Williams 1

Priya Williams

Sean Waters

CO 300

17 February 2021

“When Did Porn Become Sex Ed?” Analysis

American society is failing to educate adolescents about sex. In her opinion piece “When Did

Porn Become Sex Ed?” Orenstein identifies adolescents’ lack of sexual knowledge as the exigence in her

piece and proposes solutions to address it. Adolescents are being poorly equipped to engage in healthy

sex because the topic is taboo. Orenstein appeals to mainly parents, as well as other adults who impact

the lives of adolescents, that normalizing sex needs to happen. Constraints including gender and cultural

views impact the normalization of sex, but Orenstein is mindful of these. The rhetoric employed by

Orenstein is persuasive because she appropriately addresses the exigence, audience, and constraints.

Orenstein effectively shows that we need better sex education in America by explaining how

many adolescents consume pornography to learn about sex. Approximately 60 percent of college

students surveyed answer that porn is their sex instruction manual. What is even more interesting is

that nearly 75 percent of these college students know that porn is unrealistic (Orenstein). These

statistics are staggering and may shock a reader. Exigence arises from these statistics. Normalizing sex

would prevent adolescents from feeling like they need to consume pornography despite knowing it is a

bad representation of sex. Orenstein sets the stage with these statistics to compel her audience that

change needs to happen.

So why are adolescents turning to pornography to learn about sex? Well, sex education across

the United States is not standardized and is not sex positive. Sex education is only mandated in 23

states, abstinence education prevails, and most classes focus on the reproductive anatomy (Orenstein).

Orenstein emphasizes how the American school system is failing adolescents. Adolescents are
 Williams 2

unprepared either because they never received any form of sex education or the sex education they did

receive is insufficient. It is no wonder that adolescents enlist the help of pornography. Discussion about

sex and pleasure never occur and the idea of self-exploration is cast aside. Orenstein’s exposure of the

state of sex education in America further proves the existence of exigence.

Orenstein, a parent herself, recognizes how parents can be a part of the solution. Conversations

about sex are uncomfortable. A personal account from a 21-year-old college student explains how her

“liberal parents would have been willing to answer any questions, [but] it was pretty clear the topic

made them even more uncomfortable than it made her” (Orenstein). The discomfort surrounding sex is

a barrier to American adolescents learning about healthy sex. The normalization of sex, particularly by

parents, is essential. Orenstein tailors her argument towards parents by describing ways to improve

their parenting and care for their children.

Orenstein encourages parents to openly discuss sex with their children instead of leaving it

shrouded in mystery. For example, many parents teach their children the names of their body parts but

omit the names of genitalia. Orenstein states, “Leaving something unnamed, of course, makes it quite

literally unspeakable.” Without the proper language, children cannot engage in conversations about sex.

Parents portray sex as secretive which makes it even more difficult for these conversations to happen.

Educating children about sex including proper terminology is important for children to discuss healthy

sex and boundaries.

Parents care immensely about their children, so Orenstein appeals to parent’s nurturing nature.

Parents do not want their children to experience pain, yet most sexually active young women are

engaging in painful sex. According to Orenstein, “70 percent of women report pain in their sexual

encounters,” which is an unfortunately high percentage. These young women are oblivious to sex being

enjoyable and safe. Better education on pleasurable sex would lower this percentage which compels

parents to improve sex education. Another positive outcome of talking to young people about sexuality
 Williams 3

is that it increases the likelihood of children delaying sexual activity and responsibly having sex

(Orenstein). Parents want children to be safe, which Orenstein capitalizes on by highlighting how open

discussions about sex positively impact children in the long run. Normalizing sex keeps children safe.

Describing how female sexuality is often repressed, whereas male sexuality is celebrated,

Orenstein highlights how gender differences can impact the conversation surrounding sex. Orenstein

describes how “males’ puberty is often characterized in terms of erections, ejaculation and the

emergence of a near-unstoppable sex drive, females’ is defined by periods” to exemplify the differences

in gender. Why do these gender differences exist in the normalization of sex? Orenstein implores her

reader to consider encouraging women to engage in sexual self-exploration like men are encouraged to.

Both partners deserve to gain satisfaction from their sexual experiences. The discussion surrounding

men and women being equals when it comes to sex is an important on to have in sex education.

Orenstein considers cultural differences as another important constraint. The sex culture in

America differs from the sex culture in other countries. In America, women describe sex as being “’being

driven by hormones,’ in which the guys determined relationships , both sexes prioritized male pleasure,

and reciprocity was rare” (Orenstein). The Netherlands depicts a different sex culture where respect,

open communication, and being in touch with pleasure are valued. Orenstein’s analysis of these cultural

differences aid in demonstrating how normalizing sex will lead to better outcomes. Right now, American

society values male sexuality and sex is almost primal. If we want to change this, then we should look to

countries like the Netherlands. Creating an open dialogue between adolescents and adults is important.

Overall, Orenstein effectively capitalizes on parents’ desire to do what is best for their children.

The analysis of social constraints including gender and cultural values strengthen her argument by

highlighting how American society can improve sex education. Orenstein’s rhetoric likely convinces her

audience that the exigence of sexually uneducated adolescents needs to be addressed and provides

clear solutions to the problem.

 Williams 4

Self-Assessment

Purpose and Content 23/25: I have a clear, focused thesis claiming Orenstein’s rhetoric is persuasive. I

identify the exigence, audience, and constraints that illustrate how Orenstein addresses the rhetorical

situation. For the most part my rhetorical analysis is focused. Sometimes my analysis is not focused and

summarizes too much, so I took two points off for this section. My writing demonstrates I carefully read

the article.

Compelling and Convincing 24/25: The presentation is compelling because I identify elements of

Orenstein’s argument then analyze them. I focus on the rhetorical situation elements (exigence,

audience, and constraints). Differentiating between audience and constraints in terms of audience

values (e.g., parents want to keep their children safe) is difficult, so I took one point off for this section.

Integration of Source Material – Evidence 18/20: I include evidence in each body paragraph with

explanation. I include short quotes and paraphrases. Sometimes my paraphrases are confusing or not

explained well, so I took two points off for this section.

Outline, Organization, and Style 19/20: My essay flows well overall and is logical. I structure my essay by

the different rhetorical situation elements (exigence, audience, and constraints). My writing is clear and

specific. Sometimes my writing is not succinct and confusing, so I took one point off for this section.

Appearance, Documentation, and Mechanics 10/10: I properly cite all my evidence and the overall

appearance of my paper is good. I ensure that there are little to no mechanical errors.

Total Score: 94/100

Specific Feedback Requests

Feedback on focusing my rhetorical analysis (e.g., avoiding summarization), integrating and explaining

evidence, and how to improve my writing’s flow.