Sex education isn’t helping young people. It’s harming them

For too long, governments have been obsessed with the notion that young people need more sex education, not less. The latest excuse to ramp it up is the number of sexually transmitted infections which, to be fair, has risen to pretty grim levels. In 2015, 141,000 new cases of STIs were diagnosed in 20- to 24-year-olds, and 78,000 discovered in 15- to 19-year-olds.

The Local Government Association (LGA) has said that compulsory sex and education ‘could make a real difference in reversing this trend’. But I’m not convinced at all given the reality of sex education in Britain. The fact is that our nation’s young people are some of the most inundated in the world in regards to information on the subject. This surplus has paradoxically done anything but tackle STIs, sexualisation and the rest. Just look at the STI figures!

In the last few years, campaigners’ preoccupation with making sex education compulsory has masked the fact that it has actually been wheeled out rather extensively at schools across the country. After all, what PR-wary head would ignore the issue? And if it’s not schools, teenagers can find vast resources on the topic from television, magazines, books, leaflets at the GP surgery or advisory centres like Brook. Sex is everywhere.

What no one will ever stop to realise is that with this ever-pouring tap of information, the issue of sexualisation has not gone away. It has, in fact, increased to the point that young people’s health is now at risk. But campaigners say it’s time for more, more, more!

The issue with sex education is that it often overestimates the prurience of young people. During my own such classes at school, not all that long ago, teachers talked to us as if we were mini Russell Brands, dying to pounce on each other — and sex was communicated as a mechanical function, like getting a bunsen burner to work. Overall, I felt that the adults often projected their own fascinations on to my year, who varied in levels of ‘sexual readiness’.

People also forget that sex education doesn’t start and stop at school. Children go home where they are blasted with information from even the most well-intentioned TV shows. Many of these simply reiterate the covert message from sex education classes: you should be having lots and lots of sex!

If anything, it seems to me that — contrary to the experts’ opinions — the reduction of sex education could improve health outcomes, not least because it takes away the expectation of sexual activity in teens. From every angle, young people are taught that sexual exploration is synonymous with ‘liberation’ and ‘growing up’. For some, it’s too much, too young.

The LGA’s focus on sex education also distracts it from delving into big contributors to STIs, like Tinder and drinking; two things that often go hand in hand. People forget that dating apps have a hugely detrimental effect on relationships, contributing to the sort of sexual reductionism that has led to STIs. This, itself, is a direct result of sex education, which has served to separate sex from commitment, love and care. Even the idea that you need ‘love’ for sex is now seen as archaic and laughable — though it is the very sort of thinking that could cut down STIs.

We have to face up to the fact that, far from protecting young people, sex education has only contributed to the very culture that sexualises them. That there are more STIs floating around is not the reason to crank it up. It might just be the reason to slow down.

  • jeremy Morfey

    Perhaps it’s the quality of the s*x [we below the line are not allowed to say that word, and I will not use ‘gender’ this time because it is utterly the wrong word] education, rather than the quantity of it.

    Making the connection with love and mutual respect and giving joy to others, rather than with abuse and male violence and disease and LGBT rights, might actually render it far more beneficial than leaving it taboo until suddenly plunged into adult relationships utterly unprepared, as happens in America.

  • Grumbledog


    Schools should be teaching anal so-called s3x is wrong. That’d be valid s3x education.


  • Paul Maurice

    In Ontario, Canada the Ministry of Education (under former Minister of Education and present Prime Minister, Kathleen Wynne….a lesbian) is introducing the teaching of fellatio and anal intercourse as positive sexual practices to elementary school children, and……much worse!…..that there are not two sexes but SIX in our ambisexual brave new world. All of this (and more) to children from 5 to 12 years of age.

    • Katherine Jaconello

      The goal is to instruct the young in all forms of the achievement of orgasm. Behind it all is belief in the occult. Satanist Alice Bailey and Occultist U Thant of UNESCO were the inspirations for the current curriculum called “Out-Come Based Education” or “Common Core Curriculum” derived from the World Core Curriculum from UNESCO. Mix into that the Druidic voices of psychiatrists Carl Jung, Sigmund Freud and Wilhelm Reich. Stir in the CIA behaviour experiments of MK ULTRA and add the population doctrines of Malthuse. We have a witch’s brew from the 19th century being flogged as modern by politicians whose goal is to make our children psychiatric patients. This is criminal use of tax funds by the trillions.

  • Paul Maurice

    The principal author of this new sex curriculum in Ontario, by the way, was arrested for and convicted of pedophilia recently. Still, the curriculum has been passed by the lesbian feminist Wynne’s Liberal government and is now legally enforced. There have been protests, but to no avail. The teachers’ unions, not surprisingly, support it.

  • James Doyle

    Great article .Without doubt there is to much sex spoken but no love whatsoever. In UK. Anna Richardson herself Bi-sexual by her own admission had a TV programme going round schools with basically the message we all deserve better Sex . These programs were aimed at 13 and above basically it was just soft porn. Today there is a case of a 21 year old having sex with a 12 year old. Not long ago a young girl approached me in a swimming pool.and said she fancied me .I was in my 50s the girl could have been over 17 she could have been 14 I declined the offer. The 21 year old was found not guilty of stat rape as it was said the girl ( who had been drinking )said that she was over 16.For God’s sake let our Kids be Kids .They are long enough Adults.

  • GregGrimer

    I volunteered at a year 7 schools athletics meeting this week as there were not enough teachers to help out and my son was participating. As one of the boys threw a Javelin and a teacher commented on the size of the throw one of the PE teachers joked with another in a puerile fashion about the supposed size of the 12 year old’s penis. “He’s got a big one”.

    You think they’d be more guarded about their speech, given there are parents around to hear their tactless comments, but the fact remains that there are some teachers who don’t give a rats about your son or daughter’s moral foundation, their innocence, and who are rather sick and perverted individuals and don’t even have much shame about it.

    Why the government think them capable of giving lifestyle guidance I can only imagine. The government are a bunch of perverted creeps themselves.