More Related Content Similar to PAF591SexEducationSexualViolence (15) 3. 3
Sex Education and Sexual Violence Prevention Policy
From masturbation to the onset of sexual behavior, the goal of schoolbased sex
education has been to fight the “ailments” of adolescent sexuality throughout history
(BayCheng, 2013 & Fine, 1988). Currently, in the United States, teenage pregnancy and the
HIV/AIDS epidemic have been the two issues on the minds of the curriculum developers of
current schoolbased sex education, and the answer has been abstinencebased education. In this
model, it is theorized that the delay of sexual intercourse until marriage would prevent the spread
of HIV and cut out the possibility of teenage pregnancy altogether. These policymakers view
the problem as adolescent boys being unable to control their natural urges, teenage girls as being
unable to say no to these boys due to low selfesteem, while holding no sexual power or interest
on their own, and the solution being to empower those women to say no until marriage.
Abstinenceonly education, which educate only on abstinence and “just say no tactics,”
and “abstinence plus” programs, which somewhat expand a into barrier and hormonal
contraceptive use, although predominantly to highlight their failures, has been the schoolbased
4. 4
sex education model funded by the federal government for decades with little question of its
effects, only that it fit the moral compass of Americans (BayCheng, 2013). It is more
comforting to believe that preventing sexual behavior of teenagers as a whole is the solution, and
that if they are not having sex, there will be no unwanted consequences; however, they do not
consider the consequences of this mindset.
To the majority of those who do any work in public health or education, it comes to no
surprise that this limited and scaretactic based education is not effective in preventing sexually
transmitted infections (STIs) nor does it put a dent in the escalating rates of teenage pregnancy,
Michelle Fine describing the issues as the following: “current practices and language lead to
increased experiences of victimization, teenage pregnancy, and increased dropout rates” (1988,
p29). It was found by the Federally Funded Adolescent Abstinence Promotion Programs: An
Evaluation of Evaluations that abstinenceonly programs were insignificantly effective to
completely ineffective at preventing STIs or unplanned pregnancy among adolescents (Boonstra,
2009). With nearly 750,000 adolescent girls becoming pregnant each year (Fantasia and
Fontenot, 2011), regardless if one defines teenage pregnancy as the problem, the interventions
are obviously not stopping their intended ailments.
There are many reasons that this might be the case. First, for what may seem “obvious,”
abstinencebased programs do not teach adolescents alternative ways to prevent pregnancy or
5. 5
infection; condomuse is not taught, proper use of hormonal contraception is ignored, and safe
sexuality is limited to the construct of marriage; it is either marriage, or it is unsafe and has poor
consequences. However, in more complicated approaches, abstinenceonly programs do not
educate teens on sexual behavior beyond vaginal/penile penetration, nor mention identities that
do not fit the heteronormative approach (BayCheng, 2003) Not only does this limit those in the
LGBTQA community, but it ignores many other forms of sexual behavior that all identities
engage in, such as anal or oral sex, and does not teach about the safe techniques behind them,
allowing the continuing spread of sexually transmitted infections among adolescents and the
continuation of risky behavior. Because these behaviors are often labeled as strictly for particular
sexual orientations, and these orientations are unable to get married due to frequent federal or
state law, the behaviors are excluded in education. This exclusion of particular sexual acts
ranging in risk also allows individuals to minimize them, categorizing them as a “lesser” sexual
act, perpetuating the idea that these acts without consent would not constitute assault.
As discussed, some identities, such as those in the LGBTQA community, are erased.
Others are objectified and to the point of dehumanization. For those of nonwhite races,
schoolbased sex education only furthers fetishism and separates people of color into another
category of sexuality, a category that is less than moral. Colored students are often portrayed as
naturally immoral and sexually deviant, even if subtly; in textbooks, colored students are more
6. 6
often pictured as pregnant or engaging in sexually risky behavior (BayCheng, 2003). They are
featured as exotic and different, as they are often featured in other industries, such as advertising
or pornography, but this negative view in a sexual context may lead them to relating the
identities to unhealthy decisionmaking and their objectification may lead to violence.
Next, abstinence education is what many scholars call “sexnegative,” focusing only on
the negative consequences on the sex and ignoring all positive outcomes (BayCheng, 2003).
There was never a word mentioned in sex education classes about desire, pleasure, or even the
idea of wanted pregnancy; instead, there are PowerPoint slides showing pictures of longterm
untreated infected genitalia, statistics about the poor outcome of unwed pregnant teenage
mothers, stories of girls “used” by men, outdated stories about AIDS patients dying from “the
common cold,” etc. Sex, sexuality, and sexual behavior then becomes a moral issue, not a health
one. Orgasms and sexual pleasure, and in particular female orgasm, are never mentioned;
women’s sexuality is lumped under the object of men’s desire (BayCheng, 2003). Women’s
desire is ignored, or simply fetisized (Fine, 1988). Waiting until marriage to engage in sexuality
is not crucial for one’s health, but it becomes a central aspect of a woman’s worth, and her goal
becomes to “gatekeep” and make sure no man “invades.” A woman engaging in sexual behavior
before their time are viewed as “damaged goods.” One sexual health educator emphasizing the
importance of abstinence went as far as to use the following analogy with a class: “Imagine you
7. 7
are a stick of gum. When you engage in sex, that is like getting chewed. And if you do that lots
of times, you are going to become an old piece of gum, and who is going to want you after that?”
(Hess, 2013) The message this gives is obvious: women expressing sexuality are damaged, and it
does not matter what you do to them, it is automatically considered consensual.
Sexnegative education gives mixed messages about the “natural” aspect of sex: men’s
sexuality is defined as a lustful, uncontrollable urge only stopped by the good girl’s ability to say
no. Women’s sexuality is defined as a reproductive organ; the conversation surrounds
menstruation, pregnancy, and childbirth (BayCheng, 2003). Men have sexual desires that are
implanted into the women’s reproductive womb, and of course, all of this happening after
marriage. The woman is the object of the man’s desire, and in that way, is dehumanized and her
experience is completely ignored. And last, continuing in its heteronormative gendered script, it
continues putting the entire weight of sexual decision making on women; men are the initiators
with an expectation to want sex constantly, and women are set as gatekeepers to say no. Women
are left powerless in the sexual script, and are expected to express no personal sexuality.
Besides the continuing spread of sexually transmitted infections and teenage pregnancy,
the consequences for stripping women of their sexual identity are vast. By not allowing women
to have a choice in her sexual expression, and that she is just a piece of the men’s orientation and
an object of desire, it victimizes women and perpetuates violence against women. Not only do
8. 8
advocates against sexual violence and many feminist theorists hold these beliefs about the
connection between schoolbased sex education and sexual violence; public health advocates
have similar beliefs. The Center for Public Health Research in Australia published an article
stating, “order to design health education programming that will be attended to by those for
whom it is intended, understanding of the meaning of the health problem to those affected is
essential. In the cases of sexually transmitted AIDS and date rape, we need to understand the
meaning of sexuality in order to approach prevention.” (Lear, 1995, p1315) These public health
policy makers emphasize that the understanding of sexuality is essential to approach prevention
of ailments seen as harmful for society, such as deadly viruses such as HIV, and violence against
those in lesser places of power and privilege.
The approach to sexual violence prevention in the United States, while it has not been the
same as the sexual health approaches, has had similar moments of triumph and terror. Tactics
utilized are often victimblaming and rather than preventing somebody from raping, it tells
individuals how to not get raped; tips such as “watch your drink,” “use the buddy system,”
“cover up” are all examples of common dialogues of the prevention of rape and sexual violence.
In universities, selfdefense classes are a common tactic for rape prevention, along with handing
out rape whistles and providing late night transportation. Women are encouraged to carry
pepperspray and inventions are created for women to wear vaginally in order to physically harm
9. 9
attackers during penetration. There is little mention of men getting raped, besides the occasional
jailrape joke of “don’t drop the soap.” There is no talk about men respecting women’s
boundaries; rather, it teaches women “how to be respectable” so that their boundaries are
perhaps respected. It assumes strangerrape as the only narrative, rather than including
acquaintance rape or sexual violence within dating relationships, which make up the majority of
sexual violence.
In the last couple decades, other feminist approaches have been used for rape prevention.
One common tactic is bystander intervention; rather than teaching victims how to not get raped,
individuals are taught how to notice signs of somebody in trouble and how to intervene as an
active bystander. Some of these include looking out for an individual feeding another drinks at a
party, body language that looks like nonconsensual attention is on a person, etc. This still
assumes that the attacker claims no
responsibility in the matter, but instead of blaming the victim, it puts the responsibility on the
community. Although with good intentions, it does not
Last, consent education among high school students (usually focused as “healthy
relationships/healthy dating” workshops) or in college audiences talk about the importance of
two or more parties asking for consent to begin sexual activity; it puts responsibility on all
individuals participating in sexual acts as responsible for the others’ comfort and consent to the
10. 10
activity. This type of activity is the most “positive” and least victimblaming of the three. [In my
final draft, I would like to do research into the three different sexual violence prevention tactics I
mention, as these were all defined and written off my own experience and description and I
would like better definitions and statistics on effectiveness]
Sexual violence is often defined very separately from sex, for understandable reasons.
Rape and sexual assault are acts of violence; they are nonconsensual, often forceful, and should
not be lumped within under other types of sexuality. This is done too often, and with much
consequences; last year, a Washington State high school running a story about a rape as
“restroom sex,” sexualizing nonconsensual experiences and furthering rapeculture in which rape
is an accepted part of the female experience (CulpRessler, 2013). Another example of
sexnegative education leading to sexual violence due to the invalidation of consent and blurring
the lines of violence and pleasure would be the objectification of racial minorities; if racial
minorities are seen as deviant sexually and as sexual objects to be desired, this “they are asking
for it” view may lead to the higher proportion of sexual violence happening against women of
color (University of Michigan, 2014). Erasure of LGBTQA populations may also further their
violence as well.
However, what scholars in sexual violence prevention often do not evaluate is the
relationship between healthy sexuality (or the lack thereof in a population), comprehensive and
11. 11
sexpositive education, and the prevalence of sexual violence. If there is no access to education
that promotes healthy sexuality, if there are not healthy gender roles in a population that does not
further unhealthy dynamics, if there is no education to teach how to have conversations about
sexuality that are beyond “no” until marriage, then how are young people ever able to get a sense
of what is not healthy? Abstinencebased education tells individuals that the only answer to sex
is no; if the only answer is no, then there is no autonomy, and no consent. Schoolbased sex
education does not define sexual violence, it does not talk about relationship violence, and it only
occasionally defines rape, only focusing on the penilevaginal penetrative sexual assault, rather
than the psychosocial effects of any sexual violent act. Not only is sexual violence not talked
about in schoolbased sex education, but often only perpetuates sexual violence. Elizabeth Smart,
who survived being kidnapped and raped over nine months, spoke out against the
abstinenceonly education she received, citing it of the reasons for her delayed escape, stating
that she felt “worthless” and “unfit to return to her society, which had communicated some hard
and fast rules about premarital sexual contact.” (Hess, 2016) Michelle Fine states that current
abstinenceonly sexeducation programs can “exacerbate the vulnerability of young women
whom schools, and the critics of sex education and schoolbased health clinics, claim to protect.”
Under the rules set by sexnegative education, consent does not matter. Choice doesn not matter.
Women are valued by their virginity status, and sexbeforemarriage is the expectation. There is
12. 12
no control, there is no right answer besides no, and the man holds no responsibility. Women do
not get to be agents to their own sexuality.
Tiefer et al. talked about the importance of a holistic view of sexuality, using the World
Health Organization’s (WHO) new definition of sexual health being “the integration of the
somatic, emotional, intellectual, and social aspects of sexual being” (2011). WHO also adds that,
“It requires a positive and respectful approach to sexuality and sexual relationships, as well as
the possibility of having pleasurable and safe sexual experiences, free of coercion, discrimination
and violence” (World Health Organization, 2010). When approaching gun violence, one has to
be willing to talk about guns, even if guns do not always lead to violence. It should be no
different that in order to approach sexual violence; as a society, we must be comfortable talking
about consensual sexuality for all ages. It is impossible to have a world free of sexual violence
without having comprehensive access to sexuality education that is free from violent gender
norms, gender discrimination, objectification of human beings, and complete erasure of
identities.
Policy makers need to begin by being realistic about sexuality, particularly the sexual
behavior among adolescents. First, the majority of adolescents, excluding those who are asexual
or do not desire to be sexual, are emerging sexual beings, and will someday engage in sexual
behavior. The idea of adolecents engaging in sexuality have made adults uncomfortable for
13. 13
decades. In reality, the idea of sexual expression as a normal part of a relationship is still a topic
that is hard to accept in some adult relationships. Examining the way that we, as a society, talk
about sex, in all honestly, makes individuals very uncomfortable and it is much “easier” to
continue with the established morality (Leer, 1995). However, in order to progress into an age
where sexual violence is no longer a norm and potentially live in a world free from it, society
must be willing to move in new directions and challenge some of its old ageold moralities.
Whether or not that is after marriage, in five years, the next day, or inbetween class
periods is irrelevant; teenagers deserve to have access to education that gives them the tools to
make 1) educated decisions about their behavior, 2) the ability to communicate with potential
partners about safe sex practices, likes, dislikes, and boundaries and 3) the confidence to
establish agency and acknowledgment of everybody’s agency. What this translates to is a
sexpositive, comprehensive sex education model that is inclusive of all identities, addresses
sexuality as not simply a reproductive issue but as a way of expression of that requires healthy
communication and respect, along with talking about all the important “typical” public health
bulletins.
Comprehensive sex education teaches about barrier and hormonal contraceptives, but this
is an incomplete look at the prospects that a perfectly comprehensive sex education system could
hold. Rather than being a scaretactic based system with the goal of preventing ailments, it
14. 14
should be a system meant to increase the benefits of sexuality. The center of comprehensive sex
education needs to be scientifically factbased and focused on individual consent; students
should learn about their bodies, the bodies of other genders, and all that their bodies can do.
Pleasure and desire should not be pushed under the rug as the cause of the “problem” of
adolescent sexuality; rather, they should be taught about as a part of development. Students
should be taught not only where the reproductive organs are but about where sensitive
nerveendings are, such as the head of the penis or the clitoris. The variety of sexual behaviors
should be taught comprehensively, not only to encourage an educated decision making for which
sexual activities an individual may desire at whatever point in their lives, but how to be safe in
that particular behavior, such as knowledge about oral dams, also known as dental dams, for
oralvaginal or oralanal sex. Not only is this education incredibly important and relevant, but it
is simply more interesting for students to learn about (Connell, 2005). Teenagers are interested in
sex, and have questions about important topics that are relevant to their daily lives. At the ripe
ages of 1218, whenever the are receiving the information, they are not worried about
reproduction; instead, they have questions about masturbation, sexual orientation, love, orgasms,
sexting, and other relevant topics. Rather than ignoring pleasure and desire as topics, they should
be the focus of sexual wellness, as they are the central reason of much of sexual behavior.
15. 15
Sexual orientations and gender identities should also be taught as the variety of normal
expressions rather than the “us vs. them” dialogue currently seen in abstinencebased
curriculums (BayCheng, 2003). The behavior of the variety of sexual orientations should be
covered and all safe sex techniques should be gone over; from silicone lubricant being
recommended for safer anal sex, to the idea of gloves and finger cots for somebody with a cut
hand, every single sexual act should be thought as a possibility for any individual, and should be
taught as such. There is no gay sex and straight sex; there is sex, and it is all part of a normal
expression. Gender, gender roles, and gender expression should be taught as a spectrum of
normality and transgender issues should not be framed as a “deviant behavior.”
Besides the inclusion of pleasure, LGBTQA individuals, and contraceptives is the basis
of consent; each individual should be the driver of their sexuality. In her book titled Risky
lessons: Sex education and social inequality, Fields states that comprehensive sex education that
maximizes sexual health among adolescents would be “instruction that insists on the value of
young people gathering with their peers to ask questions, to share information, and to learn about
and claim their capacities as agentic sexual beings.” The “right” sexual choice should not be
based off one’s partner or other outside pressures; rather, an individual’s choice should be based
off of the combination of their experiences, their personal sexual orientation, their wants and
desires, their own riskmanagement approach, their moral opinion on sexual expression, rather
16. 16
than the developer of the education created; schoolbased sex education should take an unbiased,
secular approach, providing students with the foundation in order to make sexual decisions that
they get to make. Without the emphasis on individual choicemaking, the limitation of choices to
one single choice only furthers the lack of consent seen in sexual violent situations.
Policy needs to reframe what is most important in our schoolbased sex education and
where taxdollars need to fund. Federal funds should not be distributed to give individuals
subpar education that not only does not treat the intended issues, but also creates others; instead,
federal funds should be given to programs that are proven effective. The current tactics are
ineffective on a variety of levels: for sexually transmitted infections, costing millions of dollars
in medicinal coverage, unplanned pregnancies, costing millions of dollars in childbearing and
rearing, and often ignored, it is costing this country in the psychosocial factors that are affecting
sexual violence. Worst of all, solutions to these problems are often ignored or deconstructed as
such separate issues. Lack of proper sexuality education affects sexual violence, including
genderbased violence, violence against people of color, and violence against the LGBTQA
community.
An effective policy would not make one singular program to be used by each state, but
fund programs that meet an important amount of criteria.These would include: 1. comprehensive
education about both barriers and hormonal contraceptives 2. education about sexuality as a
17. 17
social issue, such as consent, important indicators and predictors of healthy relationships, and
rights to sexual autonomy 3. be inclusive of a variety of different identities, such as those of all
sexual orientations, gender identities, and racial minorities, not simply as a tackon method of
stereotypes, but including them as a member of the community and their expressions as normal
4. phrasing sexuality as a positive and natural way of expression and normalizing it as one of
many sexual choices. Those in favor of abstienenceonly or abstinenceplus education consider
this type of sexpositive education as a problem as it is “prosex.” Sexpositivity does not say
that all individuals should be having sex; this education says that all people have the choice of
when they choose to engage in sexual behavior, rather than enforcing norms of particular
moralities, religions, and identities that may not apply to all individuals. Abstinence should be
taught as one of the many valid options, such as for individual morality, an asexual orientation,
safety precautions, or any personal reason as an autonomous choice, either until marriage, until a
few years down the road, or throughout the lifetime. Abstinence is an important topic for
adolescents, and should never be removed as a largefocus of a comprehensive sexeducation
plan, as it is the safest choice for the prevention of sexually transmitted infections, pregnancy,
and other issues that a teenager may be trying to personally avoid. But it should be taught as a
choice in a variety of choices of how they may express their sexuality.
18. 18
This policy, as stated, would fund state programs that meet the qualifications outlined
above. This could either be per state or per individual school district. These can be local
programs that can be aimed for more relevance to the area, yet still giving the young people the
crucial information that they need, rather than one large program that may not translate to each
community as well as local programs. Failure to utilize a program that is scientificallybased,
inclusive, sexpositive and emphasizes the prevention of sexual violence would result in the
federal government simply not funding the particular program. This “carrot method” of policy
would give incentive for states to choose to educate their students in more effective ways.
Constructing a completely comprehensive and sexpositive sex education with emphasis
on consent education, healthy sexuality expression, autonomous decision making as an
independent sexual agent, and safersex decision practices could highly affect the rates of
infections, unplanned pregnancy, and violence among a variety of populations. The moral
objective among some is not worth the violence of the many; the majority of humans at some
point in their lives engage in sexuality, and it is important for young people to learn how to make
healthy decisions, what a healthy decision is, and what is not. Instead of separating sex from sex
education, or sex from sexual violence, we need to focus on healthy sexuality, as it might be the
solution for all.
References
19. 19
Allen*, L. (2004). Beyond the birds and the bees: Constituting a discourse of erotics in sexuality
education. Gender and Education, 16(2), 151167.
BayCheng, L. Y. (2003). The Trouble of Teen Sex: the construction of adolescent sexuality through
schoolbased sexuality education. Sex Education, 3(1), 61.
Berglas, N. F., AnguloOlaiz, F., Jerman, P., Desai, M., & Constantine, N. A. (2014). Engaging Youth
Perspectives on Sexual Rights and Gender Equality in Intimate Relationships as a Foundation for
RightsBased Sexuality Education.Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 111.
Boonstra, H. D. (2009). Advocates call for a new approach after the era of ‘AbstinenceOnly’sex
education. Guttmacher Policy Review, 12(1), 611.
Connell, E. (2005). Desire as interruption: Young women and sexuality education in Ontario, Canada.
Sex Education, 5(3), 253268.
CulpRessler, T. (2013, May 13) No, You Cannot Substitute ‘Sex’ For ‘Rape.’ Think Progress.
Retrieved from
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/05/13/2003771/noyoucannotsubstitutesexrape/#
Döring, N. (2014). Consensual sexting among adolescents: Risk prevention through abstinence
education or safer sexting?. Cyberpsychology, 8(1).
20. 20
Fantasia, H., & Fontenot, H. B. (2011). The Sexual Safety of Adolescents. JOGNN: Journal Of
Obstetric, Gynecologic & Neonatal Nursing, 40(2), 217224.
doi:10.1111/j.15526909.2011.01217.x
Fields, J. (2008). Risky lessons: Sex education and social inequality. Rutgers University Press.
Fine, M. (1988). Sexuality, schooling, and adolescent females: The missing discourse of desire. Harvard
educational review, 58(1), 2954.
Gordan, P. (2011). Sexuality education and the prevention of sexual violence. In Protecting children
from sexual violence : a comprehensive approach. Strasbourg, FR: Council of Europe
Hess, A. (2013, May 6). Elizabeth Smart Says ProAbstinence Sex Ed Harms Victims of Rape. Slate.
Retrieved from
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/05/06/elizabeth_smart_abstinence_only_sex_educati
on_hurts_victims_of_rape_and.html
Lear, D. (1995). Sexual communication in the age of AIDS: the construction of risk and trust among
young adults. Social Science & Medicine, 41(9), 13111323.
Mirsky, J. (2003). Beyond victims and villains: Addressing sexual violence in the education sector (No.
47). London: Panos Institute.
Shaw, D. (2009). Access to sexual and reproductive health for young people: bridging the disconnect
between rights and reality. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 106(2), 132136.
21. 21
Tiefer, L., Hall, M., & Tavris, C. (2002). Beyond dysfunction: A new view of women's sexual problems.
Journal of Sex &Marital Therapy, 28(S1), 225232.
University of Michigan. (2014). Sexual assault & women of color. Sexual Assault Prevention and
Awareness Center. Retrieved from http://sapac.umich.edu/article/57.
Walker, S. J. (1997). When “no” becomes “yes”: Why girls and women consent to unwanted sex.
Applied and Preventive Psychology, 6(3), 157166.
Wojtowicz, K. (2014). The construction of an antifeminist pedagogy in an
abstinenceonlyuntilmarriage curriculum (Doctoral dissertation, Rutgers UniversityGraduate
SchoolNew Brunswick).
World Health Organization. “Defining Sexual Health.”. (2010). Retrieved from
http://www.who.int/reproductive
health/topics/sexual_health/sh_definitions/en/index.html
