Abstinence Only Sex Education

Abstract
The goal of this paper is to discuss the benefits of applying notions of social psychology to real-world social situations in order to identify common misconceptions and provide deeper understanding. The relationships between abstinence-only sex education and homicide, video games and school shootings, and hurricane Katrina, poverty, and racism are explored, along with possible causes of these misconstructions. Concepts used to assist in these explanations include correlation and causation and the inequality of these terms, third variables, which may connect the two, spurious associations, which may misconstrue them, and the fallacy of fundamental attribution error.
Keywords: sex education, abstinence, homicide, violence, video games,

As recent studies have shown, places where abstinence-only sex education is frequently taught in high schools, yearly homicide rates are considerably higher. Though not entirely inconceivable, the likelihood that teaching abstinence in high schools leads to homicide is improbable. Instead, we should take into consideration other statistics relating to the regions that apply—namely the American South. As a general rule, the South tends toward religiosity and conservative values, which abstinence-only sex education can be easily tied into. If it were causation we were looking for, one may have a better time arguing that higher rates of teenage pregnancy are caused by abstinence-only sex education, which also has noticeably higher rates in the South. But what of the homicide rates? A study by Nisbett and Cohen (Social Psychology, 4th Edition, pg. 47-49) concluded that the Southern United States may be what’s called a “culture of honor”. Southerners are more likely to act violently in response to insult, or if they fear that their family or property is endangered—that is, their honor is compromised. Historians and anthropologists believe this is rooted in the history of the South, which was settled by herders from Ireland and Scotland, who had to be prepared to defend their livestock from potential threats. The North, however, was settled by farming peoples, who had much more

It’s a popular topic on the news and among parents that are averse to games that violent media will cause adolescents and children to act in kind. Ever since the Columbine Massacre in 1999, in which the shooters were known to be obsessive gamers, it seems to be a common assumption that games have some connection to the crime. And, as studies have shown, there is some level of truth to the claim that violent games can lead to aggressive behavior (Social Psychology 4th Edition, pg. 493-496). So if this is the case, why aren’t gamers prowling the streets, weapons in hand? The answer is simple: As with sports or any other competitive event, there is a “socially acceptable” amount of aggression allowed, or even expected. A line is drawn somewhere between violence against human-shaped pixels and violence against real people. This considered, a person who opens fire in a school has obviously crossed this line and then some, which leads to the conclusion that there must be some other variable involved. Nearly all cases of school shootings have another thing in common—the perpetrator is socially outcast from his or her peers. The feeling of ridicule and isolation that results from this can in turn lead to spite directed towards peers, causing a violent outburst. The way video games tie into this is likely that the rejected party seeks stimulation and