Comprehensive Sex Education is Still Worth Fighting For

×

Expand

Photo: Umida Kamalova - Getty Images

Banana with condom

It has been one year since my initial Sexpress column. Since then, there have been drastic changes in the sexual health landscape of the U.S., with abortion access being decimated in many parts of the country, the introduction of numerous anti-LGBTQ laws, and calls for libraries to remove books containing content about sexuality or gender identity.

While efforts like these are pernicious and frightening in today’s polarized political landscape, they are certainly not new. Like they have done since the 1980s, regressive activists and politicians have chosen to wage culture war battles around sexuality, and many of those battles have played out in the arena of the K-12 public school system.

Even though there is widespread public support across the political spectrum for comprehensive sex ed in public schools, CSE (Comprehensive Sex Education) has long been under attack from forces that aim to promote “Abstinence Only Until [heterosexual] Marriage” (AOUM) programs. A 2017 article in the Journal of Adolescent Health notes that, “[t]he weight of scientific evidence finds that AOUM programs are not effective in delaying initiation of sexual intercourse or changing other sexual risk behaviors.” The authors further find that “AOUM programs threaten fundamental human rights to health, information, and life,” concluding that they “are inherently coercive, withholding information needed to make informed choices and promoting questionable, inaccurate, and stigmatizing opinions.” Such programs are often neglectful, if not harmful, to LGBTQ students, sexually active, pregnant, and parenting adolescents, and survivors of sexual assault. 

On the other hand, CSE programs have been shown to offer positive outcomes—not just in delaying sexual activity and lowering STI (Sexually Transmitted Infection) incidence, but also in building child sex abuse prevention skills, reducing intimate partner violence, improving skills that support healthy relationships, and decreasing homophobia and bullying. Like most subjects, CSE programs are most effective when started at younger ages with basic concepts and then scaffolded to build on learning as youth grow older.  That’s how we learn math and science; sex ed works much the same way.

Despite public support and evidence of CSE’s benefits, opponents continue to spread misinformation and outright lies about the goals and outcomes of CSE. Recent tactics have preyed on parental fears about child abuse while peddling unabashed prejudice against LGBTQ people. Florida’s 2022 “Don’t Say Gay” bill is a prime example of this strategy. The bill prohibits “instruction… on sexual orientation or gender identity… in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students.” Florida’s governor claimed the bill would prevent “sexualizing kids in kindergarten,” and his spokesperson stated that anyone who was against the bill is “probably a groomer.” (For those not familiar with the term, “grooming” refers to acts of establishing an emotional connection with a child to prepare the child for sexual abuse.)

These outrageous claims are based on hateful, false stereotypes about LGBTQ people, and are divorced from the reality of what kids actually learn about these topics in CSE. But fairness or reality is of no concern to proponents of this strategy; the point of “grooming” discourse is to lob an ideological stink bomb that contaminates anyone near it, while whipping up fear, resentment, and mistrust in education programs that speak to human diversity. It is no coincidence that the same organizations and politicians who object to CSE are also fighting against “critical race theory,” spurring a spate of laws that would prevent honest education in schools about the impacts of racism and white supremacy in our country’s history.

Meanwhile, age-appropriate CSE recommended standards for young children (K-2) are aimed squarely at the prevention of childhood sexual abuse, as well as developing skills needed for kids to seek help from a parent or trusted adult when in dangerous situations. Other CSE standards for young children focus on healthy boundaries (both for self and respecting others), bullying prevention, recognition of/respect for different types of families, and age-appropriate lessons about anatomy and reproduction (i.e., “where babies come from”). CSE standards around gender roles and gender identity for young children focus on being able to define basic concepts and talk about the range of ways people can express their gender.

When discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity is censored inside the classroom, LGBTQ kids and their families are not only isolated and stigmatized, they are actively discriminated against when denied sexual health education that is relevant to their lives.

By including people of all sexual orientations and gender identities, CSE can benefit all kids and all kinds of families. Indeed, there is evidence that LGBTQ-inclusive sex education offers better mental health outcomes not just to LGBTQ youth, but to all youth.

So, when you see attacks on sex ed headed for your local school board meeting, don’t get bogged down in bad-faith arguments that are deliberately misleading and designed to incite moral panic and fear. Engage in proactive talk about the benefits of CSE. The bottom line? All young people deserve access to sex education that is medically accurate and affirming of their identity.