A Tale of Two Abstinence Campaigns

In an interview with Christianity Today , Wheaton College professor Christine Gardner explains the differences in rhetorical approaches between evangelical abstinence organizations in America and abstinence campaigns in sub-Saharan Africa:

You looked at how Africans view abstinence, saying they “saw their bodies as temples of the Lord and themselves as caretakers . . . a more deeply theological response.”

I assumed that HIV/AIDS would be the big motivator for [African] young people to commit to abstinence. It is big, but I found this other undercurrent that was deeply theological. A leader of one of the programs told me that yes, they do talk about AIDS as a motivator for young people to commit to abstinence, but they noted that “you can get malaria and die, too.” AIDS is not as much of a motivator as a Western researcher coming in would have assumed.

How do the American and African messages compare?

Americans have turned a prohibition into a more positive admonition. In this case, pleasing God is an end in itself. Pleasing God will have tangible benefits. In Kenya and Rwanda, it was more of a combination: “Avoid death. Avoid HIV/AIDS, and do it out of fear of God, because he wants you to do this.”

‘I’m concerned that we may be raising a generation of abstinent teens but setting them up for divorce.’—Christine Gardner
Also, in the places I visited in Africa, the condom is viewed as a medical device, a tool for saving lives. It is not viewed as a tool for promiscuity, as evangelicals in this country largely view it. The same little piece of latex is described so radically differently by evangelicals in two different cultural contexts.

Read more . . .