There is a policy on sexual education that seems very flawed. Over and over again we have come to the question of what sexual education should be teaching the children and where to actually draw the line. In the article State Policies on Sex Education in schools Blackman and Scotti tell their readers why sexual education is taught in schools. Most of the reasons are the statistics of teens having sexual activity and the rate of sexually transmitted diseases. Then the article talks about how all states are involved sex education for public school children.
This article then talks about the 2016 Sex Education Legislation where a majority was failed and or failed-adjourned. The next part of the article is the State Law on Medical Accuracy in Sex Education where 20 of the 50 state laws talks about. One of the states included is California “Code § 51930-51939” which says that schools will provide age appropriate sexual education in schools. It continues to talk about how in grade seven abstinence and protection from pregnancy and Sexually transmitted diseases will be established making sure everything will be medically accurate.
Article 1 General Provisions 51930- 52932 is a policy is the sexual education policy that teaches pupils the knowledge and or skills they will need to protect themselves from HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases along with many other things. This code also helps the children to develop a healthy attitude towards themselves as they go through these changes in their lives. While also understanding that your sexuality is a normal part of life. This code also speaks on sexual health and HIV prevention while also telling the students how to be in a safe and successful relationship. Talking to primary school children about sex by the department of Health and Human Services is an article that talks about the comprehensive sexual health and HIV/AIDs prevention instruction and the legal requirements for education.
This law was enacted on January 1, 2016. The bill was renamed from the California Comprehensive Sexual Health and HIV/AIDS Prevention Education Act to California Healthy Youth Act. This is a bill that requires that the schools are to educate grades seven through twelve about sexual health education and HIV prevention education. This act had five primary purposes which are information to protect sexual and reproductive health from sexually transmitted infections, information about skills to develop healthy attributes concerning young growth, body image, gender ect., an understanding of sexuality and normal part of human development, an understanding of unbiased sexual health and HIV instruction to protection, the understanding of how to have healthy relationships and boundaries.
While this is an overview of the education codes there is more material covered in each subsection of the policy codes. These codes do talk about how in education the materials that are being taught under this policy will have access to all of this information in whatever way best suits their needs and does not stereotype any race they choose to be. This education would take place in during the grades of 7-12 however, parents can take place to opt their children out of the sexual education according to the Assembly Bill number 329. They also give information about the effectiveness and safety of all federal Food and Drug Administration or (FDA) information.
They also teach the students about the social views of HIV and AIDS including stereotypes and myths along with how successful treatment can be. They provide students with information on local resources and they tap on parenting, adoption and even abortion. This code also takes information on sexual harassment, sexual assault, rape, and human trafficking along with how to help prevent sex trafficking. A school can teach on the risks and consequences of having more than one or shared partners and pornography.
The sexual education taught in many schools is failing the students in many ways. The fact that sexual education is being shown in television shows and movies like Mean Girls is showing how badly sexual education is being taught. In Mean Girls the physical education teacher is telling the children about sex and he says “Don’t have sex. Because you will get pregnant and die. Don’t have sex in the missionary position, don’t have sex standing up. Just don’t do it, promise? OK, everybody take some rubbers.” While this teacher is teaching abstinence, he is not teaching about the terminology or even the risk or benefits of sex. This teacher is relying on a scared tactic instead of teaching the children instead of knowledge.
The teacher had the opportunity to teach about the actual sex education, but just told his students not to have sex then passes around “rubbers” also known as condoms to the students. If this is a true story of how sex education is taught it shows the corruption of the sexual education system in today’s schools. While this movie may not have everything accurate it is a depiction of what people view sexual education as.
The audience doesn’t see if he covers any more topics maybe he did explain better. Mark Manson rights an article called 7 things sex education should have taught us but didn’t which list seven things that he thinks should have been covered in sexual education classes. He speaks about how Sex education should cover more than Biology. Although it is important to know the sexual organs and how they work, sex is more than biology. His article touches on the fact that yes children need to know pregnancy, however when having sex no one is thinking about their sexual organs. Manson says, “That’s because for humans sexual activity is more than a mere biological urge, it has psychological significance and social meaning.” He touches on the fact that sexual education focused on sex in relation to having a child, but sex now is rarely about having a child.
Manson makes a great remark when he says “Sex ed should account for the recreational, social and emotional reasons for sex and their consequences. It should discuss the interpersonal meaning of intercourse, setting clear expectations and boundaries, communicating desires, dealing with feelings of shame and awkwardness, and of course, being responsible about protection and privacy.” While these seem like obvious things to either know or learn, no one really touches on these aspects of sexual education. In Manson’s second point he speaks about respecting personal boundaries. In this section Manson touches on the fact that it is okay to say no and to give clear consent and not feel bad about it. However, society makes it seem like women have the power over whether sex is going to happen, so it is a stereotype that men have to win women open.
Mark Manson’s third and fourth point are about how sex does not determine the personal value of anyone and that all sex is natural. The stereotype is that men should have sex and if they don’t they have failed while if you are a women and you have sex you should feel ashamed about it. When he speaks about the fact that you are welcome to have sex or experiment with the same sex gender and that this is in fact okay to do. His next point is that in sexual education we should learn more about how to please each other. His fifth point talks about how men should be taught how to make a woman climax and that this usually happens when arousing a woman with her clitoris. This flows into his sixth point which is that men and women experience sex in different ways. This is factual in the fact that men and women have different body parts, but also in the fact that the sexual desires may differ as well. The Manson slides to his seventh and final point which is that “great relationships mean great sex”.
Manson touches on the fact that while schools cover all the biology of sex they say save sex until marriage because that will solve many issues while this is not really true. Sexual education should be teaching about romantic relationships to their students. Mason ends off his last point by saying, “What about attachment theory, emotional needs and the differences between love, lust and commitment? What about the Neo-Freudian explanation for romance? What about dealing with the anxiety of meeting someone attractive?” He makes a valuable point. Children should be learning the difference between love and lust and maybe even that marriage is about love not lust.
While Mark Manson did a great job about talking about some troubles of sexual education Rachel Sanoff does her own article about Seven Problems with the State of Sex Ed in America today and How we can make it better. While some of Sanoff’s points align with Manson’s she does touch on some other stereotypes that are in today’s society. One of Sanoff’s point s is that sex education needs to start earlier. She talks about how looking into the education Britain and the Netherlands are offering is a glimpse of what the American sex education could look like. These places seem to be teaching education from kinder throughout twelfth grade which is given the children a more positive and natural outlook on sex. This does not mean that she wants to talk about sex with little children, but to understand that there is an age appropriate time to cover all concepts.
Another one of Sanoff’s points that seems to align with Manson is that sex ed needs to be teaching things like pleasure, consent and even healthy relationships. Many schools seem to have this idea that if we touch on sexually transmitted diseases and the biological terminology is all they need to do to prepare students for their sexual intercourse with future partners. However, would there not be many more benefits to what a healthy relationship with consent on both sides looks like? Sanoff says, “The fact that sexuality is described as frightening instead of as an enjoyable activity between responsible, consenting adults denies young people the chance to learn how to take care of themselves and how to communicate their comfort or discomfort regarding various acts.” If sexualization was normalized a result might be more people taking responsibility for their actions. Another concept that Sanoffs covers is that normalizing the use of condoms is not necessary making children have sex but helping already sexually active students become safer. Not only should sex education encourage the use of a condom and maybe even other types of contraception, but it should also be inclusive to the LGBT+ community as well. Not only will this allow these students to be protected from unwanted pregnancies and diseases, but it should be helping them with bullying and abuse as well.
Sanoff’s last point is that sexual education should be talking about sexual health, chronic disorders and the disabilities. When talking about inclusive sexual education this should include everyone, even special education or special needs students. Now Sanoff knows that these changes cannot and should not be changed overnight, but slowly they should be incorporated.
Chitra Panjabi speaks about the problem with sex education as well. However, she has a very different approach that should be considered. Every school, district, and even state have their own laws based on sexual education and how it should be taught. The students are not all getting the same education. When it comes to the sexual education policy it is very hard to understand why students living in the same state, but different school districts would be getting different forms of sexual education. Not only is it hard for students to get the same education it can be hard for them to get an education at all with the “abstinence education.” This is an education where children are encouraged not to have sex until marriage and that they should just say no to sexual education. This can be a problem because assuming that telling children to abstain from sex is going to make them not have sex is a bad approach.
This is also a problem because they are not teaching these children about sex. This is even going to a point where it’s not even education at all and it is denying children of their human rights to have the education and information about their sexual and reproductive health and sexuality.
What are the changes being made to change sexual education for the better? David Washburn in California Approves new guidance for teaching sex education article says that the California board of Education is approving a new statewide guidance for health education which includes some recommendations for teaching sexual education that will align with the California Healthy Youth act which is the state’s comprehensive sex education law. While this is a new framework for all the subject’s sexual education makes up around ten percent of the framework. This framework has California teach about birth control, sexually transmitted diseases, but also covers what it means to be sexually assaulted, harassed or even trafficked. All of these lessons will include material that is inclusive to the LGBTQ+ students and community.
The new provisions on the law still allows parents to take their children out of sexual education, but not when it comes to the lessons focused on the rights of the LGBTQ+ community. While this change has caused conflict among the community the most challenging part for parents to understand is that the lessons addressing the LGBTQ+ students because they are using sine books that include animated pictures of naked people showing the male and female body along with some explicit descriptions of the sexual acts that may occur.
In the Controversial Sex Education Framework for California Approved Sespite Protests Shelby says that the education officials of California are making new framework for sexual education in the classrooms. They are working on making sure that the content seen in classes are not overly graphic for the children at hand. This is not a mandate, but it is there to help teachers with what information to use in the classroom. They have come to ban some books not saying that they are bad books, but that they are books that should not be supported by the school. The parents are trying to make sure that the content shown in every grade level will be appropriate for the children in those grades. However, the teachers are saying that this information will help everyone in the long term. At what grade should things like transgender be taught and where will the parents and teachers come to an agreement?
California is overhauling sex education guidance for schools — and religious conservatives don’t like it by Valerie Strauss talks about how the religious conservatives are view the new changes to the sexual education policy. Strauss writes:
According to EdSource, conservative religious groups have been mobilizing parents to remove recommendations that deal with the sexual health of LGBTQ students and material aimed at young children. Hundreds of people attended a public hearing in March in Sacramento, and many stood to express objections to the Instructional Quality Commission, which advises the state board and approved the new draft framework.
One woman, who identified herself as a “Christian soldier,” said: “This is something that is destroying our children. It will destroy our future children.” Another woman read a Bible verse and said the draft framework is “straight from the pits of hell…. Almighty God is going to judge all of us, rightfully. “The draft of the new framework says in part: Grades kindergarten through three: Students can start to learn about gender differences and “challenge” gender stereotypes. “While students may not fully understand the concepts of gender expression and identity, some children in kindergarten and even younger have identified as transgender or understand they have a gender identity that is different from their sex assigned at birth.”
What the religious conservatives have to say is a concern among the Christian community. As Christians we are taught that sex before marriage is a sin and the it is a sin to be a part of the LGBTQ community.
