Being a college senior, I often find myself reflecting on my academic journey. I remember my third-grade field trip to the Kennedy Space Center. I remember pizza Fridays. I remember the hours of praying to a god I wasn't sure I believed in. And I distinctly remember the day that my fifth-grade class would be enrolled in the notoriously dreaded sex education course.
Growing up attending a private religious school, there were many topics and skills that I was not taught. Lessons that are now a very central part of my life. I don’t remember learning how to be an ally for someone who may be struggling in silence. I don’t remember learning about the importance of consent. And I don’t remember a single page worth of educational material including the acronym “LGBTQ+”.
Far too many LGBTQ+ youths, 91.8% to be exact, are stuck in classrooms where educators are not addressing identity-specific material. Sex education should not be constructed with a “one-size-fits-all” approach. It should be a right, not a privilege, to participate in a curriculum that recognizes your identity, not just the identity of the majority of students sitting next to you.
Anti-LGBTQ+ policies, such as barring inclusive sex education, can exacerbate stigma, increase engagement in risky behaviors such as drug and alcohol use, and result in an overall decline in mental health.
As of 2020, only California, Colorado, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and the District of Columbia enforce mandatory inclusive sex education (Streed et al., 2021), but what does it mean for sex education to be “LGBTQ+-inclusive”?
According to the Connecticut State Department of Education, this means providing medically accurate information, correcting commonly held myths and beliefs, emphasizing the importance of forming emotionally and physically sound relationships, and talking about consent and boundaries. To me, this sounds like a very standardized way of teaching; however, it should be inclusive of the different struggles that members of the LGBTQ+ community face such as the difficulty of coming out, or queer use of STD protection and birth control (2007).
We are all equal. No person is better than another just because they say or think they are. However, it is true that relationships within the LGBTQ+ community can present differently in some situations. Just because two male-indentifying individuals have sex does not mean they are exempt from contracting a sexually transmitted disease. Sometimes there are different emotional factors that come into play in an LGBTQ+ relationship, such as heightened sensitivity between two female-identifying individuals or the HIV/AIDS epidemic that is common among gay men. This would not as likely present itself in a cis-gender relationship. It is important to address these barricades in the education system so that it is not cis-gender specific and that everyone has the opportunity to learn how to navigate boundaries, feelings, and potential dangers.
During the nine years that I attended a primarily conservative school, I was sheltered from real-world problems and struggles that so many individuals encounter. The knowledge I acquired was strictly limited to what I was force-fed in the classroom. As naive and impressionable fifth graders, this prompted my peers and me to adopt the biased views being instilled by our educators. It was considered unacceptable for two vagina-owners to go to a school dance together. The Palestinians were “bad” and the Israelis were “good”. Having pre-marital sex “went against the religion”. This is to name a very select few. "Love your neighbor as yourself", they would preach, but how are we supposed to do this if we aren’t taught to accept one another as we are? (Leviticus 19:18).
If you or anyone you know may be struggling or undergoing crisis here are resources to support members who identify with the LGBTQ+ community:
Tags: