A teen sex guru speaks

"Morals and values" is such a loaded phrase. Many times it is used to indicate one thing: abstinence. How do you talk about morals and values to kids who have decided to be sexually active?

For so long, we've looked at kids who are sexually active and said, "They are immoral" or "They don't share our values." I actually believe that teens learn morals and values best by first watching ours, and second by discussion. They don't learn by having somebody like me lecture them. They learn by participating in a discussion where they are pushed to define their own particular morals. That's why parents need to be willing to talk about it.

In this country, the perception is that these [values] are just adopted lock, stock and barrel from an older generation. That is not how morals and values are learned. In fact, quite the contrary occurs: Kids don't listen to that type of format and they lie about what they are doing -- they go behind their parents' backs.

Many of the boys in the Guttmacher study seemed to be participating in activities that adults are uncomfortable talking about. Adults have a hard enough time talking to kids about vaginal intercourse. When it comes to oral sex, and especially anal sex, you're talking about a group of activities that a large number of adults consider immoral, and are in fact still banned in many states.

In 20 states, to be exact.

I have a hard time imagining a sex education instructor in this climate walking into a public school with a copy of Jack Morin's "Anal Pleasure and Health: A Guide for Men and Women."

Anal sex is not the place to begin sex education, but it's something that our kids are doing, so we have to be aware of it. Now that oral sex is such a topic of discussion, we have an opportunity to really educate our kids about this.

We are a sexually restrictive culture, with strong taboos, poor communication and restrictive gender roles. But to begin to have more discussion you have to look at what the kids are actually doing. A study like the one done by Guttmacher helps us to understand what kids need to talk more about.

Let's talk a little bit about Bush's choices for Cabinet positions. What do you see as the future of sex education under this administration?

Well, the nominee for secretary of health and human services, Tommy Thompson, is the former governor of Wisconsin. I think with him, we really don't know what's going to happen. But I am fearful that we might see a movement toward less sexual education and more abstinence-only education. And most of that is, you know, abstinence until marriage education.

Just to clarify: When we say that 48 states take abstinence-only money, does that mean that once they accept the money, the only sex ed programs they can teach are abstinence only? Or can the funds be used for, say, a portion of a semester-long sex education curriculum with a broader scope?

It means that a particular program is regulated. It doesn't affect the entire educational program, but it affects the part that the money is being used for. For the states using large amounts of abstinence-only money, there is a board that reviews the program and can cite or remove teachers who are too open. There also are sanctions involved with abstinence-only money that many parents are not aware of.

With the country as fractured politically as it is right now, adults can't even agree on issues such as gay and lesbian rights, much less whether or not premarital sex is acceptable. Does it still seem possible to have a sex education curriculum in the public schools that serves everybody?

Remember the recent Kaiser study? It came out about three months ago. Three-quarters of the parents in the survey felt that sex education programs in this country are limited and that kids need more education about a range of issues.

Parents may not want their child to be gay, they may not want their child to be sexually active, they may not want the child to have an abortion, but they recognize that for the good of their child, and other children in this country, this type of education is necessary. So I think that's the mandate that we need to respond to. If, in any other situation, such a large group wanted this to occur and we did not do it, there would be an outcry. Unfortunately, small groups that are very noisy about their discontent can prevent education for the majority.

Parents are now recognizing that if my daughter is not educated about, say, rape, I am depriving her of something she really needs. But it's going to take a long time to backtrack and rework our sex ed.

A quarter to a third of all parents have fairly negative views toward teenage sexuality. I think that's what we really have to worry about. We need to have sexual readiness workshops for parents in middle school and high school. Parents could come in, hear lectures, ask questions and participate in discussions. You think about sex ed for kids, but many of our parents are not ready to parent kids throughout this period.

• View blog reactions