One of my morning rituals is to read the Post-Gazette letters to the editor. Never underestimate the entertainment value of the ordinary citizen.
Last week they published a specimen from a gentleman distressed by the publication of an article on condoms for women in the magazine section, apparently in a section considered the most “family-friendly”. Part of his distress was over some of the word choices (Mad-libs anyone?) and part of it was over the article's tone.
To quote from his letter: “Yet that day, I was treated to the following, all in the heading and first 100 words of your article -- "condom" (six times), "pleasure," "prophylactics," "intimacy gels" and "vibrating rings.”
I'm not quite sure what to make of this one. The fact that he counted the number of times the word condom appeared in the first 100 words? Shocking only if the paper was publishing an article on cheese. The article was not about cheese. The headline was “A new line of condoms gives women choices, control”. Using the word “condom” in an article about condoms does not seem to be too out-of-the-box under those circumstances.
When did “pleasure” become a dirty word? Apple's Dashboard dictionary defines pleasure as “sensual gratification” but not as the primary definition (it is fourth on the list if you are curious).
Since the writer did not specify the age of his children, I don't know how much I can mine from his protest of the word “prophylactic”, except to say that I did not know what the word meant until I was fifteen and cannot pronounce it even now. If any of his kids have seen the outtakes from Ten Things I Hate About You, then they have at least heard the word spoken.
As for the words “intimacy gels” and “vibrating rings”, has he turned on a television during prime viewing hours lately? Has he taken them through a grocery store or drugstore?
While I poke gentle fun at the writer, his letter does raise a greater issue, and it is not about the editorial judgment of the paper. Towards the end of his missive, he states “There are parents out there who prefer to choose appropriate settings to discuss matters of sexuality with their children, and I'm pretty sure that looking for the comics is not one of those.”
I find such statements disturbing because they usually come out of the mouths of parents who do not want to address issues of sexuality with their children at all. Their method is to protect them from an article in a newspaper, a rack in the drugstore and ignore the playground banter. Put off the discussion until they are “older”. Complain when schools attempt to fill the communication gap and papers publish articles on condoms. Do it all in the name of “protecting” children.
Are not the moments to teach kids these things whenever you can grab them? I am not a parent (yet) but in my incarnation as a teacher I found that the best lessons are taught when there is laughter in the room. Rather than complain about how careless the paper was to publish such an article, would not a better response be to seize the moment and have that discussion around the breakfast table when minds are relaxed and open?
No comments:
Post a Comment