Do reality shows like Teen Mom and 16 And Pregnant "glamorize" teen pregnancy? That standard hand-wringer has always struck me as weird. Because um, those shows don't exactly make teen pregnancy/motherhood look awesome. They (unlike, SORRY, Glee) actually make it look pretty crappy -- a lot more so than, say, carrying around a sack of flour for a week. Even when cute teen moms glam it up for celeb magazines (which are guilty of overglamorizing post-teen motherhood), teens -- who, turns out, are also better at condoms than grownups -- still know what's up. And now we have the numbers to show it: according to two brand-new studies commissioned by The National Campaign To Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, "most teens (79% of girls and 67% of boys) agree that when a TV show or character they like deals with teen pregnancy, it makes them think more about their own risk of getting pregnant or causing a pregnancy and how to avoid it." Other findings: · Among those young people who have watched MTV’s 16 and Pregnant, 82% think the show helps teens better understand the challenges of teen pregnancy and parenthood and how to avoid it. · 76% of young people say that what they see in the media about sex, love, and relationships can be a good way to start conversations with adults. · About half (48%) say they have discussed these topics with their parents because of something they have seen in the media. · 16 and Pregnant got young people talking and thinking about teen pregnancy─40% of those in the treatment group said they talked about the show with a parent, 63% discussed with a friend, and 37% discussed with a sibling. · 93% of those who watched [a particular] episode agreed (53% strongly agreed) with the statement: “I learned that teen parenthood is harder than I imagined from these episodes.” This is all information we're not so sure they're getting in, say, abstinence-only sex ed -- which, while we're on the subject, glamorizes lies, shame, and fear. (And whose funding just got resuscitated, even as the Obama administration also awarded $155 million in federal grants to support evidence-based, medically accurate sex ed.) Enough with the mixed messages, as Jessica Wakeman wrote at The Frisky, continuing: "If pregnant teen girls get their moment in the media’s graces, the least we can do is use it wisely. The alternative could be much, much worse." Of course the media plays a role in the whole teen pregnancy ecosystem, but there are a whole lot of other reasons teens get pregnant, most of which are much, much more complicated and challenging than the simple notion of MTV cause-and-effect (which is exactly why we are reluctant to acknowledge and deal with them). Teens are smarter than we give them credit for. Sometimes, in fact -- see phrases bolded above -- they just want to talk. This post was originally published at BreakupGirl.net.

Via Science Daily: That old adage favored by scientists and ‘60s girl groups -- “correlation is not causation, no sir” -- seems to have eluded more than a few pundits in our day.

One hasty assumption in particular--that sexy media influences kids to have sex earlier--is being challenged in an article in a recent issue of Developmental Psychology. Psychologists Laurence Steinberg and Kathryn Monahan revisit a much-cited 2006 study by media expert Jane D. Brown which concluded that exposure to sexualized content on TV, or in music, movies, and magazines, accelerates sexual activity in young teenagers.

Steinberg and Monahan reanalyzed the data of Brown's longitudinal study, but this time took into account the other dimensions of the participants’ lives that may have influenced their exposure to sexualized media and their pre-existing inclination to view or listen to the sexy stuff.

The authors discovered that while a link exists between sexual content and earlier sexual activity, they found "no accelerating or hastening effect of exposure to sexy media content on sexual debut once steps were taken to ensure that adolescents with and without high media exposure were matched on their propensity to be exposed to media with sexual content."

They conclude, in other words, that the kids who were inclined to have sex earlier were also the kids who’d be likely to consume the hotter media, but the media didn’t, like, make them do it. In OTHERother words, it wasn’t Ke$ha’s fault (this time).

Kudos to Steinberg and Monahan for questioning a long-held assumption, turning the old blame-the-media trope on its head, and for using the word “sexy” about 700 times in their article, making it read like a Prince song.

Most importantly, they turn the focus back to other scientifically established causes of precocious sexual activity: parent–child conflicts and peer influence. Knowing the real causes may lead to more effective ways of helping kids be smart and wise consumers, or not, of the sexed-up stuff they see.

This post originally appeared at BreakupGirl.net.

Over the weekend, the APA convention debuted the latest in a long line of studies about the psychological impact of superheroes on boys -- a lineage one can trace back to Frederic Wertham's infamous "Seduction of the Innocent" in 1954. These new studies are more rigorous than Wertham's alarmist screed of course, but after 50 years of this sort of thing its hard to get worked up over it. Of course now the boogeyman is superhero movies, since they are more widespread than their print counterparts.

"There is a big difference in the movie superhero of today and the comic book superhero of yesterday," said psychologist Sharon Lamb, PhD, distinguished professor of mental health at University of Massachusetts-Boston. "Today’s superhero is too much like an action hero who participates in non-stop violence; he’s aggressive, sarcastic and rarely speaks to the virtue of doing good for humanity. When not in superhero costume, these men, like Ironman, exploit women, flaunt bling and convey their manhood with high-powered guns."

Of course there is a big difference between today and yesterday. Since the 1980’s, comic books (and video games) have increasingly been geared toward older and older audiences (the ones with the money) -- teen, then college-age, and now even post-college age men as "adultolescence" becomes more prevalent. And of course today's movie superhero is going to be more complex, if not more violent, than his comic book counterparts (especially the Twinkie-hawking '70s versions that researchers remember) -- that's what blockbuster-moviegoers demand. I don't remember the achingly innocent/authentic Speed Racer movie breaking any records. The report continues:

"In today’s media, superheroes and slackers are the only two options boys have," said Lamb. "Boys are told, if you can’t be a superhero, you can always be a slacker. Slackers are funny, but slackers are not what boys should strive to be; slackers don’t like school and they shirk responsibility..."

They could be right about there only being two choices, superhero or slacker. Have you seen the Green Hornet trailer? In this new formulation (desecration?) of the old radio drama, Seth Rogen plays a slacker who straightens himself out after his father dies. But does he get a job? No, he becomes a superhero! I guess he grew up on these messages that Lamb has been studying. At the convention this study was paired with another, from Researcher Carlos Santos, PhD, of Arizona State University that suggested that boys seem better adjusted in their relationships when they resist internalizing macho images. Look, if I have learned anything about relationships from superheroes, I have learned to keep women at arms length in order to keep them safe. Also, lying about what I do at night. This article was originally published at BreakupGirl.net.

Clearly, the grownups aren't at all sure what to do about sexting. While legal scholars (rightly) ponder when, whether, and most importantly how to prosecute sexters, one Pennsylvania school/DA threatened kids suspected of sexting with child pornography charges unless they took part in an after-school program which, among other things, required girls to write essays on why their actions were wrong; the goal: to "gain an understanding of what it means to be a girl in today's society." Is it shaming in here, or is it just me? To be sure, sexting should be taken seriously (as harassment and abuse). But why do I suspect -- perhaps cynically, yes -- that this focus on "what it means" will not include a full exploration of the deep cultural factors that appropriate and contain girls' sexuality and limit their worth and self-expression to "hotness"? (Maybe it will; I hope I'm wrong.) But as theoreotical counterpoint -- and to counter the oft-peddled image of teens doing nothing all day but re-watching Twilight, playing Kill Everyone, and forwarding around naked photos of the French exchange student, I offer this: a reminder of many of the positive and, dare I say, actually empowering, ways that girls use social media. As eleventh-grader Nadia Tareen -- as part of a video series on media issues called Girls Investigate, a joint project of The Women’s Media Center (WMC) and Girls Learn International®, Inc. -- writes:

Adults are often too fast to condemn teenagers’ use of technology. We aren’t as “clueless about online threats as some adults believe – Two-thirds of the teens who have created profiles have used privacy controls to limit access to them.” Also, I suspect that my parents and teachers are unaware of everything that my peers and I accomplish online. For example, social media is a great tool for activism. As the leader of my school’s chapter of Girls Learn International®, Inc., I have found that e-mail and Facebook messages are invaluable for organizing and spreading awareness. Teenagers even use social media to make their dreams come true. As an avid YouTube-watcher, I can cite at least a dozen teenagers who posted videos of their musical and comedic talents on the website, to then be discovered by industry professionals. If social media is used intelligently, it can yield endless benefits.

This post was originally published at BreakupGirl.net.