Masson's Blog and Liberal Indiana are on the Indianapolis Star story about a high school newspaper article on the dangers of oral sex. What caught the attention of both was the comment of Kenn Gividen, probably the state's most prominent Libertarian:
Columbus resident Kenn Gividen, who ran unsuccessfully for school board and was the 2004 Libertarian candidate for governor, said the student newspaper was not the proper place for such a frank sexual discussion.
“I'm sure this is something kids are talking about. Kids talked about a lot of dirty things when I was in school,” he said. “But it's something completely separate for the school to endorse it, which is obviously what they did by publishing it.”
Liberal Indiana notes Gividen's apparently reflexive reaction that anything to do with sex must be "dirty," never mind that the kids are writing about the risks of oral sex, not preaching its virtues. Masson's Blog questions Gividen's libertarianism because of the attack on "free speech," which I think confuses libertarianism with libertinism. Libertarians (both the big L and little l ones) think the government (especially at the federal level) is too involved in our lives and should scale back so individuals can take more responsibility for their own actions. Such responsibility would include, I think, arguing about what is or is not appropriate for high school journalists to do. Libertarians as a group might be somewhat less prudish than the general population, but it's not a fellow-traveling prerequisite.
The key is that both the journalism adviser and the school principal signed off on the article. High school is not a microcosm of the larger society, with student journalists representing "a free press" and school officials representing "the government" that is supposed to keep hands off. Journalists out here in the real world have to deal with the whims and dictates of publishers every day. School authorities are the publishers, with all the rights and duties that involves, and high schools are structured learning environments, not First Amendment laboratories.
As for the article itself, hooray for the student journalists. A major problem with young people today (thank you very much, Bill Clinton) is that oral sex isn't viewed as "real" sex. Without reading the article (maybe it's out there somewhere and someone can link to it), it's impossible to say how well it's done. But the high school officials in charge seem to be impressed, and it's certainly a worthy topic. When I was a high school newspaper staff member, about the most controversial thing we ever tackled was the football stars' favorite foods and movies.
