U.N. Guide for Sex Ed Generates Opposition

This article can be found here.

September 2, 2009

When recalling old childhood memories of elementrary school, one would often think of the fun, motivational posters that donned the classroom walls --imagine a picture of a kitten suspended from a branch with the subscript 'Hang In There' or a light-hearted and humorous Garfield pun. What one wouldn't expect are posters outlining tips on how to get an abortion or practicing safe sex. With the new guidelines the UN has distributed advocating a more direct approach when teaching sexual education in schools, such measures are not far from the imagination.

Fear is the driving force behind this legislation. The rapid spread of HIV throughout the last few decades has encouraged leaders of all countries to place acts of prevention such as this at the top of their agendas.

Outraged conservatives are honing in on the creators and supporters of this act, intimidating many contributors into asking for their names to be removed from the list of project sponsors. While the fears that more direct methods of informing children of sexuality might lead to a corrupt generation seem outdated and over reactionary, I believe Unesco-- the UN group charged with the creation of this document-- has gone too far. The article introduces that there was once a "suggested discussion of masturbation with children as young as 5" and a way of hinting that there are many different ways to be sexually "abstinent". Such measures overstep the bounds of entire governments, let alone the small educational institutions forced into acting as constituents of the policy. Even if the more modest members of the UN were to comply, the outrage of America's powerful conservative political and relgious groups will ultimately lead to its failure.

While I find most of the encouraged discussions to be much too suggestive to the point of encouragement in sexual activity, other topics-- such as the "recommended discussions of homosexuality"-- seem to fit nicely into the times without being outright inappopriate. Actual intimate conversation about the specfic acts of alternative sex is where I would draw the line. The point of more direct sexual education should be to ease the confusion and ignorance of our youth on the topic of sex, not to arouse them by making them comfortable with it. It appears that the comon belief of Unesco writers was that repeated discussion mean desensitization; but it's highly unlikely that the hormones of a growing pubescent will ever allot for such.

I found this article to be outlined perfectly. I appreciate how Stephen Erlanger, the author of this article, introduced all the interesting facts of this proposal up front --like the tid-bit on how discussions on masterbation are being planned for those as young as 5-- and delving further into them as the piece develops. There was an even balance between both sides of the debate and no bias was detectable. Even when admitting conservative groups' intimidation on the matter, he backed their opinions up with direct quotes.