Consent is one of the biggest issues never discussed in conversations about sex, whether the talks are happening in classrooms, the bedroom of two adults, or in the back of a station wagon (or your parents’ basement, or under the bleachers…you get the picture).

Let me just say that I think teaching young folks about abstinence is great. Sex is something that should be entered into with full knowledge and consent, and complete awareness of the physical and emotional implications. Teaching people they have the agency and ability to say no to sex is awesome. Teaching people they can be happy, sexual, popular, self-confident people and say no to sex is wonderful. Teaching people they can consent to hand-holding, hugging, kissing, stroking, taking a shirt off, and still say no to sex, that’s empowering.

Abstinence-only programs do none of those things. Abstinence-only is not empowering. Teaching people (women especially) that they’re used, they’re unwanted, they’re disgusting, and even dirty lollipops if they consent to sex outside of marriage is depressing. Discouraging people from open discussion about sexuality and desires through shaming and scare tactics is downright wrong.

How can someone make decisions about to engaging in sexual activity if all the information they have amounts to "sex is bad and 'purity' is good "?

On a visit back home I ran into a 15-year-old friend of my sister’s. When my sis was off talking to a couple of other friends, I was sitting with this girl (let’s call her Tina.) Tina pointed to something in the nearby vicinity and said it was roll-y “like a condom.” I asked her a couple of follow-up questions and it turns out Tina had had sex with two previous boyfriends and now she was known for being a girl who would do that kind of thing, and she didn’t know how to say no. She felt the guys who dated her only asked her out because they knew she had had sex, and she felt obligated to them. I mean, hell, once the wrapper’s off the lollipop, you can’t just shove it back on and say it’s still good. (Disclaimer: I did *not* use that analogy in the conversation with her.)

When I told her that she could say no to the next boy, even though she’d said yes to the first boy, her reaction was gratitude. “No one has ever said that to me before. I’ve never thought of it like that.” Then we talked about her condom use. She had no idea which sexual acts would expose her to STD’s, and no idea that you could use condoms outside of intercourse.

Thanks abstinence-only in Archbold, OH. Bang-up job you’ve done.

When we finished that conversation, Tina was excited that she could say no until she felt ready to engage in sexual acts, and I felt confident that if she did decide to, she’d know how to protect herself from STD’s and pregnancy as best she could. I felt bad knowing not everyone has a friend’s sister they can go to, and not every sister’s friend is like me (let’s face it-I’m hard to compete with).

If we aren’t having full, open and honest conversations about sex, we’re not equipping people with the tools they need to decide in which circumstances they say yes, and in which they say no. We aren’t teaching people the signs to look for to know whether a partner is unable to or has not yet consented (alcohol and drug consumption, mental health issues, age differences, lack of a clear, voluntary and vocal “yes”, etc.).

It’s time to move from a frame of draping sex in sin and shame to one of giving people tools and knowledge; so they feel empowered to say no, so they only engage in sexual acts with fully consenting partners, and so they are capable of protecting themselves from pregnancy and STD’s if they say yes. Come on, Ohio. It’s time.

Jennifer Yoder is a Victim's Services Coordinator for the Ohio Alliance to End Sexual Violence.