The duty invites you once again to the back roads of university life. A proposal that is both scholarly and intimate, to be picked up all summer long like a postcard. Today, we invite ourselves into Quebec classrooms to discuss sex education.
Since sexuality is associated with the intimate, the political and the social, sex education intended for a young audience has, over the years, raised fears about excesses or possible personal disclosures, incompetence, manipulation or indoctrination. Even if parents have often been perceived as the most reluctant about sex education in schools – although it has been shown that they are generally in favour of it – fears can come from teachers, stakeholders, school management, government bodies as well as children and adolescents themselves.
Parents may struggle with the balance between their family values (moral or religious) and the content of programs. They may fear exposure to inappropriate sexual information. Staff may be uncomfortable or fear negative reactions. Government authorities may be wary of negative political and social reactions. Children and adolescents may feel embarrassed, judged, or even stigmatized.
All these fears, although legitimate, can often be allayed by a better understanding of the objectives of the approach and the content covered. Thus, it is important to meet with those who express these concerns based on erroneous beliefs or fragmentary perceptions of sexuality and, if necessary, offer them support.
Sexuality education in schools is an excellent platform for developing empathy, critical thinking, ethical competence and analytical skills. In a world where sensationalist information and fake news abound, it is crucial to provide young people with social, cultural and ethical references that fuel reflection on principles that our society values: freedom, equality, inclusion, diversity and respect for human dignity and social justice.
Thus, the approach that will be updated in schools through, among others, the Culture and Citizenship of Quebec program, covers a variety of themes in primary or secondary school such as puberty, sexual roles and stereotypes, friendship and love, identity and sexual orientation as well as consent and sexual violence. Through these themes, it is possible to address modesty, responsibility, trust, dignity, kindness, security, social influences, acceptance of oneself and others, sexual rights, or attraction and non-attraction.
Philosophical or sociological questions can also be raised: “What is love?”; “Can you be in love at 10 years old?”; “What is the difference between teenage lovers and those aged 25 or even in their fifties?”; “What does it mean to accept the difference of the other (bodily, cultural, sexual and gender diversity; intellectual or physical disability)?”.
Sex education goes beyond simply transmitting information. And while honest and nuanced information remains essential in such an approach, isn’t it interesting—but more demanding—to discuss and analyze a phenomenon from various angles with students to help them make sense of it? More than 30 years ago, educator Marie-Paule Desaulniers stated that one of the goals of sex education is “to know THE sexuality in order to better understand THEIR sexuality.” The emphasis is thus placed on the well-being of children and adolescents by responding to their emerging and diverse needs, thus promoting their harmonious development.
Not to mention that school is a living environment, where several informal situations necessarily lend themselves to educational intervention (sexual insults, heartbreak, spontaneous questions, confidences or suspicions related to bullying and violence), which can fuel the fear of having to manage an element of the unexpected and the unpredictable.
But it is not only fear that risks not advancing the issue of sex education. There is also indifference, demotivation, demobilization, refusal to invest in it, insistence on betting on the functionality of sexuality or even the fact that it is perceived as a “small subject” of little consequence.
Anticipations and reinsurance
Sexuality education approaches in schools are often weakened by curriculum changes and the demands and opposition that can follow. Consider the recent reactions to gender theory. When the government in power undertakes a change, sometimes legitimate and beneficial, sometimes incomplete and questionable, this destabilizes the troops already convinced of the merits of the previous approach.
It is then necessary to train current and future cohorts, remotivate stakeholders, reassure skeptics, and convince everyone of the relevance of this new approach. Each time, we hope that this approach will be the right one, the most coherent and the most effective. And above all, that it will be sustainable.
By the way, what are we afraid of regarding the current approach to sex education in schools? First, that it will be fragmented, adopted hastily and not taught in its entirety, at all school levels, even if it is formally part of two study programs. Second, that solid collaborations with various professionals and intervention environments will crumble. Finally, that beyond what is developed, we will maintain a reductive vision of sex education that is not sufficiently part of a developmental approach to sexuality.
In order to reassure ourselves, what should we focus on then?
• On the competence, intellectual curiosity, sensitivity and motivation of teachers and school professionals who have the development of children and adolescents at heart, and who have been able to observe the learning, reflections, and even the confidence that sex education has allowed them to develop in students. “We never exhaust reflection, the thinkable,” teaches the philosopher Cornelius Castoriadis.
• On continuing education, which is essential, but also on the expertise and support of sexologists and professionals in the health and social services sector as well as workers from community organizations who have been working for many years to promote sexual health and prevention.
• Finally, on the coordination and leadership of school administrations and the support of the ministry to ensure that these sexuality education approaches are implemented while supporting staff and parents.
Although parents remain the primary educators of their child’s sexuality, schools undoubtedly have a role to play. This is a collective responsibility that must be fully assumed and that requires a positive, inclusive, coherent, supervised, and assessable approach in order to be improved over time and to be sustainable.
In doing so, fears about sex education in schools are being allayed, don’t you think?