Monday, February 22, 2016

Abby Dow - Primary Source


For my primary source assignment this week, I closely read the Family Life/Sex Education Guidelines published by the California State Department of Education in 1987. The specific excerpts I posted on the blog (there were 28 pages of the guidelines) come from the section of the guidelines that focus on the criteria of evaluating family life/sex education materials. Specifically, the ones I chose to include deal with how the materials should be judged in terms of their treatment of key issues such as STD prevention (and specifically AIDS), homosexuality, and STDs. This source is very useful for my topic because it shows the way California (a state generally considered to be progressive) dealt with HIV/AIDS in the context of sex education. The “morality” component clearly comes through in the wording of the standards; for example, under the Homosexuality section, the source reads, “Family values and monogamous, heterosexual relationships are affirmed throughout the program.” Additionally, the push for abstinence education clearly comes through. For example, under the STD section, the document states, “There is no safe sex.” This entire source, as well as the specific excerpts I included, are very important for my paper on how the AIDS epidemic (and specifically Surgeon General Everett Koop’s push for education in 1986) affected sex education in the U.S.



5 comments:

  1. Your source seems to fit your topic well. It sheds light on the late 1980s and the time around that. I think that your source could further your paper.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Your source seems to fit your topic well. It sheds light on the late 1980s and the time around that. I think that your source could further your paper.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Abby, I absolutely love your source (so interesting!) and think it figures really well into your paper. I was particularly struck by criteria #19, especially "The material allows for factual, substantiated discussion of homosexuality, including the historical view and legal ramifications. When this source was published, sodomy laws were still in place in ~16 states, so the nature of this conversation would have differed greatly among states. This leads me to believe that, while the intentions were to have standardized education, similarly to the ways in which almost every subject is taught today, the existence of this document does not imply a homogenous dialogue about homosexuality, STDs, and sex.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Great source!
    "The topic [of homosexuality] should not be introduced before the seventh grade"...And the association between promiscuity and AIDs.....
    No mention of condoms?
    Was there other 'unofficial' advice that differed from the advice given here?

    ReplyDelete
  5. This is a super interesting source! I am wondering whether California's policy was unique in this time period, and whether other states passed similar standards. I am really looking forward to reading more of your analysis!

    ReplyDelete