Abstinence Teaching Ignores LGBTs
US Federal Guidelines Exclude Homosexuality from Sex Education
© Kat Long
Abstinence-only-until-marriage education defines heterosexual marriage as the ideal for all students and prevents discussion of gay issues in the classroom.
Abstinence-only sex education is the only type approved and funded by the U.S. federal government for teaching in schools. These curricula maintain that abstinence until marriage is the only correct choice for students when they make decisions about sexual activity. Most sex education advocates agree that abstinence is a valuable option for students—but many educators say that teaching only abstinence leaves out many significant issues that teenagers need to know or may have questions about. There is also active debate about the effectiveness of abstinence-only curricula.
Abstinence programs, by law, do not discuss homosexuality or any sexual identity other than heterosexual. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ guidelines for state abstinence education programs require curricula to teach “that a mutually faithful monogamous relationship in context of marriage is the expected standard of human sexual activity,” and that “sexual activity outside of the context of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects.” These rules imply that lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender students will not fit into the “expected standard” of human sexuality because same-sex marriage is illegal within in the United States except in the state of Massachusetts. They also infer same-sex relationships are less meaningful and legitimate that opposite-sex ones and may cause “harmful” effects.
Several states have rejected federal funding for abstinence education, and it is possible that the exclusion of LGBT issues from the curricula is one reason. Organizations such as Planned Parenthood and the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS) disagree with the federal guidelines’ extremely narrow interpretation of human sexuality and the apparent effort by conservative members of the Bush administration to legislate morality. In addition, 80% of parents of junior high students and 73% of parents of high school students support teaching about homosexuality and sexual orientation in schools, according to a 2004 study by the Kaiser Family Foundation.
Organizations such as Gay Men’s Health Crisis claim that the excluding homosexuality from classroom sex education does no one any good. Students who are unsure of their orientation will not have a forum in which to ask questions, and students who are nominally homophobic won’t be challenged on their assumptions about LGBT people. The curricula could arguably foster a more hostile environment for LGBT students outside of the classroom.
What options do lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender students have? Fortunately, the number of states rejecting abstinence-only funding in favor of comprehensive sex education is growing; it’s more likely that sexual orientation will be discussed in the classroom. LGBT students can also seek sex information outside of school from SIECUS and social support from the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN).
