"Where in the world is my Seventeen magazine," echoed a young teenage girl's voice through the aisles of Albertson's grocery store. OK, you can replace "young teenage girl" with "the guy writing this column," but that's not the point. The point is, the October issue of Seventeen was pulled from the shelves of Albertson's stores in 12 states, including Arizona, because of an article titled "Vagina 101."
The catalyst was three depictions of a vagina. One is actually a colored diagram labeling different parts, while the other two are actual photographs.
The pictures are displayed in a professional, informative format with the intent to teach young girls about the nature of their bodies.
While pulling Seventeen from shelves may seem inconsequential, it is actually representative of a much larger crisis affecting youth health across the nation.
For example, the Tucson Citizen reported on the Seventeen ban and interviewed several concerned parents. They quoted one unhappy parent as saying, "It's dirty. It's dirty," while another parent said, "That's graphic. If that's supposed to be educational, that should be taught in school, not a magazine."
Who knew the female body was dirty, and sex education should only be taught in school?
It seems clear; some people do not think sex education should be available via the mass media. But if teens and parents are reluctant to discuss these issues, that leaves schools to be the provider of sex education in America.
If teens should be learning about sex and sexuality in school, it would be wise to understand just how our nation's schools are addressing the issue.
The answer to that is simple -- we are doing it with a huge religious bias.
In fact, as reported by "60 Minutes," the government is spending $167 million dollars on abstinence-only programs, pushing the conservative Christian moral agenda, in the United States. Strangely enough, that was part of Bush's political agenda while governor of Texas, at a cost of $10 million. The results left Texas with the lowest decline in teen birth rates of any state.
Not only is abstinence-only being pushed in schools; facts are abused regarding the science of reproductive health for teens.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention studied the effectiveness of sex education programs combating teen pregnancy and STDs. Their research proved that five sex-education programs showed progress, all of which endorsed comprehensive sex education not abstinence-only.
Additionally, teachers should discuss condom failure rates instead of success rates. Otherwise, it is similar to discussing only the good decisions one makes after drinking all night (and most of us know those percentages).
Failing to do so, and pushing abstinence even though it is a documented failure at reducing teen pregnancy, is blatantly ignoring science based evidence geared toward the general well being of teen reproductive health.
Even more unimaginable, Bush appointed Dr. David Hager to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Advisory Committee on reproductive health. Yet, in 1998 Dr. Hager published a book, "As Jesus Cared for Women: Restoring Women Then and Now," advising women to read specific verses from the Bible to treat premenstrual syndrome.
If teens cannot learn proper, unbiased sex education in the classroom, the least Albertson's could do is let young people -- or 26-year-old male architecture students -- read about it in Seventeen .
By itself, the decision to pull Seventeen is trivial. Yet, in a more encompassing national scenario, it is a frightening result of a religious agenda censoring knowledge for America's youth.
If that's the direction we're heading, it may not be too long until confused teens utter to each other, "Where is my vagina?"
Noah Lewkowitz is an architecture graduate student. You can reach him crying in the aisles of Albertson's at noah.lewkowitz@asu.edu.
