Sex Ed: why it matters now more than ever

Growing up is hard, adults expect teenagers to act like adults whilst still treating them like children. Likewise, parenting is hard, particularly when it comes to teaching values and beliefs. This prompts the consideration of how big of a role parents should have in shaping their children’s independent values.

There are a multitude of personal matters young people may not feel comfortable discussing, or have any opportunity to discuss, with their parents and guardians – which is where outside education comes in. But what happens when schools heavily restrict content to cater for independent beliefs and values? A multitude of research has found that young people wish for more comprehensive, inclusive, diverse and non-judgemental sexual, health and relationship education in schools (Allen 2024). Thus, it is crucial to understand barriers in the development of comprehensive programs to bring forth ideas on how to not only overcome, but respect, these challenges.

An investigation into the different moral stances that exist when updating schools’ sexual education curriculums allows for a broader understanding of the nature of existing conflicts. Additionally, I consider Netflix’s television series Sex Education (2019) as an exemplar of progressive sexuality and gender education, and the significance of its positive representations of content that is catered towards young people’s needs, rather than adult’s desires. Further, research into what exactly constitutes a “comprehensive” program is key in understanding how and why opposition exists. School health education is widely seen as inadequate in addressing information needs; driven by the societal taboos that are placed on openly discussing sexuality, as well as conservatist values concerning diversity and heterogeneous identities. Conservatism has caused sexual education curriculums to centre around the concept of ‘prevention and protection’, attempting to dictate young people’s lives by promoting that the safest way to have sex is to not have it at all (Gibson 2007). Australian students seek more education on sexual health matters, consent, relationship and sex positivity, desiring that programs be more LGBTQIA+ inclusive and delivered by qualified educators (Waling et al. 2020).

Through relating these circumstances to Stanley Cohen’s moral panic theory and relevant academic studies, I developed a discussion into how to develop responses to the subjectivity and role of morality in constructing these curriculums. Moral panics occur in societies when they move away from the “norm”, which is most often entrenched in traditional values. It can be recognised that the content of which may be included in comprehensive sexual education can convey values that go against different societal attitudes towards sex and relationships, and their construction of what constitutes taboo topics.

References

Allen, L 2023, ‘What can the Netflix series Sex Education teach school-based sexuality

education?’, American Journal of Sexuality Education, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 398-416.

Gibson, S 2007, ‘The language of the right: sex education debates in South Australia’, Sex

Education, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 239-250.

Rasmussen, M L 2010, ‘Revisiting moral panics in sexuality education’, Media International

Australia, vol. 135, pp. 118-130.

Waling, A, Fisher, C, Ezer, P, Kerr, L, Bellamy, R & Lucke, J 2021, ‘“Please teach students that

sex is a healthy part of growing up”: Australian students’ desires for relationships and sexuality education’, Sexuality Research and Social Policy, vol. 18, pp. 1113-1128.

Sex Education 2019, television program, Netflix, America.