With 1 million confirmed cases, Russia is experiencing an HIV/AIDS epidemic, and it seems like no one knows how to handle it. The response from the Russian government is conservative and prejudiced, and puts blame on the affected people for lacking morals.

Rising Epidemic

According to a UNAIDS report from July 2016, Eastern Europe and central Asia make up the only region in the world where AIDS continues to rise rapidly. More than 80 percent of new cases in that region were in Russia. Even though the majority of cases affect key populations, such as drug users and gay men, it also spreads quickly through the rest of the population, especially heterosexual women, because condoms are somewhat difficult to come by.

“Condoms have practically been banned because they lead to people having sex, and sex is risky,” said Dr. Orlova-Morozova, head of Moscow Regional Hospital’s AIDS department, to ABC. The hospital currently has 38,000 patients with HIV or AIDS. He said that there is not enough money for medicine, so they have to choose who to treat and turn away many.

Rejected by Society

This view on HIV/AIDS is so conservative and biased it is hard to believe. A poster on the hospital wall where Dr. Orlova-Morozova works says: “The majority of cases of HIV/AIDS are due to the weaknesses and improper behavior on behalf of the infected person.” People who are HIV positive often lose their jobs, their friends, and are pushed out from society.

Under President Putin’s rule, life in Russia has shifted back toward a moral standard that was commonplace during the Soviet Union era, and religious leaders have a lot of influence. The approach commonly adopted is ‘Family, fidelity and faith.’ According to LaSky, an outreach organization for gay men in Moscow, there was a “scientific” paper at a recent AIDS convention that was called “How prayer can cure HIV.”

The government has banned sex education in schools and it is punishable by law to even mention sex or AIDS to children under 15 years of age if you’re a teacher. It is estimated that over half of the HIV cases in Russia are spread via intravenous drug use. But despite the fact that methadone treatment is the most successful way of treating drug addiction according to WHO, methadone therapy has been illegal since Putin came to power. There is also no way to hand out sterile needles.

Distrust of the Government

The hospitals can’t even help everyone they would want to–people with foreign citizenships living in Russia are not entitled to free medical help. A man that ABC talked to, called Sasha, was born in Uzbekistan but lived in Moscow when he discovered he was HIV positive. To get free care he would have to go back home, where homosexuality is illegal. He can’t even work to make his own money for treatment, since he would have to prove he’s HIV-free to get a job in Russia.

Social worker Maksim Malyshev thinks it is the government’s attitude that is the problem.

In my view, the problem of HIV infection in Russia exists because the people whose job it is to find ways of preventing HIV in Russia are doing a crap job. They are living in some kind of fantasy world of their own, and they have no desire to listen about science-based methods and to the specialists who are working on this problem.

Evgeny Sorokoumov, project manager for LaSky, agrees, saying, “Putin wants to show the world that our country is strong. No one needs us. We can just die.”

The UNAIDS report concludes by stating that changes in behavior, comprehensive sex education, and distribution of condoms are important measures to prevent any further spread of HIV. But in Russia’s case, it seems to be the will that is lacking, not just the way.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Russia Faces AIDS Epidemic, Government Blames Moral Lapses appeared first on Law Street.

After a few months of debate on whether or not Utah would be considering porn a public health crisis, the state has finally pulled the trigger. Governor Gary Herbert signed a resolution earlier this week declaring porn a public health crisis.

While this bill does not in any way inhibit porn usage in the state, it does call for the:

Recogni[tion of] the need for education, prevention, research, and policy change at the community and societal level in order to address the pornography epidemic that is harming the citizens of Utah and the nation.

However, that education, prevention, research, and policy change could be difficult considering the state hasn’t laid out any kind of legislation or proposal as to what to do about this epidemic. In addition, the resolution doesn’t allot any kind of funding toward anti-porn education or anything of the sort–so how is this resolution helping with the so-called epidemic at all?

This resolution was created by one of the state’s Republican Representatives, Todd Weiler, with the goal of increasing awareness of the potential dangers of porn. Weiler claims that he wants default internet settings to be changed in order to make viewing porn more difficult than it currently is. The senator maintains that he is not trying to ban porn in the state of Utah, but rather make it less accessible for children and teenagers. Weiler was quoted saying that:

If a library or a McDonald’s or anyone else was giving out cigarettes to our children, we would be picketing them, and, yet, our children are accessing pornography on their tablets on these sites and we seem to be OK with that.

He is very concerned with how accessible pornography is on the internet because it leads to the corruption of children and young teens:

This is a $7 billion industry. Help us protect children from your evil, degrading, addictive, harmful substances. If adults want to do that, that’s their choice, but we’re talking about developing adolescent minds of our nation’s future.

Even after being mocked repeatedly when they first announced the state’s plan in January, the Utah legislature and governor are sticking to their guns and standing firmly by their decision to have porn listed as a public health crisis. Senator Weiler and Governor Herbert, along with several others, firmly believe that pornography is a danger to society because of how addicting it can be and the consequences that can come with a porn addiction.

One thing is for sure, if Utah wants to decrease porn usage in the state, they may as well just block the entire internet because, as we all know, porn is the one thing the internet is really made for!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTJvdGcb7Fs

Alexandra Simone

Alex Simone is an Editorial Senior Fellow at Law Street and a student at The George Washington University, studying Political Science. She is passionate about law and government, but also enjoys the finer things in life like watching crime dramas and enjoying a nice DC brunch. Contact Alex at ASimone@LawStreetmedia.com

The post It’s Official: Utah Declares Porn a Public Health Crisis appeared first on Law Street.

It’s that time again.

The TV tells me so with endless ads, and my dreams tell me so with the dreams I’ve had almost every August since I was 6, like my subconscious is whispering it like it thinks it’s auditioning for a horror movie: backtoschool, backtoschool, backtoschooooollll.

And even though my syllabus is done (well, mostly done), my new hire paperwork is in (finally), and I’m pretty sure my bank account won’t empty out completely before I get paid again (grad schools think we don’t pay rent in the summer), I agree with grumpy Twitter users and Leonardo DiCaprio:

"Are you ready for back to school sales?" #BackToSchool pic.twitter.com/hvrxaYqeNG

— CHILDHOOD RUINER (@SongsPost) August 10, 2015

Still, though, I am ready for John Oliver’s take on #backtoschool prep. With the help of Laverne Cox and Nick Offerman, he just released a comical (but oh, too true) sex ed PSA.

And even though most people are rightly focusing on the actual content of the PSA–which Mic sums up in a great series of stills–I’d like to have a moment of online silence for the couple of seconds in his intro when Oliver cracks himself up making fun of kids teetering on the edge of puberty (he tries to get over it from 0:55-0:59). Watching him amuse himself is funnier, for me, than the joke itself, which I would have left out of the damn thing: shouldn’t body positivity go along with any sexual education proclaiming itself to be liberal? If the kid is proud of what his body is doing, let him be proud.

But, if you want to critique where he gets the idea that he should be so proud of a mustache (hello, damaging conceptions of “manhood” that lead to the very rapey sex that the PSA generally tries to address), that’s fine, too: go for it. But shouldn’t a critique of the dominance of masculinity (which Oliver could have gone into with the kid being “way too proud” of his “ghost mustache”) be more incisive than a punchline?

Yes, maybe. But then, everything’s a punchline here (which always, of course, has its goods and its bads). Some (but not all) of the bads: the video is presented as being about “teen birth control decisions.” When I was a teenager, I just turned off (pun?) when people would try to talk about that. A cis woman who was dating another cis woman (and, largely because we were teenagers, thought we’d never want to have sex with anyone else), I wasn’t worried about birth control. At the time, I didn’t think I would ever have to be. So I didn’t pay attention to any sex ed. Because it was super heteronormative. Like Oliver’s video. *facepalm*

So even while we’re watching, and even while we’re getting a lot of things right, we–and by we, here, I mean Oliver’s video–always have to seek to improve where we can. Even and especially through the “everything’s a punchline” mentality.

Some of the goods, though:

From “this is a vagina” (*GIGGLE*) to “and this is a butt,” (*GRAVE STARE*), the PSA says it is addressing itself to teenagers who are going to make a ‘hugely important’ decision: “no decision is probably more important than the one you’ll make about becoming sexually active.” And it does so by making us…laugh.

Which is useful, actually. Because it can diminish nerves and it can take away skittishness. It allows us to laugh about sex while firmly telling us, “no, no, violating someone’s consent is not something to laugh about.” (Best line award goes to Laverne Cox: “This is actually pretty simple: if someone doesn’t want to have sex with you, don’t have sex with them.”)

When we can laugh, we can ask better questions. And our students can ask better questions.

If the laughter isn’t at someone’s expense (like the Ancient Egyptians joke in the PSA. JOHN OLIVER STOP IT RACIST MICROAGGRESSIONS ARE NOT OKAY AND ARE NOT FUNNY), it can level a bit of the power playing field between teacher and student: with laughter easily flowing, it’s harder for teachers to present ourselves as “authorities” of sex. Which we’re not. Instead, we’re more like peers of students, who–like teenagers–have a variety of sexual and sexuality-related experiences. It’s a good thing if we don’t pretend we’re authorities of sex. Because let’s not pretend we all have had all the sexual experiences ever. Or even all the sexual knowledge ever. Because we don’t. Because we don’t all even get the idea that it’s probably best not to rape someone.

Adults need sex ed, too. Everyone is always learning.

And maybe the whole laughter thing can help us get there, just a little bit.

Jennifer Polish

Jennifer Polish is an English PhD student at the CUNY Graduate Center in NYC, where she studies non/human animals and the racialization of dis/ability in young adult literature. When she’s not yelling at the computer because Netflix is loading too slowly, she is editing her novel, doing activist-y things, running, or giving the computer a break and yelling at books instead. Contact Jennifer at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Sex Ed: Now Featuring John Oliver appeared first on Law Street.

The state of sex education in the United States is put simply, a complicated mess. It’s one of the subjects in which our essential decentralization of public education from state to state is most apparent. Some states teach comprehensive sex education, others teach abstinence only. And that’s just the public schools. Private schools can pretty much teach whatever they want. All of this means that we are sending young people into the world with wildly different expectations, understandings, and questions about sexual and reproductive health. Luckily, some students in the Clark County School District in Nevada are now standing up for themselves and demanding real sex education.

This spring, the Huffington Post put together a number of truly terrifying maps to show the disparity of sex education across the country; this is the one I found the most disturbing:

That’s right, all those states in red don’t necessarily have to provide medically accurate information about sex to their students. Some of the greatest misinformed hits from sex ed classes around the country, courtesy of a Congressional report, include:

• HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, can be spread via sweat and tears.
• Condoms fail to prevent HIV transmission as often as 31 percent of the time in heterosexual intercourse.
• Women who have an abortion are more prone to suicide.
• Ten percent of women who have an abortion become sterile.

These “facts” are not only patently false, but go straight to spreading fear and misinformation. There’s really no regulation to insist that that students get appropriate or accurate information when it comes to sex, which has led to terrifying gaps in knowledge among young people.

For example, a 2009 study shows that nearly half of sexually active young people do not use protection regularly. Laura Lindberg, of the Guttmacher Institute, a research institution, explains that this statistic probably stems from abstinence only programs that emphasize the problems with contraception in an attempt to stop young people from having sex altogether. Lindberg says:

Abstinence-only curriculums have gone explicitly out of their way to teach misconceptions about contraception. This generation of 20-somethings have missed many opportunities to get medically accurate and correct information

Because many states aren’t required to provide that accurate information, myths are rampant, and people actually make more unsafe choices.

Contrast that with how students fare in states that teach comprehensive sex education, including the real facts about contraception. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently released a report detailing how the teen pregnancy rate is much lower in those states.

Even with all of that information, the sex education we provide to students continues to be extremely contentious. But now, some students are starting to take matters into their own hands. Or rather, their own voices. Students in Clark County School District in Las Vegas are protesting for a comprehensive sex education curriculum. They are pushing for real, accurate information on topics including sexual assault, masturbation, and other topics that both parents and school districts have deemed inappropriate. But junior Caitlyn Caruso, one of the leaders of the protest, pointed out the clear need for such discussions in the classroom. A victim of sexual assault, she relayed her experience with sex education in school:

I didn’t have words to name what had happened to me in the past and the experiences I had with sexual assault… I wasn’t provided with that terminology in my sexual health education classes here in Nevada. It took me years before I could access that information and could name what happened to me.

She continued:

When I walked into my first sex education class, I was confronted by the immediate message ‘Don’t have sex until you get married’ and ‘If you have sex before get married, you’re not pure anymore,’ I felt ostracized and alienated and impure. I felt dirty, and like I didn’t belong there, and like I didn’t really belong anywhere.

I understand the argument that we need to protect our young people from information that is too mature for them. But it’s unrealistic in this day and age, when sex is all over the media, to expect that teens are completely in the dark. It’s better to provide accurate information than none at all, or worse, inaccurate information. I applaud the Las Vegas students who are taking a stand.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Nevada Students Demanding Comprehensive Sex Ed appeared first on Law Street.

Hello! Welcome to my blog. I thought I’d start things off with a rather tame subject, so let’s talk about abortion!

Well not really, but sort of. Let me explain.

I was scrolling through my Facebook news feed the other day when I came upon a friend’s status, which read: “Pro-Choice is not Pro-Abortion.” I wanted to “Like” this bit of wisdom a thousand times over, but on my way to click the little thumbs-up sign I noticed the status had 57 comments.

Fifty-seven.

After expanding the comment section (which was rapidly growing to 60…61…62…)  and reading through them, it became immediately apparent that I had stumbled onto a heated political debate comprised completely of supposed “friends” text-yelling (ALL CAPS) at each other through their comments. It is a social custom I have tried hard to avoid, as it is known to feed on the ignorance and close-mindedness of its debaters, and really who has ever had their opinion changed by a Facebook argument?

This one looked to be no different, but I began reading through the paragraphs of hardly-thought-out arguments anyway, simultaneously amused and saddened by the lack of true information being shared. The friend who had originally posted the status had stopped commenting around number 20 when one of the more opinionated Conservatives in the thread had said: “Of COURSE the man hating feminist is against having babies.”

Whoa.

First of all: this person clearly did not know the difference between feminism and misandry (but that’s a topic for another post). Second: they demonstrate the problem with posting political arguments on your profile.

Now, I am all for sharing your political opinions on social media. Unfortunately, you rarely see people posting statuses that are level-headed and based on fact. Rather, you’ll find opinions rooted in anger and ignorance that employ such devices as name-calling (as seen above) or references to religion that have no relevance to the argument. Also, more often than not, these hot-button topics like abortion, or gay rights, or feminism, spur debates that don’t go anywhere or change anything. Those topics are just small facets of larger issues that need to be addressed: sexual education, women’s health, women’s rights, the definition of marriage, etc.

Let’s look at the short and sweet status that started all this: “Pro-Choice is not Pro-Abortion.” The reason I liked it so much is because it’s really not about abortion at all. What this status is saying in as few words as possible is that Pro-Choice is about a woman’s right to make decisions about her own body. Pro-Choice says that we, as free American citizens, do not have the right to make decisions for thousands of women we have never met. It does not mean that, if given the choice, we would choose abortion. It doesn’t matter. Every woman is different and every single one should be able to decide what happens to her body. And yes, until that baby comes out of her vagina, it is part of her body.

But the topic of Pro-Choice/Pro-Life is at the tail end of a problem that begins with sex ed. Yes, those awkward hours of listening to your school’s P.E. teacher telling you how to put on condoms and explaining STIs. Did you know that not every school kid had to have that class? And of those who did, only a fraction got medically accurate information?

We all laugh at that scene from Mean Girls when Coach Carr is talking about how pregnancy will kill you. You know the one.

The not-so-funny part is that some kids actually receive that type of education from their teachers. According to this map put together by the Huffington Post, in the year 2014 several states don’t even require their schools to share information on contraception.

Courtesy of the The Huffington Post.

If there’s one thing that’s true about teenagers it’s that if they want to have sex, they will. Especially if you tell them not to. How can we expect them to have safe sex, and prevent STIs and unwanted pregnancies, if they don’t have all the information they need to know? It is only logical that if the number of people using contraception goes up, the number of unwanted pregnancies — and therefore abortions — will go down.

Sex ed restrictions aren’t merely for schools, though. Organizations like Planned Parenthood exist to give women and men information about contraceptives, STIs, abortions, adoptions, and healthcare. Yet, people continue to fight these organizations because they perform abortions. The focus, for some reason, is on just one of the many helpful services offered. But, like drugs and firearms, if you make something illegal people will still get their hands on it — and illegal abortions are definitely not safe.

So, for the safety and sanity of all the sexually active people out there: stop arguing about abortion and instead provide some alternatives to the dismal state of sex ed in America. And remember, when arguing about political issues on social media, keep it calm, accurate, and open-minded.

Morgan McMurray

Morgan McMurray is an editor and gender equality blogger based in Seattle, Washington. A 2013 graduate of Iowa State University, she has a Bachelor of Arts in English, Journalism, and International Studies. She spends her free time writing, reading, teaching dance classes, and binge-watching Netflix. Contact Morgan at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Discussing Abortion Distracts From Root Issue: Sex Ed appeared first on Law Street.

Thousands of parents in California have recently done their children a great disservice by signing a petition to remove a sex ed book from the classroom called “Your Health Today.”

The book, which was slated to be used in 9th grade sex ed classes in Fremont, California this fall, takes a refreshingly new approach to sex ed by actually discussing things most 9th graders are questioning. It actually manages to go beyond clinical discussions of eggs, sperm, and vague references to how one reaches the other.

The petitioners claims that the book “exposes youth to sexual games, sexual fantasies, sexual bondage with handcuffs, ropes, and blindfolds, sexual toys and vibrator devices, and additional instruction that is extremely inappropriate.” With a description like that, you would think that the school district accidentally purchased a Cards Against Humanity deck rather than a textbook.

No one denies these topics are mentioned, but as pointed out by Slate, the book only provides definitions (students looking for anything more will need to sneak in to 50 Shades of Grey when it premieres next year. Or just use Google.) And on closer inspection, “Your Health Today” is actually a really informative book that provides information every sex ed class should: how to put on a condom, anatomically correct drawings of reproductive organs, and a myriad of topics affecting today’s youth that range from online dating to the idea of “hooking up” with someone.

But parents are seemingly up in arms over their teenagers being “exposed” to this information, as if talking about sex toys could do the same kind of damage as, say, a complete lack of information about preventing HIV. The parents are protesting even though school officials in Fremont say their own internal surveys show many students are sexually active.

I can’t say I’m surprised parents have had this reaction. As a culture, we regard sex as shameful and wrong, which has led to a lot of misinformation about sex and the topics surrounding it. Time after time we have heard about students who are uninformed about birth control, the importance of consent, and STIs. Sweeping sex under the rug and only talking about it in the most clinical of senses does not do anything to change that.

If we want children to develop healthy attitudes towards sex–ones that revolve around respect, emotional preparedness, and a working knowledge of the good and bad parts of being sexually active–we need to actually talk about it with teenagers. We need books that teach kids about their birth control options, that their sexual preferences aren’t wrong or unnatural, and that a lot of responsibility comes with being sexually active.

But we need parents to be on board, too. Mercury News reported one parent griping that: “there’s a section that tells you how to talk to your prospective partners about your sexual history […] How does that relate to a 14-year-old kid? I don’t see it at all.”

And therein lies the problem–that parent clearly doesn’t understand that this kind information could be invaluable for their child in just a few years. So I’m leaving it up to the rest of the parents in Fremont–the ones who are okay with their children learning about the great, bad, and everything in-between parts of sex–to tell the school board the support this book, and they support sex ed. We can’t get by with just teaching out kids “how sex works.” I promise, they already know that much. Let the school district teach an effective, comprehensive sex education class so your kids are as prepared as they can be. The more information they have, the better off they are.

[Petition] [Salon] [Mercury News]

Molly Hogan

Molly Hogan is a student at The George Washington University and formerly an intern at Law Street Media. Contact Molly at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Hey Parents: Comprehensive Sex Education is Worth It appeared first on Law Street.