by Danielle Lyons
When you think about sexual education, you probably flash back to 7th grade. I’m pretty sure we all watched that cheesy video about how sex works, or even had the teacher uncomfortably skim over the mechanics of sex. Always ending on the note: Abstinence, abstinence, abstinence! Looking back, I realized that this crash course should have given us valuable knowledge besides the mechanics. This lackadaisical attempt at sexual education genuinely cheats women of information they need to know.
First and foremost, they tend to leave female orgasms out of the equation. This baffles me entirely. You hear that whole bit about how sperm is released, but nothing about the female climax, as it’s not of importance or it just doesn’t happen. Mary Lou Rasmussen states, “Young women have got powerful social messages [telling] them that they’re secondary sexual beings, that the primary purpose for women to have sex is to secure a man… for financial security and to have babies, and not for pleasure.” Sex is a mutual experience in which both parties experiences are important. It isn’t solely for the benefit of male partners.” She also goes on to explain, “One of the ramifications for not including conversations about pleasure in sex ed is that we’re not going to be able to really effectively address domestic violence unless we’re addressing how we think about pleasure and sexuality education and its relationship to consent.”
Which brings me to my next point: Consent isn’t really mentioned in sex ed. Crazy right? One of the MOST important parts of sex is completely skipped over. We do though, grow up hearing the old bit about, “No means no.” Cheyenne King from Feminist Culture explains, “Though many know what they consider consent to be, many have objections over what consent isn’t. Sexual education rarely covers the issues of consent where coercion, manipulation, or intoxication is involved.” Consent can’t be explained through one of those corny videos or a diagram. It absolutely needs to be discussed. That old phrase, “No means no,” simply isn’t enough. It’s irresponsible to omit such an important component in sexual education.
While abstinence is an option, it is not the only option. Why advertise it as so? It’s irresponsible. Jessica Valenti states, “While boys are taught that the things that make them men — good men — are universally accepted ethical ideals, women are led to believe that our moral compass lies somewhere between our legs.” Basically, when it comes down to it, abstinence promotes shame, specifically for women. I can think of a bunch of phrases that are used to degrade women that are sexually active. Yet I struggle to find one for the opposite sex. Instead of presenting abstinence as the only acceptable option, they should delve more into safe sex options. Promoting safety instead of shame is a much healthier option.
I’d like to end with this: It’s high time sex ed gets a makeover.