for sex and
encourages self-blame if these expectations are not met. Likewise, this formula prevents
individuals from considering more systemic patterns for the “failure” of a relationship.
Finally, intersections between readiness and virginity discourses present a
range of nuanced difficulties for different women, often inhibiting their ability to act
in sexually autonomous ways. In light of these limitations, we would do well to interrogate
this discourse and to invent new alternatives.
Catherine Ashcraft, 2006. "Ready or Not . . . ? Teen Sexuality and the Troubling Discourse of Readiness." Anthropology & Education Quarterly, vol. 37 no. 4
I just realized that I didn't finish the whole article, but I am pretty sure I just missed the conclusion and biblio and such, so I will haughtily declare my opinion of it. I thought Ashcraft agilely navigated the competing and even contradictory discourses of teen sexuality. Also, she feeds my (perhaps naive) feeling that the education we provide our young people with puts emphasis in the wrong places, for various reasons.
Talk about “readiness for sex” pervades current conversations about teen sexuality.
As such, we can no longer afford to ignore how this discourse limits teens’ ability
to make sense of their sexual experiences. The above analysis reveals at least three
such limitations. First, in asserting that readiness is a mysterious state known only to
oneself, the discourse can shut down talk about the relational or power-laden dynamics
around sexuality. Indeed, this assumption can make it seem only natural that we
focus on the “technical and tangible” aspects and “let individuals decide for themselves”
when it comes to this relational realm. Second, the underlying formula that
all will go well if one “waits until ready” fosters unrealistic expectations for sex and
encourages self-blame if these expectations are not met. Likewise, this formula prevents
individuals from considering more systemic patterns for the “failure” of a relationship.
Finally, intersections between readiness and virginity discourses present a
range of nuanced difficulties for different women, often inhibiting their ability to act
in sexually autonomous ways. In light of these limitations, we would do well to interrogate
this discourse and to invent new alternatives.
Catherine Ashcraft, 2006. "Ready or Not . . . ? Teen Sexuality and the Troubling Discourse of Readiness." Anthropology & Education Quarterly, vol. 37 no. 4
I just realized that I didn't finish the whole article, but I am pretty sure I just missed the conclusion and biblio and such, so I will haughtily declare my opinion of it. I thought Ashcraft agilely navigated the competing and even contradictory discourses of teen sexuality. Also, she feeds my (perhaps naive) feeling that the education we provide our young people with puts emphasis in the wrong places, for various reasons.