MASS SEX EDUCATION
While various factions argue over concerns of sexual expression or pornography demonstrated in public media, a popular consensus seems to emerge as to a true need for proper sex education. What constitutes proper sex education, however, remains a matter of honest debate. Even programs on venereal disease, breast exams and contraception meet with some adverse criticism. This paper will be a preliminary report on one attempt to present, to a mass audience, an adult level of sex education and the reaction of the students and community to this effort.
HISTORY AND CONCEPTION
For the 1973 spring semester, the College of Continuing Education and Community Service of the University of Hawaii in conjunction with the State of Hawaii public service station, KHET-TV, was seeking to provide a television series which could simultaneously be offered for college credit, entertain a mass general audience and provide a public service. This was in keeping with their respective missions and following in their pattern of previous efforts. Their joint offering for the 1972 session was a series on Futuristics.
The popularity and reputation of the University of Hawaii course on Human Sexuality prompted consideration of such a course specifically designed for television. The choice was both appropriate and daring. It was appropriate since interest in the area was high and the need was great, as could be judged by contemporary newspaper and magazine reports. It was daring since this would be the first such forthright attempt to be made anywhere1 and the University and public station, as most others, were not typically quick to knowingly involve themselves publicly in controversial productions. Many meetings were held between the (Acting) Dean of the College, Dr. Fredrick Meyer; the Director of Public Services of the College, Robert Miller who was to act as Executive Producer of the series; Station Manager of KHET-TV, Robert Steiner; Television Director, David Silvian and myself. The chance occurrence of these persons in their respective positions was fortunate. All recognized both the public need and the public responsibility.
It was anticipated that the series would draw adverse criticism as well as support but that the need for proper information and the nature of the material and the quality of the production would more than compensate for any negative features2. In retrospect, all went well, at the time however this was a very risky decision inviting the possibility for severe community reaction from at least a vocal minority. Some refuge was taken in the fact that the State of Hawaii was the first in the nation to legalize abortion (in 1970) and the State Legislators at the time had expressed a need to foster sex education. Further, at the time I had been for several years both a consultant on sex education to the State of Hawaii Board of Education and had taught courses for credit on Human Sexuality in the University School of Medicine as well as elsewhere. I also had taught highly popular college courses on Human Sexuality both in the College of Arts and Sciences and College of Continuing Education and Community Service.
In August 1972 production was started on a television series of 30 color programs with material to comprise a credit course entitled Human Sexuality. The College as prime producer of the series and I as instructor were concerned with the educational worth of the material. Also, I was sensitive to the fact that this would be a first large scale mass presentation of overtly sexual material which might, if not done properly, hamper future efforts not only in the State of Hawaii but elsewhere. Naturally, as a presentation of the State Public Broadcasting System (PBS) station the task was also to provide general mass entertainment as well as information.
Each full presentation was arranged to consist of two half-hour portions. The first was to be a prerecorded professionally produced taped program covering a specific area of interest. This portion would then be available for repeated use in Hawaii and use elsewhere. The second half-hour was a live presentation during which additional timely material could be added, special guests invited and most crucially, response could be given to questions generated by the first half-hour and telephoned in via an open line. The open line was available to all registered students.
Only one censorship restriction was imposed by the television station: no frontal full scale view of genitals was to be shown. The college imposed no restrictions other than “discretion”, allowing my experience and judgment academic freedom. As for myself, I tried to hold to the same three basic guidelines I use in my regular class: the first to try and equally present various facts and attitudes on different sides of controversial issues, the second, to present the material in as open and positive vein as possible without sensationalism and the third, to present the series based on a theme that the area of human sexuality is best considered as a series of natural processes common to all rather than a set of problems involving a minority. In practice, these guidelines allowed for example, that when prostitution, nudity, homosexuality or group sexual practices were under review, if possible, the different facets to be explored were presented with input by individuals openly involved in the practices. The individuals talked “face to camera” unashamedly and matter-of-fact. Further, all questions telephoned in to me were considered legitimate and responded to honestly and without prejudice to the best of my ability.3 When requested, I would give my own personal opinion but routinely would not since I was more. interested in presenting data when available on facts and attitudes and discussing the attitudes.
In production, the main problem was one of lack of funds. Typically, an hour of prime television production can cost from $50,000 to $100,000; a rule of thumb is $1000 per minute. We had less than $100,000 to spend for the total 30 hour series. Many of the studio costs were absorbed by the television station; many of the studio crew working voluntarily. All participants in the series did so without compensation. The basic costs were paid for by the University College of Continuing Education which led to peculiar restrictions on how money could be spent. To overcome this, several thousand dollars in costs for necessities and incidentals were paid for out of pocket. A good many attempts were made to obtain private funds from drug firms, medical supply houses, individuals and foundations and from other sources. None were successful.
In order to increase community acceptance and support for the series, and prevent an adverse campaign generated out of ignorance of our intent, all individuals or groups that were considered to have a legitimate interest and concern in the area were appraised of our purpose and projections. Such included leaders of all religious faiths, civic organizations, and educational groups. In addition, the legislature and public service agencies as well as representatives of other media such as the local newspapers, radio and television stations and magazines were appraised of our intentions to provide an adult television series covering a . broad gamut of topics in human sexuality. Help and advice were solicited from them all and an open door policy was maintained for all parties to contribute ideas, comments and criticisms. No aspect of production was closed to any legitimate party. This cut short pre-production criticism of our being biased (to the right or left) or seeking sensationalism. Also, it allowed for a large amount of positive publicity which no doubt aided general community acceptance and helped increase enrollment in the television course for credit.
To increase viewability and instructional impact, all types of audio and visual presentations were used. Slides, movie film, interviews, demonstrations, charts and studio acting all were utilized. Experts and tyros, academics, clinicians and laymen all contributed to the series production. While the series was still being prepared, on January 23, 1973, the first program of the series was aired. The paid enrollment figure for those taking the course was 526 students4 not all for grade. The viewing audience, hard to gauge, was estimated at 10,000 to 20,000 persons.
Naturally, it wasn’t always easy to get individuals of any type to honestly discuss in public for the television audience, their sexual attitudes, knowledge or practices. As the series progressed, however, and the tenor of the production manifested itself, this problem eased considerably. This was probably due to no one being knowingly embarrassed or publicly moralized to for their position or expressions. All guests were presented openly and equally. No-one was hiding anything; no participants were paid. The persons and topics. were presented as information, not to praise or condemn.
The content of the thirty programs covered the basic material presented in my normal Human Sexuality course. Such areas of content include a broad perspective and wide coverage which encompass psychological, biological, social, ethical and legal as well as cultural aspects of a subject. Units were included on sexual and reproductive anatomy and physiology; reproduction and family planning; development; love, courtship and intimacy; concepts of normal; heterosexuality and homosexuality; sexual commerce; sex and art; religion, pornography, nudism, and so on. A full list of program titles and the subjects covered is listed in Table 1.
Everyday emotional and physical, sexual and reproductive processes were covered. Typically, coverage progressed from the familiar to the unknown and from the less sensitive to the more sensitive. The viewer was allowed to develop at his or her own pace. While the knowledge transmitted was as accurate as possible, the viewer could accept or reject the attendant attitudes depicted or formulate new ones after the material was incorporated into his own frame of reference and background. Each program would stand on its own but generally, later programs in the series depended upon the incorporation of some knowledge and appreciation of attitudes from former ones.
The course was open for 3 college credits and simultaneously cross-listed in several departments and colleges: Anatomy and Reproductive Biology of the Medical School; Psychology in the College of Arts and Sciences; Educational Psychology and Education in the College of Education. To qualify for the college credit, the students had to:
1) register and be expected to watch the programs
2) prepare a book report on an appropriate reading of their own choosing
3) prepare a project report
4) take an exam on sexual information and attitudes and pass a multiple choice open-book final examination.
The final examination grade was based only on the information portion of the post-test of sexual information and attitudes. The option was also available for the students to attend two evening classes during the semester at which time material deemed inappropriate for public television showing was presented. Such material included film material of various coital practices, genitalia, and hard core pornography. The evening meetings also provided an opportunity for the students to become personally familiar with items such as various contraceptives or art and cultural objects and discuss items of interest or concern with fellow students and the instructor.
The project was an undertaking of their own design in which each student was encouraged to do something . which would be a broadening sex-related experience; something they would not ordinarily do. Suggested projects included taking a visit to a nudist colony, League of Decency meeting, swingers’ bar, homosexual bar, or Right-to-Life meeting (see Table 2). This exercise was a valuable teaching tool in itself.
As an educator, there is little doubt that much more detailed material is covered in a half-hour of television production than is typically covered in a class hour. This results from several factors. The first and most obvious is that the media allows for visual resources typically unavailable in a classroom. In an electronic wink, one can go from a classroom to bedroom, from Hawaii to New York. Without waste of time, one can interview several people whose attendance at a small class session so repeatedly would be unwarranted for the individual imposed upon and cumbersome for the instructor to arrange. The second advantage of television teaching is that no time is wasted with classroom mechanics, e.g., fixing the air conditioner, getting the projector to work, waiting for the latecomers, or being repetitive and disjointed in content presentation. Regrettably, as in any class limited in time, depth in many areas had to be sacrificed and students’ on the spot probing or questions could not always be responded to. This deficiency was usually rectified during the second half-hour which was a live presentation.
Built into the academic portion of the course were several methods of evaluation. One method requested students to complete, during the first week of programming, an anonymous and confidential questionnaire which covered their knowledge and attitudes about certain sexual matters. The optional pre-test was available for comparison with a nearly identical post-test, also confidential and anonymous, at completion of the series (student were graded by a coded student number.)
It was roughly estimated that the program had about 10,000 to 20,000 viewers for each broadcast. It is not known how many persons were regular viewers for all programs as “non-registered students.” Of these 526 registered and paid for the course; the largest number of students registering in Hawaii for any television course before or after. Of these 405 took the course for credit and provided enough pre and post data for analysis.
The number of females responding was significantly greater than the number of men by a factor of 4 to 1 (Table 3). The finding of greater registration number for females is not unusual; the size of the difference was, however, unexpected. The experience of more women than men registering for class occurred many times before. I have attributed it to a combination of factors: a greater stigma is attached to a male registering for a sex course and thereby admitting “some ignorance” which is allowable for women to admit. Also, it is a stereotyped consideration that women would “benefit” from such a course more than men. The preponderance of women students also reflects a high enrollment of high school and elementary teachers who were taking the course for promotion credits.
ETHNICITY, RELIGION, AGE
Hawaii is a multiracial state where Japanese-Americans and Caucasian-Americans represent the two largest groups. This was reflected in its student composition (Table 4). Of the students, 40% were Japanese; 38% Caucasian, 8% Chinese, 7% Hawaiians and 7% other. Considering the statewide census, the Japanese were thus over-represented among the students and “other” ethnic groups were under-represented. However, if comparison is made from among registered students, the disparity is not significant but Caucasians seem over-represented. The age distribution among the students was interesting. The Caucasian male averaged 36 years while his Japanese counterpart averaged 30 years. The Caucasian female averaged 34 years and the Japanese female 29. No reason is yet apparent for this ethnic difference. The religious distribution among the students also was quite varied, but again more or less reflected the statewide figures, except that Roman Catholics were underrepresented by about half and a large number of students, almost a quarter, did not claim any religious affiliation. This is 3 times the state-wide figure (Table 4). Data on the religious affiliation of the University students was not available.
The marital status of the students reflected the age group enrolled: 70% were married; 8% for the second time. Twenty-two percent of the class was not married nor had ever been. The remaining 7% were either separated, divorced or widowed. The State figures show 63% married; 8% for the second time; 26% single; 11% separated, divorced or widowed (Table 5). The number of children born to the registrants was generally two or less (86% ), but 6% of the students had 4 or more children. This compares to 76% of the general populace of Hawaii having 2 or fewer children and 24% having 3 or more.
Students indicated they took the course for various reasons (Table 6A). The most common reasons being: “it sounds interesting” (98%) and for “professional advancement” (85%). Only 15% indicated they were taking the course to solve a personal problem. About half the class admitted they wanted to “learn an area they knew little about” (54%) or wanted to generally “improve their. personal sex life” (56%), and 7 out of 10 said they wanted to learn vocabulary and facts.
The post-course evaluation indicated what the students felt they actually received from the course (Table 6B). While 95% would recommend the course to a friend, 28% did not think the course was “easy in work.” While only 15% indicated they took the course to solve a personal problem, approximately twice that number (28%) said the course did help them solve a personal problem. Half the class affirmed that the course somehow improved their sex life; 9% strongly so.
The students learned vocabulary and facts as they desired. This however, might be assumed to be part of any course. However, 80% of the students indicated they learned of things they knew little about. Sixty-nine percent of the class considered that the course “fostered an appreciation of ethical values.”
In any class, the student must absorb a minimum amount of factual material and complete certain requirements to pass the course. Of the 526 students who registered for credit, 482 (92%) completed the course with credit. For television courses, this is an unusually large figure. For the offering the preceding semester, a course on Futuristics, 221 persons registered and 89 percent completed the course. The following term a Modern History course enrolled 395 persons with 88 percent completion. Among our students 44 (8%) withdrew, didn’t complete the requirements for credit, or failed.
The knowledge-factual portion of the post-test in comparison with the pre-test indicated many areas of original lack of knowledge and its subsequent acquisition. This was surprisingly true even in areas in which a greater degree of knowledge would have been predicted. For example, at the start of the class, almost 1 of 4 adults (24.4%) were not sure of the adequacy of a condom for protection against V.D. and another 24.2% thought it not adequate. Only 51.4% of the class thought a condom adequate protection. For the final exam, about 80% of the students indicated that a condom could provide adequate protection against venereal disease being contracted during typical coitus. As a result of the course, almost 18% of the students learned that a woman might become pregnant while undergoing menopause and more than 41% learned rapists aren’t necessarily exhibitionists. Some other questions with their pre and post-test responses are given in Table 7.
The students were in no way graded academically for their attitudes in regard to any of the material under discussion. Throughout the course, however, the students were exposed to the philosophy or idea of “to each his own as long as it respects the feelings and rights of others and society.” This generally is the instructor’s attitude. With this attitude, and the material presented, an interesting shift occurred in the students’ attitudes regarding certain topics.
The greatest attitude changes were seen in regard to masturbation, transvestism and homosexuality. At the end of the course, 21% of the class more than at the start could see occasion to encourage masturbation; an equal number could accept transvestism in others and 12% fewer saw homosexual behavior as abnormal or as a sign of mental illness (Table 8A). A 6% decrease was seen in those who saw erection as necessary for satisfactory sexual encounters (there being more involved) and 10% fewer people at the end of the course thought that good love needed sex. A like number (10%) would now accept masturbation in marriage. In general, almost all attitudes shifted to what might be considered a more liberal or permissive stance but this was not necessarily so (see Table 8B).
It had been anticipated that, no matter what was presented on the television screen, there would be a response from a minority of persons objecting to material being shown which was openly about human sexuality. Prior to the first program presentation, one letter was received by the station objecting to the series on principle. To our delight and surprise, during the 15-week duration the series was being televised, not a single adverse letter or telephone call was received by the television station or by the college. After the series was over, three letters-to-the-editor appeared in the State’s two leading newspapers objecting to the series.
On the other hand, letters of praise, thanks, support and congratulations came in from church groups and ministers of various faiths, educational leaders, civic and health organizations as well as state and city government agencies. Two letters-to-the-editor in favor of -the series appeared from visitors to Hawaii who saw the programs while here temporarily. One visitor wrote in asking how to get the series shown in his home city of Chicago and a representative from a women’s group in Boston inquired how they could obtain the series. The positive pace was set by the first letter to arrive which was from a teacher from a Roman Catholic Parochial school. The letter said in part:
“I teach religion in the Catholic school system and want you to know how much I appreciate the Human Sexuality series you are presently offering … This is a very important topic to an educator with the candidness of the students today …
Having been out of school twenty years and being a celibate, I am completely unequipped to handle the types of questions many of my students ask me …
This must be a difficult topic to handle on public television and yet it was done with utmost taste …
I would like to recommend the series to my high school students who don’t receive sex education at our school, but unfortunately, it is at such a late hour (9:30) and a school night that they won’t be able to see it. Perhaps next year it could be offered earlier in the evening.
Yours in Christ,”
It wasn’t that viewers found nothing to criticize in the series. The series, however, seemed to fall in the general category of programs considered controversial but no more so than programs dealing with political, religious or other ethical themes. Judging from telephone and personal conversations between officers of the production staff or station or myself with the public, the objections were few compared to what most people thought was being gained. The comments quite often were highly personal but so too was the praise. A typical comment might be “I enjoyed seeing how a baby is actually born and the process of birth, but did you have to show the breastfeeding sequence?” or “I appreciated finding out about all sorts of sexual practices but do you have to talk so often about homosexuality.”
Several newspaper articles and features covered the series; all in a favorable light. Several programs in the series were notable for drawing community comment. The most praise was elicited by a program entitled “When Illness Strikes.” This program covers the subject of sexuality and being handicapped. Also quite popular were the programs on birth processes (“In the Beginning”), sexual identity and object choice (“I and Thou”) and sex and art. One program “V.D. Troubles” which discussed venereal disease prevention, detection, and cure is now used in every high school in the state as a regular part of their health curriculum. Many local community groups, public and private, as well as high schools and colleges, have adopted parts of the series or all of it for courses of their own.
NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE AND AVAILABILITY
The success of the series and caliber of its production earned the series a place in the catalogue of programs offered for national distribution by the Public Broadcasting System (PBS) and the Public Television Library (PTL). The availability on 2” video reel and 3/4” video cassette tape format makes the programs remarkably convenient for use in a studio, classroom or a auditorium situation. The series was awarded a 1973 citation for Creative Programming excellence by the National University Extension Association through its Arts and Humanities Division.
Several schools and communities now use the programs in a library situation where anyone may borrow the programs for individual or group viewing. Teachers assign the programs as “outside viewings” the way they might assign “outside readings”. Several communities including St. Louis via KETC-TV and the San Francisco Bay Area via KQED-TV and other Public Broadcasting stations have begun to run the series publicly. Several commercial stations and cable systems have presented the series. The response in the “Bible belt” St. Louis area and the “sophisticated” Bay Area has been generally so positive that, as in Hawaii, the stations plan to run the series a second time in the near future. The communities appreciate them.
Many high schools and colleges have acquired the complete series or individual programs of the series for their own use. Institutions utilizing the series or portions of it range from the State University of New York at Stony Brook, Community School District 19, in Brooklyn and the University of Maine at Farmington on the East to Georgia Southern College, Pennsylvania State University and Milwaukee County Federated Library in the Midwest to the Bay Area Community College Television Consortium of 17 colleges on the West Coast. (The Consortium registered approximately 3,000 students for the course the first time it was offered in 1975. This is the largest registration per college they’ve had in their several years of existence.) The (Kinsey) Institute for Sex Research uses portions of the series in its workshops.
While the series is designed to be self-sufficient in terms of material offered, a study guide has been prepared to go along with it (Human Sexuality Study Guide, by Lleni Jeffrey and John Blakemore of Monterey Peninsula College, 93940). I myself along with Arno Karlen, author of Sexuality and Homosexuality, am presently preparing a text which can be of use in augmenting the course, to be available in 1977 (Little, Brown & Co.). I am preparing my own study guide for the series which also should be available then.
In general, teachers using the programs in a classroom setting indicate the thirty minute T.V. format provides a fast-moving attention-holding pace wherein a large amount of audio and visual material is presented which they would find difficult to otherwise assemble, organize and present. Each thirty minute program provides a common class base from which extensive discussion can proceed for the remainder of the class period. This time is used for expanding the subject coverage, probing the theoretical, biological, psychological, social, or emotional and ethical issues raised or answering questions stimulated by the program.
Particular praise has been received from those teachers who are generally versed in only one area such as psychology or biology, and are responsible for the broad range of material encompassed by the field of human sexuality. The series is generally instructive for them as well. One such instructor, the campus minister at his college wrote:
“Please add me to what I am sure is the horde of people who think your T.V. course is super! I think you are really good for the part and your knowledge of both the biophysical and psychosocial aspects of human sexuality is rare.
I’m just beginning my fourth semester teaching Human Sexuality here at Leeward (Community College).”
Interestingly, the programs in the series are also used by some therapists who show the programs to their patients or ask them to view them at a resource center. This seems to facilitate and standardize the transmission of basic information and provide a model and stimulus of legitimate discussion of sexual matters.
Any station, school or organization may purchase any or all of the 30 programs in a 3/4” format. These programs are available at cost. At the time of this writing only $130 for a half-hour program. The programs may also be rented; presently for $40.00 per program. (For detailed information contact: Public Television Library, 475 L’Enfant Plaza, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20024.
A television series of 30 color programs covering Human Sexuality has been produced and utilized for the teaching of sex education to large public audiences as well as classroom or small groups. The programs introduce the viewer to a broad range of topics by generally assuming that all aspects of human sexuality, biological and psychological, social and emotional, may be legitimately and openly discussed. In so doing, an honest attempt is made to present the various pros and cons of attendant issues, ethical and otherwise.
While a great deal of information was transmitted and learned, significant changes in attitudes occurred among the students. It appears that the results were highly successful, with the series meeting substantial praise and acceptance by students and the general community as well. The availability of the series at cost, in a convenient tape format, allows for wide distribution and easy use.5
During the production of the television series, in addition to those persons mentioned, the help of many others deserves thanks. Particular thanks is acknowledged to all those staff and technicians who participated behind the cameras and to the discussants and professionals who participated in front of the camera. Special thanks are due to production assistants, Joan Carnes and most importantly Nancy Holmes.
|1. Introduction||11. Pregnancy and Birth||21. When Illness Strikes|
|2. Sources of Information||12. Population||22. Keeping Your Health|
|3. The Body||13. Planning Your Family||23. Sex Education|
|4. Processes||14. Abortion and Sterilization||24. The Marrieds|
|5. Sexual Development||15. I and Thou (Identity)||25. The Non-Marrieds|
|6. Life Changes||16. I and Thou (Object Choice)||26. New Life Styles|
|7. Love and Intimacy||17. Pornography and Fantasy||27. Sex and the Law|
|8. Cultural Influences||18. Sexual Fringes||28. Sex and the Arts|
|9. Normalcy: What Is It?||19. Sexual Commerce||29. Sex and Ethics|
|10. In the Beginning (Puberty and Fertilization)||20. VD Troubles||30. Recap and Summary|
|Try to do something which will challenge your mind and expand your intellectual horizons. You may use this requirement as an opportunity (excuse) to do something you otherwise might not do, e.g., take a trip to an X-rated movie or night spot or listen to a sermon or lecture relative to a sexual topic. You may go by yourself or with a partner. This should provide a new insight to expand your personal knowledge and views from a new, personally enriching perspective.|
PLACES TO GO
|A Family Planning Clinic||Swingers’ Bar|
|Massage Parlor||Gay Bar|
|Nudist Colony||Any appropriate lecture|
|Boy-Girl Review||Divorce Court|
|Strip Show||Pornographic Movie|
|Gay or Straight Church to hear appropriate sermon|
MEETINGS TO ATTEND
THINGS TO DO
|Gay Liberation||Get a pelvic exam|
|League of Decency||Get a breast exam|
|Right to Life||Get an anal exam|
|Women’s Liberation||Get a VD check|
|Zero Population Growth||Keep a journal of reactions to telecast|
THINGS TO TRY
Interview or speak with a minister, priest, or Rabbi regarding aspects of sex;
Ask if you can participate in a group session, or discuss sexual counseling;
Participate in an intimacy session;
Interview a police officer, lawyer, prostitute or others involved in vice.
It may be beneficial to try several things and report on the most meaningful to you. A brief written report on your trip is anticipated and should include:
1) Why you chose the field trip,
2) To which topic was the field trip appropriate, how, why, where?
3) Evaluate the worth of the field trip to you and others,
4) Would you recommend this experience to others? Why? and
5) Any comments you feel are appropriate relating the field experience to the course material, readings, etc.
|MALES = 81 (20%)||N = 405||FEMALES = 324(80%)|
|AGE: JAM = 30 Years||CM = 36 Years||
JAF = 29 Years
CF = 34 Years
|JAM = Japanese American Males||
JAF = Japanese American Females
|CM = Caucasian Males||
CF = Caucasian Females
|* These figures are approximated from various local, state, and national surveys.
(1970 Census of Population, Vol. 1, Part 13, U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1973 and State of Hawaii Data Book 1975, Dept. of Planning and Economic Development)
**Figures taken from The College Student Survey, 1974, SEQ 2, published by the Survey Research Office, University of Hawaii-Manoa (in press).
|Marital Status %||Student||State*||Children %||Student||State|
|S/D/W||1/5/1||11||Three or more||14||24|
|2nd or More||8||8|
|S = Going Steady / L = Living Together / E = Engaged / S = Separated / D = Divorced / W = Widowed
* Source: 1970 Census of Population, Vol. 1, Part 13, U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1973 and State of Hawaii Data Book 1975, Dept. of Planning and Economic Development.
|A. To learn area know little about||54||46|
|B. Thought would be easy||42||58|
|C. Sounds interesting||98||2|
|D. To solve personal problem||15||85|
|E. To learn vocabulary and facts||71||29|
|F. Improve personal sex life||56||44|
|G. Professional advancement||85||15|
|A. Learned about an area I knew little about||27||53||1||10||2|
|B. Course was easy in amount of work||10||50||14||24||4|
|C. Found course interesting||54||43||3||1||0|
|D. Helped solve personal problem||5||23||41||25||5|
|E. Learned vocabulary and facts||35||58||5||2||0|
|F. Helped improve my sex life||9||41||33||8||6|
|G. Aid professional advancement||21||55||17||6||2|
|H. Instructor competent||77||22||1||0||0|
|I. Would recommend course to friend||62||33||4||1||0|
|J. Fostered appreciation of ethical values||20||49||22||8||2|
|SA = Strongly Agree / A = Agree / NO = No Opinion / D = Disagree / SD = Strongly Disagree
* Please note that the figures in the column SD are tentative by reason of being taken from a poor-quality photocopy. As soon as a copy with clear figures can be obtained, this table will be updated.
|A possible result of sex relations during menstruation is infection of the male sex organs. (False)||87.4||97.1||9.7|
|After a heart attack the patient should no longer have intercourse. (False)||85.6||96.9||11.3|
|Pregnancy can occur while a woman undergoes menopause. (True)||72.2||89.5||17.3|
|In many males fluid secreted early in arousal can contain enough sperm to cause pregnancy. (True)||73.5||93.7||20.2|
|Many people over 35 years of age masturbate regularly. (True)||28.3||65.1||36.8|
|It is very likely that an adult preference for homosexual relations can be changed to a preference for heterosexual relations by getting married. (False)||73.8||82.9||9.1|
|More than 50% of married men have at some time after marriage engaged in intercourse with someone other than their wife. (True)||38.9||72.6||33.7|
|Twenty-five percent or more of men over the age of seventy have an active sexual life. (True)||29.0||65.3||36.3|
|Those convicted of rape ordinarily are those who began with exhibitionism. (False)||41.3||82.5||41.2|
|Premarital intercourse is engaged in by more than 1 of every 3 American girls. (True)||58.7||83.3||24.6|
|1. “Masturbation should be encouraged under certain conditions||11||41||37||9||1||21+||Pre|
|2. “An individual is morally justified in appearing in public places dressed and made up to look like an individual of the opposite sex.”||6||36||30||21||6||21+||Pre|
|3. “Homosexuality should be regarded as an illness.”||4||23||23||36||14||12-||Pre|
|4. “Homosexuality is all right between consenting adults.”||18||61||13||5||2||8+||Pre|
|5. “Homosexuality is abnormal in adults.”||4||27||24||33||12||12-||Pre|
|6. “Fulfillment of love needs sexual satisfaction.”||13||50||7||28||4||10-||Pre|
|7. “Married persons should use masturbation as a way to relieve sexual tension when the marital partner is not able to participate in coitus or prefers not to do so.”||17||59||20||3||1||10+||Pre|
|8. “Premarital sexual relations often equip persons for more stable and happier marriages.”||6||35||30||25||5||9+||Pre|
|9. “After puberty, spending time nude with more than one other adult of mixed sexes is moral.”||6||25||43||22||5||9+||Pre|
|10. “Men and women should be allowed to be nude together in isolated nudist camps and similar semi-public private settings||23||56||14||5||3||9+||Pre|
|11. “Intercourse with more than one person at a time is perverted.”||10||29||32||23||6||8-||Pre|
|12. “Erection of the male is essential for sexual enjoyment by either partner.”||7||27||9||48||9||6-||Pre|
|13. “Giving out birth control information tends to encourage sexual promiscuity.”||1||9||7||44||39||5-||Pre|
|SA = Strongly Agree / A = Agree / NO = No Opinion / D = Disagree / SD = Strongly Disagree|
|1. “Paying money for sexual relations (prostitution) should be illegal.”||11||14||14||41||20||pre|
|2. “Sex education should be an integral part of the public school program.||28||48||2||2||0||pre|
|3. “All types of sexual stimulation to orgasms, including manual-genital and oral-genital contacts should be practiced in marriage if pleasurable and desired as alternatives to genital intercourse or coitus.”||37||52||6||3||1||pre|
|5. Sexual satisfaction needs love.”||18||33||6||35||8||pre|
|6. “Sex is an acceptable form of recreation.”||25||54||14||7||3||pre|
|7. “An individual who definitely does not enjoy sexual intercourse should not be obliged to have intercourse with his or her spouse.”||5||26||22||28||9||pre|
|SA = Strongly Agree / A = Agree / NO = No Opinion / D = Disagree / SD = Strongly Disagree|