I’ve been thinking of how one could use a Debbie Does Dallas line to be funny. I came up with a few thoughts on it, such as if someone were discussing a sex education bill or something where one makes clear one is not talking about the individual’s behavior.
However, it’s definitely not funny in the context of talking about someone who has HPV and had a hysterectomy. Repeating it only makes it worse.
It’s fine to criticize the ideas someone has if they share a personal experience, but to imply they are a slut or a porn star in their behavior is over the line. Way over the line. 60 -70 % of the population contracts HPV in some form. Just on the issue of making a message persuasive, telling a majority of people they are dirty filthy people is unhelpful to the message.
How a single individual contracted HPV isn’t the point and trying to embarrass someone who shared an intensely personal part of their medical history only makes the person trying to embarrass her look like a sociopath. Or perhaps that’s just an accurate description of the person trying to embarrass the person with HPV.
What’s hysterical is this line from Stanek:
Back to those liberal bloggers. Their loud demand for ignorance can be interpreted only one of two ways. Either they hold a paternalistic view of women as being too weak to handle the truth or an exploitive view of women who should remain sex objects no matter the cost to their health. There is no other explanation for hysterical protests to shut up about the cause of HPV.
No one wants anyone to shut up about the causes of HPV. In fact, one can look at Debbie Halvorson’s record and see one that advocates comprehensive sex education which has demonstrated far more success in avoiding STDs than does abstinence only education that Stanek supports. Halvorson actually supports giving students age appropriate information to avoid infection instead of pushing a failed policy of abstinence only education. The only people trying to gag anyone in the discussion are those ignorant fools like Stanek who don’t care about evidence, but they are on a religious crusade to punish women who have sex.
Let’s recall what Stanek suggested:
* Halvorson could discuss the number of sex partners she has had throughout her lifetime and how each one increased the likelihood of contracting HPV.
* If Halvorson even had only one sex partner aside from her husband, she could discuss how one can contract HPV from a sole encounter.
* Halvorson could discuss whether she realized at the time her sex partner carried HPV, which most trusting, vulnerable women don’t.
* Halvorson could disclose whether it was her husband who passed HPV on to her after sleeping with other women, demonstrating another reason for chaste behavior outside the marriage bedroom.
* More uncomfortably, if Halvorson contracted HPV through rape, she could discuss ways to avoid rape.But no, Halvorson does not advocate avoiding a risky behavior that leads not only to HPV but to 20+ other STDs and their strains, along with unplanned pregnancy. Halvorson merely advocates trying to avoid the consequences of risky behavior. Shame on her.
Halvorson does advocate avoiding risky behavior and when having sex to reduce the risks involved. That’s dealing with reality that people actually do have sex.
Stanek seems to think if you say just say no enough, people won’t have sex. That has never been true and it never will be true. People are sexual beings and that’s a good thing. Teaching young people how to have healthy relationships is how to best reduce risks across the board. Teaching them to just say no leads to the same level of sex just without the tools to avoid pregnancy and STDs.
Beyond that, even if people make poor decisions regarding sex, there is nothing wrong with reducing the risks of those poor decisions. Under Stanek’s standards seatbelts would only be encouraging teens to speed and therefore morally wrong.
There’s a history of being able to say anything in some conservative circles and not be shunned. Apparently that’s true at the Illinois Review.