In one case the patients wondered how they had gotten pregnant when they were on the pill. After some conversation, the doctor discovered that the couple had become pregnant due to the fact that the man was taking the pill. Another case related to Omar was about a married couple who had been trying desperately to have a child and yet they were unsuccessful. After further investigation the doctor discovered that these patients were actually engaging in anal sex and had never had vaginal sex.
This total lack of knowledge of the basic action of procreation, both protection and prevention, and the simple act of trying to create a child seems almost laughable. After getting over the comedic value of such outlandish stories, one has to take a moment to acknowledge the seriousness of this threat. In cultures where privacy and conservative behavior is so highly favored that its citizens are ignorant to their own bodily functions, I wonder if there is a human rights violation in that.
The violation isn't just ignorance, its the governments active resistance to the notion of informing their masses. The Chinese government has shut down multiple sex ed programs due to their 'promiscuity,' and this is, in my opinion a violation of their basic human right to understand their own body and protect it from an assortment health problems as well as understanding the act of sex itself.
Thoughts?
Wow, this post is really interesting. I did not know there was such a lack of knowledge towards sex education in China. I think you might be on to something though and I agree that there may be a need for educating people on this subject. When I first thought of sex education as a “right” I felt as though this might be a little bit outlandish, but when taking into consideration the fact that people need the education because they do not know about their own body, the “right” does not seem as outlandish. When breaking down the need for this education, I think the value of the education increases because it shows the importance of individual knowledge of a body and beyond that, bodies of others. Especially when considering health risks and procreation, people have a right to this knowledge.
ReplyDeleteAs with most of the rights claims, there seems to be a tendency towards conflating a "right" with a mere "ought". It is obviously harmful for individuals to be so ignorant of basic sexual function; however, the speak of the situation as a rights violation would seem to imply that this condition constitutes an assault on their dignity by some other party (presumably the state for failing to ensure adequate sexual education). Given that formal sexual education is a relatively recent innovation, and the human race has quite successfully propagated itself for many thousands of years, is this a claim we are prepared to make?
ReplyDeleteI am in shock by what the doctor found in both cases regarding sex and pregnancy. For countries like China where sex and intimacy are strictly in the private realm of their life, it seems that the youth would have many unanswered questions and concerns they felt too uncomfortable to ask. I think this proposes a great point that not everyone knows about sex, birth control methods or even the functions of their own body. In this sense, I do think that it is a right that should be explained through either a sex ed course or a biology course exemplifying how the body works. It is a violation of a human right to deny information about one's own body and allow it to be susceptible to harm or danger if not informed. Also, historically sex was seen as pleasurable for the male. In a time of equating genders it is necessary to inform both men and women on their functions of their body.
ReplyDeleteReally interesting post, Colin! I do agree with Patrick though. I don’t know if this could be considered a human rights violation because sex ed is a new phenomenon, as Patrick said. Liz does make a good point though by considering sex ed in the light of education however being educated on one’s body seem to be a right of the individual that is not violated by others if that person is ignorant. It is a matter of culture but the Chinese people could personally obtain sex education by informing themselves and then conveying what is learned person to person. It is not a violation of a human right but a difference in culture if the Chinese government conceives sex ed programs to be “promiscuous.” Therein, the Chinese government is not against education in relation to sex ed, which would be a human rights violation; however, their government is simply not able to conceive of the need for a sex ed program other than to increase promiscuity, which they do not promote. Therein, such a situation can be change from person to person by passing along the word- such a change starts with the people.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Patrick also that it may not be a "right," but instead is something that "ought" to be done. However, sexual education is, in my personal opinion, a necessary part of a healthy human life. Without such education, serious repercussions could come of it. I think that keeping sexual education from the members of the community in many ways is a detriment to the community itself. Moreover, the educative process does not have to be public or in schools necessarily - I think that there are ways that people could learn about healthy sexual practices without it conflicting with the society's cultural norms.
ReplyDeleteI think we can all acknowledge that sexual education is an important aspect of human development and plays a major role in societal development. So important, and personal that it should be left to family or role-models. The government is assuming a role in sexual awareness in the absence of core morals and values in an increasingly non-religious world.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSexual education is, as all have argued before me, an important part of one's developmental education. I truly believe that no good can ever come from ignorance, and without such education, ignorance prevails and often serious consequences follow suit. The truth remains, however, that in the context of a human rights violation, this would need to imply serious damages to dignity on behalf of another party, as Patrick said. The language is often a difficult barrier through which to see, and the lines are certainly blurred. But I think here, like, I personally wouldn't be okay with making the claim that it's necessarily a human rights violation. Is it perhaps not doing something that ought be done, well...yes.
ReplyDelete