Overturning the “Juno effect”
Photo Credit: Marcelo Resende/Creative Commons
.
August 31, 2010 • Sumar Deen, Scribbler staff
Filed under Opinions
It seemed like only yesterday when critics of the media went on and on about commercials laden with sex appeal and the way the media never portrayed the consequences of having unprotected sex. Now with shows like “16 and Pregnant,” movies like Juno, and pseudo-celebs like Bristol Palin, these critics are still griping. They even label the supposed attraction or glamor of pregnancy the “Juno effect.”
This idea is not only ridiculous, but also unfair. Studies show that in recent years, pregnancy rates have actually gone down; according to the Centers for Disease Control, they’ve been steadily dropping since the 1990s.
So why is there buzz about the Juno effect?
“In the context of parents still not comfortable talking with their children about sex, with schools talking only about abstinence until marriage and with religion saying it’s still a sin, the media have become very powerful sex educators,” Jane Brown, a journalism professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill said in a story for National Public Radio.
She and experts like her argue that while exposure to media like the movie might not actually encourage teenagers to get pregnant, it portrays a false, Hollywood version of what really happens when teens get knocked up.
But teenagers are smarter than that. Already, statistics appear to indicate that we know to be safe. According to CDC studies, 74% of sexually experienced teen guys used protection their first time as did 82% of females. Currently, 21 states provide birth control access to teenagers without parental consent. Trends like these point support a more optimistic outlook.
That is, until the next media vice.
Loading ...
Comments
Feel free to leave a comment...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!