William McGurn: Like a Virgin–The Press Take On Teenage Sex – WSJ.com

The chain reaction was something out of central casting. A medical journal starts it off by announcing a study comparing teens who take a pledge of virginity until marriage with those who don’t. Lo and behold, when they crunch the numbers, they find not much difference between pledgers and nonpledgers: most do not make it to the marriage bed as virgins.

Like a pack of randy 15-year-old boys, the press dives right in.

“Virginity Pledges Don’t Stop Teen Sex,” screams CBS News. “Virginity pledges don’t mean much,” adds CNN. “Study questions virginity pledges,” says the Chicago Tribune. “Premarital Abstinence Pledges Ineffective, Study Finds,” heralds the Washington Post. “Virginity Pledges Fail to Trump Teen Lust in Look at Older Data,” reports Bloomberg. And on it goes.

In other words, teens will be teens, and moms or dads who believe that concepts such as restraint or morality have any application today are living in a dream world. Typical was the lead for the CBS News story: “Teenagers who take virginity pledges are no less sexually active than other teens, according to a new study.”

Here’s the rub: It just isn’t true.

In fact, the only way the study’s author, Janet Elise Rosenbaum of Johns Hopkins University, could reach such results was by comparing teens who take a virginity pledge with a very small subset of other teens: those who are just as religious and conservative as the pledge-takers. The study is called “Patient Teenagers? A Comparison of the Sexual Behavior of Virginity Pledgers and Matched Nonpledgers,” and it was published in the Jan. 1 edition of Pediatrics.

The first to notice something lost in the translation was Dr. Bernadine Healy, the former head of both the Red Cross and the National Institutes of Health. Today she serves as health editor for U.S. News & World Report. And in her dispatch on this study, Dr. Healy pointed out that “virginity pledging teens were considerably more conservative in their overall sexual behaviors than teens in general — a fact that many media reports have missed cold.”

What Dr. Healy was getting at is that the pledge itself is not what distinguishes these kids from most other teenagers. The real difference is their more conservative and religious home and social environment. As she notes, when you compare both groups in this study with teens at large, the behavioral differences are striking. Here are just a few:

– These teens generally have less risky sex, i.e., fewer sexual partners.

– These teens are less likely to have a teenage pregnancy, or to have friends who use drugs.

– These teens have less premarital vaginal sex.

– When these teens lose their virginity they tend to do so at age 21 — compared to 17 for the typical American teen.

– And very much overlooked, one out of four of these teens do in fact keep the pledge to remain chaste — amid much cheap ridicule and just about zero support outside their homes or churches.

Let’s put this another way. The real headline from this study is this: “Religious Teens Differ Little in Sexual Behavior Whether or Not They Take a Pledge.”

via William McGurn: Like a Virgin – The Press Take On Teenage Sex – WSJ.com.

There’s more to the article.  For the record, I was ready to accept the whole thing.  Since I oppose public education on general principles I don’t feel that loyal to a curricullum, even if I happen to adopt the premise in my own teaching.  So it was somewhat difficult to realize I’d been gullible.  Live and learn.

One thought on “William McGurn: Like a Virgin–The Press Take On Teenage Sex – WSJ.com

  1. Boonton

    “The real headline from this study is this: “Religious Teens Differ Little in Sexual Behavior Whether or Not They Take a Pledge.””

    In otherwords the truth is that the pledge is ineffective. If it was effective, religious teens who took it would differ from religious teens that didn’t.

    Now you can assert that maybe the pledge is effective for non-religious teens but that would be only a hope rather than a statement supported by evidence. The way to test that is to do what these scientists did, take a sample of non-religious teens who took the pledge and compare to those who didn’t.

    This kind of begs the question of why teens who aren’t especially religious or conservative (and no the two are not the same) would take the pledge to begin with when it is being sold as part of the ‘religious and conservative’ brand?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *