New York Newsday - December 15, 1994
CLINTON'S SAD STAND AGAINST CANDOR
by Gabriel Rotello
	New York - For a president whose chief problem is an inability to take a
firm stand on anything, it's nice to know there's at least one thing Mr.
Clinton stands firmly against. Nice and bizarre, that is. Who would have
guessed that the president's matter of principle, his line in the sand, the
thing he opposes so strongly that he would fire Surgeon General Joycelyn
Elders for daring to mention it, is the discussion of masturbation in sex
education classes? 
	How Trumanesque of the president. How decisive. And how pathetic. 
	Any teenager can tell you that masturbation is definitely a part of sex, and
that any sex ed class that omits it is a joke. Which is why it has been
discussed as part of sex ed in many places for many years, including here in
New York City. It was certainly discussed in Connecticut when I was in junior
high in the 60s. As one teacher told me this week, "There isn't a competent
sex educator in the country who doesn't deal with masturbation all the time.
If we don't bring it up, the kids do." 
	Some argue that keeping kids ignorant about intercourse may help some stay
virgins longer (I seriously doubt it, but they argue it), but I've never
heard a rational person argue that enforced ignorance will keep kids from
discovering the bodies they were born in. So when Elders told a World AIDS
Day forum that masturbation is "a part of human sexuality and it's part of
something that perhaps should be taught," who's to argue? Extreme right
wingers, maybe? Some of whom have a hard time swallowing evolution? And who
else? 
	Clinton's betrayal of Elders is all the more depressing because it upsets a
precedent for candor established by her distinguished predecessor, C. Everett
Koop, who was quite frank about sex and AIDS even though he was a Republican.
His boss never laid a finger on him, and right wingers merely grumbled,
perhaps because Koop's conservative credentials and Marcus Welby manner made
his comments seem like the kind of frankness we're taught to expect from the
family doctor. Maybe I'm paranoid, but I can't help thinking that if Elders
had been a fatherly white Republican with a beard instead of a middle aged
black woman from Arkansas, she'd still have her job. 
	There are grim portents here for everyone concerned with saving the next
generation from AIDS. The fact that Elder's downfall resulted from statements
about AIDS prevention, rather than her far more controversial statements
about drug legalization, is alarming. In the case of AIDS the challenge of
the future, the "change" President Clinton is so fond of evoking, lies in an
increasingly open discussion of ways to prevent HIV transmission. Not a
return to Victorian hypocrisy. 
	What's even more alarming is the fact that once Clinton caved, liberals
caved with him. When a conservative gets in trouble simply for speaking the
truth, everybody from Rush Limbaugh to John Leo rails against the thought
police and political correctness run amok. But most of today's retreating
liberals tepidly agreed that Elders had to go. The only outraged reaction
came from blacks and gays and AIDS activists, and who needs them?
	I'll tell you who. The Democratic Party and President Clinton. I doubt
there's a single Ditto Head who's now switching to the Democrats because
Clinton betrayed his old friend Elders. But there are plenty of progressives,
and plenty of old friends, for whom this was the last straw.
	When asked his opinion of masturbation, the Greek philosopher Diogenes
remarked that it was a pity the gods hadn't designed humans so that we could
cure hunger by simply rubbing our bellies. And it's a pity we can't cure
presidential cowardice by rubbing some spine into Mr. Clinton. It seems like
the only people with backbone these days are the bad guys. And folks like
Joycelyn Elders.