You know, butterflies aren't really "flies" made from "butter".
Words and phrases often carry distinct developed meanings than what one would logically deduce from the words alone. While it makes sense to treat "sex education" and "sexuality education" as two separate things, they're not really and often used interchangably. It is largely a European way of referring to sex education.
Wikipedia sees no difference and uses them synonymously. It you clicked my link to "sexuality education" you will notice for example it redirects to a page on "sex education". And yes, the actual UNESCO guide released, if you read over it actually unpacks
sexuality education as pretty much the same as sex education in many places. Here's a quote:
We have a choice to make: leave children to find their own way through the clouds of partial information,
misinformation and outright exploitation that they will find from media, the Internet, peers and the unscrupulous, or instead face up to the challenge of providing clear, well informed, and scientifically-grounded sexuality education based in the universal values of respect and human rights. Comprehensive sexuality education can radically shift the trajectory of the epidemic, and young people are clear in their demand for more – and better – sexuality education, services and resources to meet their prevention needs.
What is "sexuality" services? Services that allow you to express your sex drive? What of the science if not how males and females develop and reproduce?
A clear rationale for the introduction of sexuality education can be developed on the basis of evidence from the local/national situation and needs assessments. This should include local data on HIV, other STIs and teenage pregnancy, sexual behaviour patterns of young people, including those thought to be most vulnerable, together with studies on specific actors associated with HIV and other STI risk and vulnerability. Ideally, this will include both quantitative
and qualitative information; sex and gender-specific data regarding the age and experience of sexual initiation; partnership dynamics, including the number of sexual partners and age differences; rape, coercion or exploitation; duration and concurrency of partnerships; use of condoms and contraception; and use of available health services.
While sexuality education
is how Europeans primarily refer to it, where "sex education" is mentioned it is often used interchangably. Take this quote from Sexuality Education in Europe
Quality and availability of sexuality education
According to a report from The Center for Reproductive Law and Policy: “There is neither a general overall policy, nor a unified practice, regarding sex education for adolescents in Hungary”. (The Center for Reproductive Law and
Policy, 2000) Provision of sexuality education is considered inadequate by most observers: “It is fair to say that the teaching of Sexuality Education is somewhat sporadic and much depends on the conscientiousness and openness of the teachers. A more organised framework would be indispensable in this area” (IHF-HR, 2003).
Consider this from the same document:
The focus of sexuality education depends very much on the subject in which it is taught: biological aspects are the focus within Biology lessons, and relationship issues within Religion or Ethics lessons. In the first to fourth grades pupils cover topics of family life that include healthy lifestyle and puberty.
One reason for perhaps defining such education as "Sexuality Education" in Europe rather than simply "Sex Education" (other than language in different countries) is because sex
carries less emphasis upon the act of sex -- that they're trying to redefine in terms society will find more acceptable. It's not about sex, but loving relationships and understanding one's own sexuality, what their private parts are, so they know others can't just touch them. It is actually more encompassing than just birds and the bees talks on "sex" is the idea. And yet, when it is more encompassing on relationships and the like, it is sometimes referred to as "relationships and sexuality education".
You know, I really, really think children should know about many things in a frank and open manner. My own children never believed in Santa Claus, and people often comment that we're cruel -- but they actually enjoyed being in on the joke with other kids whose parents lie
My kids know about the realities of the world, often according to their level of questioning -- that some people want to "marry" same sex, they know about abortion, they understand "girly boys" in Thailand, they know about their private parts, they know that rubbing can feel good (I mean it's quite natural right). But, it's often along side their development, my asking questions to determine what they have/haven't picked up on, their asking questions and sometimes they've caught wind of this or that TV program, or their friends said something as typically happens in the societies we live within
. Open and honest according to their understanding is how I do it. BUT, Government should never usurp parents to do it
. Especially parents like myself who passionately give a damn. That
, is my beef.
And you know, I'd see red if I found out my school tried teaching my kid masturbation, normalising homosexuality (no surprise we disagree there), promotion of abortion services which take little human lives in the most barbaric ways (again no surprise if you look at my signature). Seriously the principal and teachers would have a visit, and it wouldn't be for a peaceful talk if I caught wind.
No matter the social acceptance that may develop, many ideas that do get taught sexualise children and by that I mean
a type of grooming for sex, and I don't take that lightly. Not with my kids. And often endorsed is teaching them about behaviour I believe to be psychologically harmful and/or abhorrently wrong; but it's normalised. I'm to protect my kids and family, including from social evils. If you have kids, you'll realise how personal and affronting it is, I mean picture a forced "young earth creation" education on your kids to get a sense for sensitivities.
What would be better
is if government, health and education services, developed programmes for parents. Sought to teach parents how to talk to the children, and had a discussion with parents about what they feel is important to discuss and why. And then, parents take control of their own children. If there are school run programmes, parents should have to opt in, so those who don't care about educating their kids or feel too awkward, can give their approval for government run programmes.
, is the correct approach, the proper chain of command if you will. Through the parents, not around them.
Governments and a lot of sex education or sexual education attempts to go around the parents, because they know there will be a clash of ideologies and the brainwashing-like influences that can and does happen across many controversial topics.
However much we disagree, I think parents who do not have honest and open talks with their kids are setting their children up for a fall. However, to enforce teaching upon kids without parental involvement or consent, broad strokes all parents as complete fools and is a denial of family. It is better left for Communist countries where elite superiors try to define everything for the whole community. Perhaps you'd like to live in North Korea or China? No? Didn't think so.