- Girls only to be given abstinence sex education – because you know, boys NEVER push girls for sex, its all because of the little whore-girls
- She thinks that teaching children to say no will cut down on sexual abuse – because I am sure they were begging for it in the first place
- wanting to make abortion illegal
- failing that to reduce the abortion time limit
******in case it is not obvious there is a heavy use of sarcasm in the first two bullet points*********
If you want to email your MP please please do so – there are details in the article above. Here is the letter I have sent to my MP based on the template linked to in the article above. She didnot even attend the last vote on this (probably because she is conservative and doesn’t feel that she can vote against it). I have said at the end to contact me by email. This is because each time I write to her she sends me a postcard saying ‘thanks for the contact’ and then later sends me a letter. In this day and age, when I have used the internet to contact her, I think this is a waste of limited resources (mainly money to be honest).
Dear Jackie Doyle-Price,
On 20 January 2012, Nadine Dorries’ proposed amendment to sex education, Bill 185, which suggests GIRLS be taught abstinence, is due to get a second reading in parliament. I know that you were absent last time this came up, but I really hope that you will vote against this bill this time.
A demonstration opposing the bill is being supported by Youth Fight For Jobs, The British Humanist Association and Queers Against The Cuts.
The bill is sexist as it positions girls as being solely responsible for decisions about sexual activity and boys as having no responsibility for ensuring that sex is mutually wanted, fully consenting and safe. Dorries even said that teaching children to ‘say no’ could reduce child abuse. This victim blaming is dangerous, incorrect, and offensive to survivors of abuse.
Abstinence education on its own is ineffective in reducing teenage pregnancies and STI rates. Good quality comprehensive Sex and Relationships Education (SRE) should already explicitly address the option of abstinence as part of decision-making about sex, and safer sex.
SRE should be informative and fact based. Some of the most important bits of SRE, which really helps young people to take responsibility for themselves and make healthy decisions (namely the relationships and communication aspects), are optional for schools and this bill will not change that. If this bill passes, some schools could end up only teaching the biology of reproduction and STIs (within the science curriculum) plus abstinence.
If Dorries really wanted to help young women to stay safe and healthy she would be advocating for statutory, comprehensive sex and relationships education for all young people, of all genders, and in all schools whether they are faith schools, academies, free schools or community schools. Her party in Government has already stated that they have no intention of making SRE statutory.
I call on you to vote against this archaic ideological bill on its second reading on Friday 20 January 2012.
Please respond letting me know your voting intentions regarding this bill. Rather than wasting tax payers money on a postcard, followed by a letter, please just use email.