Sex education... more harm than good?

Sex education... more harm than good?

British conservative MP, Stewart Jackson, has recently been slammed by sexual health experts for his recent comments about sex education where he appeared to blame the rise of STI’s (Sexually transmitted infections) on greater sex education...

www.bbc.co.uk...

Now, I do not want to get into a political debate. I am not a conservative and I do not believe that his, off the cuff, comments on twitter have been researched.

However, since the 1973 sex education has been a part of the British school curriculum. And, since its introduction, a lot has changed. In 1973 the amount of time spent on sex education was miniscule compared to today’s average time of 30 to 40 hours for kids aged 12 – 14.

I have also heard that there is currently an attempt to make sex education compulsory in primary schools, as well as secondary schools, in an attempt to combat rising teenage pregnancy rates.

What I want to ask is this... If sex education is an effective weapon against teenage pregnancy and STI’s, why have teenage pregnancy rates and STI infections risen steadily since the introduction of sex education in schools??

Surely this suggests that it is not an effective weapon???

Now I know that some people may think that sex education is fighting a losing battle against the rising tide of sexual material, which our children are exposed to in the media... The subtle sexualisation of children is undeniable as unscrupulous marketers seek new audiences to pedal their wares. Children’s clothes that are far too grown up, pop songs with increasingly provocative lyrics, children’s programmes with adult themes etc... All of this is undeniable and must have an effect on the minds of our children!!

But is sex education the best way to combat this? Or is it adding fuel to the fire??

Wouldn’t the simple solution be to return a sense of innocence to our children?? To FORCE the corporates to stop exploiting the natural desire of children to be like adults??

Having said all that, I would not advocate a complete ban on sex education... I think it has its place and can be a useful tool. However, in the current environment any good that it can do is completely swamped by the negative sexual stereotypes and subtle brainwashing from the corporate media!

Just my thoughts!

Oh just to add...

Teenage pregnancy rates did actually fall slightly (4%) in 2008... but I do not know the reason for this...


news.bbc.co.uk...

[edit on 27-8-2010 by Muckster]

originally posted by: Muckster
Sex education... more harm than good?

British conservative MP, Stewart Jackson, has recently been slammed by sexual health experts for his recent comments about sex education where he appeared to blame the rise of STI’s (Sexually transmitted infections) on greater sex education...

They dont realise that like most infections it is not detectable there for

they are not in danger of contracting an STI? If it doesn't show it isnt there?

They get told there is this decease and that decease and all deceases are

curable ...... so there is no deterrent, they need to be told of the long term

effects like infertility etc.

However, since the 1973 sex education has been a part of the British school curriculum. And, since its introduction, a lot has changed. In 1973 the amount of time spent on sex education was miniscule compared to today’s average time of 30 to 40 hours for kids aged 12 – 14.

That is not long enough it should continue as in counselling taking in more

than the physcal act but emotional effects and relationships discussing

problems, and 'old wives tales' far to many girls equate sex with love.

Main problem I believe is where do they find a teacher who is expert enough

on the subject to teach it !!!

I have also heard that there is currently an attempt to make sex education compulsory in primary schools, as well as secondary schools, in an attempt to combat rising teenage pregnancy rates.

Personally I think that is far to early...... their childhoods are constantly

being eroded let them be children they grow up faster enough, and as most

havent hit puberty they arent going to get pregnant?!....

Now I know that some people may think that sex education is fighting a losing battle against the rising tide of sexual material, which our children are exposed to in the media... The subtle sexualisation of children is undeniable as unscrupulous marketers seek new audiences to pedal their wares.

^^^^This^^^^ and pornography is what needs to be discussed as I said earlier

in the on going sex education after the basics in the counselling sessions far to

many boys get their education from pornography.

A square a square an a circle a circle. Join point a to point b, and for the same sex types, you will figure it out.

Just go up an down, and you will be a sex God, master of your libido an domain, and professional in no time.

Here your masturs degree for being a jerk. Now they are ready to go into the real world and service the community and your fellow countrymen.

originally posted by: Muckster
What I want to ask is this... If sex education is an effective weapon against teenage pregnancy and STI’s, why have teenage pregnancy rates and STI infections risen steadily since the introduction of sex education in schools??

I going to wager that back in the good old days it wasn't reported. Pregnant teens went to go live with Aunt Ida for awhile.

a reply to: Muckster


I think that some of the things people expect sex education to sort out are actually societal problems.

At least if you educate people about sex, they are in a better position to live their lives.

STI increases can be a result of NHS being overstretched, 3 week waiting times for a GP appointment, lack of public service advertising or a rise in the number of people who don't speak good enough English to understand the message.

I think what has changed is morals. In the seventies a girl who had sex was labeled a tramp. A pregnant girl was ostracized by society.
That is not the case today where having sex is not looked at as a mortal sin.

They dont lock away the girls who have sex or who get pregnant any more.
Surely no one is suggesting we go back to that ?

a reply to: SprocketUK

I dont think they go far enough.
There are still men out there who don't know where the clitoris is. Or what its for.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: SprocketUK

I dont think they go far enough.
There are still men out there who don't know where the clitoris is. Or what its for.

That is true haha

originally posted by: Sillyolme
I think what has changed is morals. In the seventies a girl who had sex was labeled a tramp. A pregnant girl was ostracized by society.
That is not the case today where having sex is not looked at as a mortal sin.

They dont lock away the girls who have sex or who get pregnant any more.
Surely no one is suggesting we go back to that ?

I don't see ostracizing people...well, lets be clear here, women as something to go back to.

Where was the ostracism for the men who fathered children and buggered off?

a reply to: Muckster

All knowledge is good knowledge?

The rise in STI's is probably due to multiple reasons.

I went to a Catholic comprehensive....I honestly think I knew more about sex and was certainly less uptight about it than my teachers.
I think things must have improved since then....I certainly hope so.

Society as a whole has changed and so have attitudes to sex.....there's no longer any sort of stigma attached to young people having sex.
And that sex is quite often not limited to just one partner.

But one has to ask if the availability of contraceptives has improved?

a reply to: SprocketUK

They got as high five and a slap on the back...

a reply to: PDFconvert


Get apache open office. Reads all sorts of formats and you can export in whatever format you like.
Open source software too

legitimately how can anyone genuinely think that knowing more about a thing - a natural and good part of almost every life on the planet - and knowing how to do it more safely - how could anyone think that is a bad and dangerous thing?
oh yes! don't teach our children about risks or diseases or or contraception, how could any of that help anyway i'm sure the dude in the sky will step in to sort it out

a reply to: continuousThunder

It's a head scratcher as to why some countries (USA, UK, NZ) have high teen pregnancy rates and others do not. It used to be said constructive education reduced rates and yet those with the lowest rates aren't all big on sex-ed - some are, some aren't.

North Korea has the lowest teen pregnancy rate in the world at 0.5608 births per 1,000 teenage females, followed by neighboring South Korea at 1.6584. Switzerland is third at 3.0578, then followed by Hong Kong at 3.2662 and Singapore at 3.8334. The other countries among those having the lowest teen pregnancy rates are Slovenia, the Netherlands, Denmark and Japan.

Countries With The Lowest Teen Pregnancy Rates

NK's low rates aren't due to sex-ed, they're due to social pressures and fears of imprisonment and execution. South K takes the same approach as 1950s USA and UK with minimal sex-ed and Holland has one of the most embedded sex-ed programmes in the world.

Personally I'm definitely in favour of more sex-ed and whatever else is necessary to reduce unwanted teen pregnancies. One thing is increasing self-esteem amongst teenage girls so they can say no more easily. More education for teen boys too and specifically in the area of responsibility. They take the risk and leave the girls and their families with all the responsibility. There are clear links between teen pregnancy, low education levels and reduced opportunities. It's a bad cycle to break with generations basically unemployed with no prospects and barely any role-models to help them break it.