highlights of our c-span cities tour. examine the text of the declaration of independence. friday, we're in yorktown virginia to cover the replica of the french sailing ship that brought us representative lafayette. watch our special primetime edition of american history tv at monday at 8 p.m.. and tune in as we tell america's story on c-span3. >> each week, american history tv sits in on a class with a college professor. georgetown university professor talks about the different types of sex education used across the country in the 1950's. and why such courses have become politically divisive today. she compares programs in oregon,

new jersey, and california. and how they were often use to instill gender norms and racial divides. her classes about one hour and ten minutes. chatelain: by former employer, the university of oklahoma, has had a lot of attention for a number of reasons. it is interesting. a group of students were caught on camera -- current camera phone rather, singing a racist song about lynching. the students immediately were expelled from university. by president david of university of oklahoma. is anyone troubled by the singular action of the president? is anyone troubled the university president has expelled students unilaterally question mark yes?

>> i think these things come up a lot. in our quick reaction society where people are robbed of the right of due process. and i think particularly in the university setting, i think anyone would be hard-pressed to defend their actions but not to defend their right to due process. prof. chatelain: it is a scary idea right, that there can be -- a student can make a choice that has an impact on the community, and there are choices students make an university settings, and there can be such a quick response. one may argue if they had worked at the university of oklahoma that perhaps the response may be a distraction to other issues that are happening on campus and this was a strategic decision in

hopes that would not be deeper digging into the culture at the university that may yield other issues. but i'm not saying that. so the question is how do we , handle a university environment? what do we do a university? >> the nature of the video itself. i'm reminded of the donald sterling incident. both incidences, they are inexcusable that the same time it is raising the question of if they didn't know they were being filmed, where does your freedom of speech come into play. i don't agree with what the attorney did but it is troublesome that you could be saying something stupid, films randomly and expelled. or lose your basketball team.

prof. chatelain: there are consequences to our speech public and private. right? our expectations of privacy can have consequences in the public. right? but you have to question the structural question of what does it mean when a group of students on a bus on the way to a party that part of their entertainment, part of them getting their head in the party game is to sing a racist song on a bus? what does that say? someone have their end up in the back? thoughts about this? yes. >> there was a reporter that made a comment about michelle obama. it was kind of, he made a very [inaudible] which is very offensive. he has commented on several things.

so it is like where does that , come into play? prof. chatelain: there's a sense of there is a standard as an employee that this is not ok. this reminds me of last semester. if you are in the class, a professor at the university of illinois fired for a tweet, that some perceived as anti-semitic or anti-israel. and the university severed their relationship with him. what are the limits of speech and what are the consequences? can we hold each other to a standard of being reasonable and respectful but do we need these other mechanisms? it will be interesting to see the stuff that unfolds. the students working on the issues at the university of oklahoma are fantastic. there is a lot of energetic students are saying their deeper questions we have to ask. >> we are also held to a

standard on social media. it is not just tweets. prof. chatelain: are the much bigger than the place and we are in? what else is going on? >> in the resurgence of black lives matter around the police brutality of the student, an honor student, and it made me think about our discussions last semester surrounding who is a worthy victim and worthy face to take up a cause, and even when you google him you can't find -- with mike brown you can't find anything.

now is the time. prof. chatelain: university of virginia, it has been a rough year. the question about, i think this is why i don't like millennial bashing. people who do it our meet and -- mean and dumb. one of the things that we see throughout these different campus communities is a smart and very transparent way of thinking about these issues. one of the reasons why black lives matter and the ferguson movement has distinguished itself historically is that it didn't fall into this trap of this person was a bad victim and we are going to look for a good victim. there is a consistency of the question. right? if we say black lives matter to we have to bracket which lives? it does not matter peace smoked weed and listen to rap music. the question of the person is

about being treated with a level of respect. >> he was arrested by the alcohol abt and they said he was arrested for having a fake id. even in the reports, if he did have this fake id -- this never would happen. prof. chatelain: no id has been recovered. from what i understand there is , no fake id or there might have been. the question is what is a human , life worth? let's say he had 100 fake ids with him. the brutality of the experience and the scale of these things is what is giving a lot of people pause. a quick side note. i'm doing a teacher training. with people in ferguson and st. louis. one of the things that was powerful is that a number of teachers said they were not allowed to talk about ferguson until november. a woman who works and lives and is from ferguson said only talk

about rebuilding trust we talk about rebuilding trust we're not just talking about the police, we are talking but educators. teachers let the community down. the importance of the deeper engagement, and i think universities are being called into question, it isn't just about providing a quality education or providing access, it is a producer that represents itself on and off campus. one last hot topic. we can use a lighter one. >> before spring break there was an article online. it was on yahoo! and multiple websites. these two twins. one was black and one was white. they constantly get [inaudible] confused. prof. chatelain: the twins. we will talk about this when we talk about caucasian. buzzfeed didn't article. here is an entire article of

people who are related but not the same racial group. the point is, we will talk about the object of looking like one race or the other in the dynamics of the family. the movie you saw on tuesday touched on it. the author of "caucasia" is in that movie. she pretended she didn't know her dad and her sister when she saw someone from school because she didn't know what the reaction was. the last one, you can go to starbucks and talk about race now. so, we will be canceling class. and just going to starbucks to talk about race. just kidding. let's get started. for today, we are looking at the question of sex education. and susan freeman's book is

challenging our notions about the path as sexually repressed and conservative in the present as liberal and more open. i think what this text does, we talk about broader questions about the relationship between race and sex education, it challenges us to think outside of the box as a time in a dolt -- as a time when an adult is telling young people about sex it is necessarily oppressive. anytime there is engagement about sex and sexuality it is always in a progressive lens. this complicates this idea. the first question i have, is sex education in the state interest? why do we understand public schools having a responsibility to do sex education? any thoughts? yes? >> considering rates of pregnancies, it is important if you are not getting education in

the home, it is important the state educate you. at least you can try to prevent these high rates of pregnancies in high school and middle school. prof. chatelain: they have this preventative task. we understand there may be a correlation between unplanned early pregnancies and social consequences. if i were to tell you the teen pregnancy rate is the lowest it has been in decades, would that mean sex education is working? possibly, maybe? we have to wonder why. what else? is it in the state's interest to do sex education? yes. >> with regard to contracting diseases, the state has an interest to make sure people are aware of things that could happen. that prevents having to deal with a major epidemic. prof. chatelain: we understand it as a long-term investment.

the health of the nation. it isn't just about pregnancy is about sexually transmitted diseases. we can extend it to healthy eating, benefits of exercise anti-smoking. the state has an interest in the health of its people. one of the thing that is interesting is when we look at where and how sex education is being done in comparison to these models in the books we find that perhaps the path had a more sophisticated understanding about the origins or the necessity of sex education than we do in the present. the states and red do not require sex education at all. with the caveat that in illinois there is some education that is not mandatory but you have to do health education. we have to provide medically accurate information on abstinence. in mississippi, localities may

include contraception, only with permission from the state department of education. in tennessee sex education is , required if the pregnancy rate is 19.5 or higher per 1000 teenage women. ages 15-17. we see this thing that we may agree is in the state interest. right? but the mechanisms in which it is applied are vastly different. they are shaped by a political climate. if we look at the states that don't require hiv education, this is interesting. so can we imagine education about hiv as mandatory but education about sex is not? operating the same place? going further. states where sex and hiv education and provided don't

have to be medically accurate. you seem bewildered. yes? >> what is that? are they looking for the medically accurate, states that are sketchy with articles. prof. chatelain: what does any -- what does it mean about being medically accurate? some states have taken a position about abstinence only education. one of the controversies about abstinence only education is the question about whether it is medically accurate. to say to the group of young people that the only way to prevent unplanned pregnancy is abstinence. that is not medically accurate. it is a true statement. abstinence is one mechanism. it is not necessarily medically accurate. why do we have so many fine definitions about the nature of sex education? right? the last one, states were sex

education if provided must include information on abstinence but not on contraception. again we see the level of , specificity in a way that when we look at these models that have the origins of the 1930's , people are not thinking in terms of parsing what it means to provide sex education. they have a viewpoint and the perspective but they are not engaged in this type of definition because sex education had not become a political issue the way it is today. how many folks in the room went to a school in which abstinence only was the standard? interesting. how many were to school where there was no sex education? how many went to school where you would say they had comprehensive sex and help -- sex and health education? how many went to school where

there was any type of distribution of contraception? how many who raise their hand went to school in the u.s. ? very interesting. the last one, states where sex education of provided must include negative information on same-sex relationships. we see another layer. don't be ashamed if you are from these states. we are all different. i saw some hiding. how did sex get into schools? the first question that this book, the first idea that it advances we think about the past, we suggest that people were compliant until the 1960's and all hell broke loose.

and people stopped following orders. that is kind of a dim view of humanity. that this idea that young people were so absorbed with the idea of conformity that they could just accept sex education as it was given to them until the sexual revolution. what she is saying is the relationships are more common. even as sex education was an idea of normative expectations, young people were engaging this issue. there are questions of these ideas. and that sex education was a form of training. in formative relationships and heterosexual reality. when i think about this book i think about a 1957 facts of life and love for teens. if you want to borrow it you can

ask me privately. after class. it is everything a teenager should know about life. one of the things that is interesting, it opens about sexual maturity and puberty and it ends with how much a wedding should cost. how to balance the budget in a household. it is a comprehensive idea that adulthood isn't about the physical changes of puberty and managing a sexual relationship it is about the depth and quality of the family relationship which is the building block of a healthy nation. finally it challenges the notion that the path of conservatives in the present as liberal. when i was a young person in the 1980's, the aids crisis shaped a lot of the comprehensive hiv education that in some places doesn't exist anymore. people debated contents in -- debated condoms in school but there wasn't a question about

sex education. abstinence only education was not something you would find in a public school but it was considered only part of a religious education. and so the idea that entire , states are using abstinence only education as the standard for sex education really does trouble this notion as a present is far more liberal than the past. any questions or concerns or reflections? we will move on. why sex education? at the core of sex education was this idea of gender, and how the content and methods are developed are these ideas about school as a place that has forms of gender imprinting. right? what are the mechanisms. what are the ways that schools reproduce ideas about gender and roles? yes, ashley. ashley: by determining who can and cannot go to a school dance

as a couple. prof. chatelain: very good. every so often there will be the students banned from going to a dance together. usually a same-sex couple. what else? the separation of boys and girls during sex education. which is interesting because when we look at the film clip of human growth that comes out of oregon, boys and girls together on the same information. we have this understanding of boys and girls needing to know different things. >> prom king and queen. prof. chatelain: the school dance. if i was elected princess or queen of all school things i would abolish dances. peer and total terror as a young person. what is the purpose of a school sponsoring a dance? anyone want to make a case?

as a productive social site? sure, make the case. >> i will take a shot. it brings those relationships into the public sphere that can be observed and condone. the notion of some dancing that happens is frankly terrifying. you have chaperones who can leave room between couples and whatnot. it is kind of like, instead of letting the couples go to their houses, it is putting in the public sphere where they can judge it. prof. chatelain: it is this idea of mediating the social sphere. a school that comes one of many social sites. at the very least there can be , some type of monitoring of it. what else? >> we could invite our brother schools over.

leave room for the holy spirit leave room for jesus. it plays into what he said, it brings relationships into the public sphere and then condoning it. prof. chatelain: it is a weird kind of role. right? i think it comes back to this conversation earlier about universities. universities are not businesses. right? we are in the business of forming young minds to be better citizens for our democracy and we have to have rules and regulation. right? i think that there is this awkward space about is this different, but most of you are of legal age. you are 18 or older when you have this experience. so we treat you like adults. ,in some ways. and now there is, this is supposed to be a nurturing environment. schools do the same role for young people as they are moving into critical spaces of maturity. pre-1960 sex education had broad

support. because it was based in normative heterosexuality and the family. this idea that there could be this broad-based coalition against sex education doesn't really emerge until the 1970's when conversations about local control and federal power start to become part of the discourse of school management. now, when we hear local control and federal intrusion what comes to mind? >> i think of racism, southern states trying to bring it down. prof. chatelain: this idea of resisting brown versus board resisting federal approaches to school integration by citing local control. common core, banning of ap united states history in

oklahoma. this intellectual and social battle waged in the schools show us the importance of schools and sides of conflict and investing in kids in order to make a better nation. finally, what she highlights in this book as there was no retrenchment or sex education during cold war due to concerns about anti-communism. right? that you needed sex education in the schools, you need education about family life, or the communists would win. one of the ways communism was framed in the united states as negative or bad for business is that communists engaged in free love. there was this concern that communists allow for polygamy, the state allowed the family -- to allow the family structure. the children were wards of the state. the investment in sex education wasn't just about educating

kids. it was about the idea that kids had to understand that this, that democracy, the u.s. way of doing things was the normative and correct way of doing things. ok? all of this is bound in sex education at this time. the question of human behavior and relationships also shapes the 1930's approach where teachers were introducing sexuality as a human behavior and it was a part of good relationships. if you look through this book through the 1950's they talk about sexual satisfaction as a reasonable expectation of a relationship. right? that there has to be sexual compatibility within the confines of a strong marriage. this was important to make sure that people were normal. the 1950's discourse on normalcy was not only reaction to post-world war ii trauma, the expression of shell shock, ideas of post-traumatic stress

disorder come out of the world war ii soldier experience, but the idea of being a normal person. right? what do normal people do in the confines of their relationship? there are various experiments she talks about these as quiet , efforts. very few communities wanted to kind of publicize this. we are doing sex education now. there are these movements that were able to be accepted and replicated, and passed throughout the state as communities took this on. the models we look at today are oregon, toms river, new jersey and san diego as three approaches of sex education all infused with social concerns of the community, ideas of race, and what happens when you engage young people about sex and sexuality. the secondary goals of sex education are also important to remember.

so it normalizes certain human , relationships. people believe that sex and relationship education reduce familial decline pretty alarming divorce rate, even though some studies say it is not unusually high, that if you factor for level of education and waiting until a certain age to get married, the divorce rate plummets. but this idea that schools would be in the business to make sure that families are healthy and strong. it prevented the gendered impulses of male-female roles. it helps regulate teen sexuality. the idea of the private relationships the coming public that could interfere in the confusion that a company's sexual maturity and expand the ability to voice their perspective with authority. what's interesting about this

time is that it is asking young people to talk about personal relationships with their teacher. right? how many people had a sex education class experience where a teacher who taught auto shop or a gym teacher had more than one role in sex education? how many found that weird? hands up, ok? how many found sex education classes were places were young people could talk and be open about expressing themselves ? how many had that experience in a mixed gender classroom? interesting stuff. we will see how it was done before the 1960's. it embraces the notion that sexuality was important. right? it was so important it was part , of the school day. young people got a sense that their feelings, their commitment to their relationship, their ideas of connection for also an

integral part of their education. any questions? any thoughts? ok, so now we will look at the different models. the oregon model of sex education was to put sex education in the framework of health and science questions. in the 1940's, the focus is on the sexual organs and functions within a biological framework. they try to do animal sexuality to stand in and they said no we have to focus on the human person. emphasize reproduction and personal hygiene. it provided a model for the film "human growth," which in 1947 was a pioneering experiment in using film to not only teach a sex education but model how sex education was supposed operating in classrooms.

there's another one called "the story of menstruation" that disney produced. it is this idea of using film representations about talking about the body, using cartoons in order to illustrate these issues. so when we think of the oregon model, it is a move from the oregon model to sex education. we talked about the anti-venereal disease campaign. the soldiers and the pictures. a lot of what oregon does in terms of sex education comes from their public health department. initially it was based in the crusades of the social hygiene society. they were doing the work we saw with other groups, awareness about venereal disease some work on anti-prostitution

health broadly defined. they entered into a partnership with the american social hygiene association. again organizations concerned , about not only the medical impact of sexual transmitted diseases but the morale impact it would have on a nation of people were unwell. through a gift from a benefactor, they created the brown trust. the brown trust focused on the role of medical professionals and sex education. unlike previous models they wanted to start with doctors and train public health practitioners to do this kind of work. that it was too important, to o scientific, too technical to leave to teachers to do. here you see a partnership with the university of oregon. you see the university community having an impact on the way secondary and primary education

functions. this brown trust is able to bring sex education to a large audience. the film human growth was a nationally acclaimed sex education movie produced by lester back. it is an incredible way of thinking about the different places were sex education move. we will watch a clip from it. it starts with the family talking about taking a sex education class to showing a sex education class, this teacher showing the movie to the movie audience -- it is very met a. and at the end showing young people asking questions of a teacher about a film they all just watched. it is all about time people how to do this. it depicts the ideal white family of midcentury u.s. the mom is in the role of him in -- role of hemming the daughter's dress for dad is

doing dad things which involve the brain. the young son is inquisitive about the history of native peoples, and the daughter is a little mixed up, because that is what girls are like. it shows these ideas of what the family is and how these young people as a product of the family enter the public school to engage in discourse about sex. curtis avery becomes the head of the alice brown trust and he advocated for the family life approach. the family life approach is you focus on relationships, how to go on a date, how to introduce your parents to the person you are dating, avoiding too much sexual contact in the early years of a relationship. getting engaged. this book, it is so specific. it talks about the dates you should go one, buying gifts, what is it mean when you get

offended when you get engaged how to announce it. it is about a series of middle-class expectations for how you are supposed to conduct yourself at various stages of your life. what are the different ways we see today where you learn this type of training? where'd you learn this type of stuff? had you know how to bring gifts to your boyfriend or girlfriend? how do you know about getting engaged? you did not learn in this class. >> television. >> what this television teach you? >> the bachelor has taught me to date 25 grows at the same time. [laughter] >> did you watch it before we showed it in this class question mark >>?

>> you are in a serious relationship and they say i'm dating 24 other women you can include me in that equation. >> i didn't get you a rose today so it is over. >> you know how to end relationships with the holding of a rose. >> your family members or your parents. prof. chatelain: identify the qualities of good relationships. it is this idea we have conversations, the culture shift in the idea that one personal relationship can be instructive for others. i'm sure my single friends appreciate the feedback i provide about relationships. >> cosmo magazine. he gives you information on what you should get your significant other on christmas. they have a lot of stuff for other things. [laughter] prof. chatelain: the industry. women's magazines are all about

a certain type of modeling of information. right? it is done in the context of just between us girls. or just between us guys, for other magazines. i'm going to tell you what's really going on. yes? >> jewelry places like jared restaurants will play off the getting engaged thing. prof. chatelain: right. no one has done anything interesting until they get engaged. then you watch these -- there is an entire industry where people hide in garbage dumpsters to take engagement pictures. it is creepy. a student sent me pictures. i say congratulations. she showed me a link. i didn't understand what i was watching. i was watching two people talk.

i thought they were posed. there was a creeper in a tree with a photo lens. the idea that we capture these things and share them, i think there is an interesting question that is embedded in where we learn this information. schools during this time felt like they were the best that to make sure that everyone was learning the same thing. it created a model for how to use question and answer approach to sex education. the film is trying to teach you how to ask your teacher about sex. i don't know how effective it is. from her archive we see young people coming up with their own questions, reflecting about the experience of talking to teachers about sex. this is a picture from a feature about human growth. right? it is a classroom watching a classroom of a movie about classrooms and they are looking at ovaries in this picture. they are showing how you do this.

this is a still from "human growth." we will watch a clip from this film. and we will see how this is done. enjoy. ♪ >> in this tribe the hair was cut in a special style when the boy reached adolescence. >> don't bother george. >> almost finished with that report? >> just about. >> he's reading about indian boys. adolescence, like him. >> why don't you grow up? >> i am just as grown-up as you are. >> says who? >> mrs. baker. she said that girls mature earlier than boys. >> if she said you were a genius

you would believe her. >> yes i would. >> she is a lovely person and a very good teacher. >> the kids at school like her. >> dad, here is something from my report. >> what's that? >> only the grown people have clothes on. >> can i wear this skirt tomorrow? >> yes. i have almost finished hemming it. >> the children wore no clothes at all. >> that's interesting. it ties into the film josie was telling us about. >> we saw that last year. >> i'm on the preview committee. i'm going to tell the class what to look for in the film. >> have you decided what to say?

>> the most important thing to look for are the changes that take place in our bodies and feelings when we grow up. >> grow up? when we become adolescence. prof. chatelain: powerful filmmaking. so what is happening in this , film? it makes you want to watch more and it is available on youtube. what is happening in this movie? what is going on in this family? everyone is moved by the acting, i know. collect your thoughts. [laughter] yes. they are establishing what a normal family should look like and what are they talking about? >> they are talking about sexuality and growing up in an abstract way. prof. chatelain: there is a sense of abstraction about

growing up in this movie that is all the rage. what are the visual images they are looking at? what other narrative is happening? >> they are learning about native americans in their culture to discuss growing up instead of using a book about their own culture to discuss growing up which would make more sense to me. prof. chatelain: it is an interesting segue into this culture about who in this culture where is close and who doesn't. even as they are representing the normalized family they are pushing up against this other type of people that even though they are different, they have similarity of understanding that one covers the body is sexual maturity. the only way they have an access to this idea is by looking into this book. i think this is a powerful set

of images, a set of ideas about kind of primitive and refined cultures that get reproduced in this conversation about the most human impulse, sexuality. it is really fascinating. why is the daughter such a disaster? this is really mid-century representations of girls and young women as being unable to pull it together and meeting the family to help her through things. it is interesting. going to new jersey, the new jersey approach is very different. it focuses on the role of human relationships and families over the physiology of facts. it is the opposite. it is focused on high schoolers learning on dating, child care adult responsibilities of family life. right? that this is not about having a medical or a biological origin of understanding adulthood. adulthood is about making a series of good choices for the family and the community.

one of the reasons why toms river takes this approach is that educators are concerned about life preparedness in the community. they are concerned about the divorce rate, a rapidly changing city moving from rural to like midsized towns. they are concerned about juvenile delinquency. just like gender structures, and a lot of these ideas of sex education, anxieties of juvenile delinquency will play a major role in having sex information. if you remember the book we looked at a problem women and falling girls and the maternal home movement, there is this preoccupation with adolescence and what is it mean that young people are acting out? also an interesting backdrop to

, this story, in this town in new jersey it is starting to form a de facto segregated school system despite african-american resistance to separate schools. when we talk about the normal and acceptable family there is a racial framework that is embedded in this idea of white families as normative, interracial marriage is incompatible with happiness. my book talks about the importance of being similar to your future spouse, but it also talks about the dangers of same-sex attraction, a frame of same-sex attraction as something that happens in adolescence, but something that has to be fought and resisted. by spending more time with people of the opposite gender. again, it is an instruction about what will be the standard for evaluating the person in society?

they modeled after this idea of home economics. does anyone take home economics course? interesting. does that still exist? i think it is only on television. you learn the basic skills for life. i imagine that no one in this room was at a school where home economics was only for girls. that doesn't happen anymore. it was modeling about this preparation to be over your own home. one of the goals of sex education was toward happier homes. right? more stable, harmonious homes. you understand family relationships. very little sex education, rather the examination of behavior. a lot of these discourses about harmony were about the growth of psychology of playing a role in people becoming more self

actualized and better people internally. it was psychological function of the relationship to challenge you to be a better person. they wanted to correct family instability. again the divorce rate was , unusually high. it believed starting with education would prevent that. it would offer a critique to popular culture as well. the rise of rock 'n roll music of teen culture, rooted in african-american culture was a source of great concern for a lot of white families and towns like tom's river. one of the ways they address this was to talk about reducing your influence on suggestive music. all of this grinding at dances that kids do today, no one would have any of that. right? it was this idea of resisting

popular culture negative effects on you. comic books get looped into this as one of the causes of juvenile delinquency. it handles sex on a case-by-case basis. it feared parental resistance. if a student had a question about sexuality they had to talk to their teacher directly who would refer them to a medical professional or someone else. the goal is not have a group discussion about sex but to talk about relationships and groups. deferring to the doctors authorities on sexual matters allow the school to have a sanitized vision of what family life was. family life is used as a euphemism for sex. in catholic school it was family life education. it was about what the family is all about. like i said before, it

emphasized homogeneity. you want to be with someone who is similar to you. that reduced any type of question about crossing racial boundaries. does anyone have a question about family life education? did you have a question. >> not about family life. some of us, it makes room for rateape culture and sexual assault but it doesn't like it ever comes out. before college. prof. chatelain: where does that come from? i can't hear you. >> talk about proper behavior, critiquing popular behavior, it sounds like it makes room for rape culture and sexual assault

but it seems like it is never present before college. then it is too late. do you think it is going to be included? prof. chatelain: currently they don't talk about sexual assault or rape? >> not the same way as college. prof. chatelain: this is an interesting point you raise. in those back to the conversation about universities and how universities struggle with certain things. sexual assault is one of them. the question about where does the education around sexual boundaries about abuse and exploitation, the idea they begin at the moment that a young person goes to college ignores the very real problem of sexual assault and abuse within the confines of the family and home. and a lot of ways that we see ourselves as beyond this moment, we laugh at some of these ideas being reproduced in schools because we think differently about the family, but one of the questions is how we frame sexual

assault as an issue of young people in this environment and in no other places. right? we don't talk about it in any meaningful way in the workplace or the community. the question is if a person is , not on a college campus and doesn't attend college, or never attend college, how do we attend to the fact that sexual abuse happens in a number of contexts? this does not open -- there are very few spaces in which that happens because a lot of the activism around sexual assault and sexual abuse emerge from college campus feminism. right? what happens when that activism is contained in one place and it doesn't attend to these other places? i think that is an excellent point. >> do they talk about unhealthy behaviors or was it just the positive of what you should do?

recognizing what you should not do, what was not healthy. prof. chatelain: the unhealthy stuff is like having -- not being enthusiastic. there is a positive way of framing behavior pretty negative behaviors are being a social outcast, being too shy, not going to the dance, not participating, not being a joiner. there is a clear understanding of not only to be normal but being a contributing member of your society. >> and a conversation about mental health. since they made it so broad. i feel like that would even more so be forgotten and ignored than it is today. prof. chatelain: the question of mental health is attitude. they talk about the way that puberty makes you moody. in fact, your best that to fight

puberty is to learn how to have emotional regulation to make it through adolescence so that you can be like attractive to other people that want to get together with you. right question. if you look at the story of menstruation it was all about girls not having a bad attitude about having their period. don't complain full yourself together and put some makeup on and go out there. it was this idea of not allowing the biological process to have an emotional impact. what is interesting is that we understand adolescence as a deeply emotional period of one life. there are all these conflictive messages. i think mental health then gets put within the frame of having a just having a good attitude and

shaking it off. the last one is the san diego experiment. it focuses on education about procreation and guidance for personal adjustment. those of the terms used writing physical aspects of sexuality and interpersonal relationships, and group counseling, talking about sex, and expanded from sixth grade to 12th grade. by 1947, they launched the first districtwide social heightygiene project. san diego was going through an incredible shift in racial demographics and it was also deeply shaped by the budding military industry in states like california. san diego is confronting all of these changes demographically and they wanted to make sure sex education had not only a biological component but also this idea of what the right thing to do is similar to new

jersey. the rise of the population of color and anxieties about race and gender shaped the messages the young people would get about sexuality. it was shaped by wartime industries and postwar industrialization. you have the loss of jobs that has a disproportionate effect on african-americans and latinos. one of the things that is interesting, if you are member -- if you remember the posters about venereal disease, and a lot of it is tied to this idea that young women are so overwhelmed by soldiers. they wanted to become pick up girls. they called it khaki fever. when they saw soldiers they lost their inhibition and engaged in sex with soldiers. military bases become the site of robust health campaign.

there was an emphasis on racialized stereotypes, mexican girls in particular and mexican girlhood. one of the examples in the book is the idea that mexican girls engaged in sex or sexual maturity earlier than white girls. right? what is interesting is those discourses stay with us today when we look at the approaches to reducing unplanned pregnancy or asking questions about how to use a racially sensitive lens when talking about sex. there is an assumption girls of color to engage in sexual activity or reach sexual maturity earlier. now, some of that is based on issues of diet and access to health care. others are a series of dynamics in the home. about a decade ago there was all of this literature that said african-american girls had their first period earlier because they didn't have fathers in the home.

right? this became part of the literature about race and sex education. the presence of the father at home helps slow down sexual maturity. >> now they are virgins forever. jane the virgin, the idea that is based on the notion that it is progressive in a sense, that latina women, they are supposed to be married. prof. chatelain: the structure of the family, it is a critique, it can be a veiled critique of what people talk about with machismo, the mexican fathers have the control over their family. other fathers don't and it prevents early sexual maturity.

you see these reprised in popular culture or in what people say our commonsense approaches to public health. it looks to the support of the parent teacher association. it used to be one of the most powerful organizations in the united states. they were able to usher in some of the sexual education in san diego. they called it human relations. i don't know if it is more euphemistic or less. right? relation broadly defined. human relations was spread across the grade level. it is an interesting idea that you start young and you continue talking about it at every stage. a lot of the earlier models waited until high school. they wanted to do the education from sixth to 12th grade because it would be most relevant at those stages. it focused on the idea of growing up and education around

puberty. one of the things that is really interesting about a lot of this language about growing up, it assumes the power and the importance of adolescence as a very distinct stage. those of you interested in the history of childhood and youth and popular culture, you hear about the 1950's as this time where the teenager emerges as a separate category of person because affluence allows for more young people to go to high school, delayed responsibilities of marriage and the family, it allows the teenager to emerge as a separate person. and now we take it for granted , now that we have these periods of time where people are growing up. how many of you feeling you are in full adulthood? this is as grown-up as he will possibly ever be? hands? a single person, seriously?

how many of you feel like they are still enjoying the wonderful extension of adolescence? your use is in less, -- enlist. hands up high? how many of you trapped between a teenager and adult? we have a mixed feelings. [laughter] for those of you who don't feel like you are quite adult, what is the most adult and you are going to do? when does it start? >> when you to pay your own bills. you're responsible for yourself. >> all of the bills. >> most of them. you will be in charge of your rent, you have to make a budget, decisions about how to invest. prof. chatelain: may i suggest you could do these things right now? >> you could be technically an adult now. but i'm saying for myself --

, prof. chatelain: when all of the bills come to your house. not just a bit. we understand adulthood as a series of financial liabilities. it makes adulthood sound depressing. what are we talking about? >> filing taxes. you guys should be paying your taxes. timeout. [laughter] >> you are no longer the dependent of someone else? i'm going to leave that right there. we are not going to engage that. i am not a tax professional. pay your taxes and student loans and you will appreciate the feedback i gave you. when do you believe that you as an individual will be an adult? >> when i stopped calling my mom every time something bad happens, when ideal independently. i only call her once a week that would be adulthood for me.

prof. chatelain: there is this heathetether to parents. a lot of this human relations family life education is about how to articulate years as an adult but not sever your ties. this becomes important for understanding the nuclear family. you seem slightly bewildered.