2193490

Let’s Talk About Sex (Education), Baby

She did not say a word, just ran up and grabbed me by the arm. I could feel her shaking slightly as

she dug her fingernails into my bicep, spun on her heel, and began to drag me towards the locker room,

almost frantic as she moved. She still did not make a sound as we went through the glass door into the

dingy, yellow-tiled room. She shoved me onto the bench in the middle of the room, then dropped herself

onto the one directly across from me. She let her head hang back, resting it against the cool yellow tiles.

Her eyes were closed. She was breathing heavily, letting each breath shake her entire body. After what

seemed like an eternity, she opened her eyes, took one big tumultuous breath, and opened her mouth to

speak. I can still see the reflection of the dim yellow lights in her piercing blue eyes as she looked me

right in the eyes and said, “I’m pregnant.”

She was fifteen years old at the time, a high school sophomore. She was particularly small for her

age, weighing less than one hundred pounds and only reaching a height of five foot two. Having a child at

that size would be detrimental to her own health, not to mention the health of the child. In the back of her

mind, she knew she could not have a child right now; she was an athlete, a good student, and a brilliantly

witty social butterfly. She had a loving family, but she knew they would not take care of a baby for her.

And as for the father, well, he was not even relevant at that point. She was alone in this. Nothing about

having a baby made sense to her, but there was just one problem: she did not want to have an abortion.

To her, abortion was a swear word. She lived in a privileged white community, with a largely

conservative political bias. No one in her family talked about it; her only knowledge of it came from her

friends, who told her that abortions were bloody and ruined your chances of getting pregnant again. Her

high school, also incredibly white and privileged, offered only one sex education unit in freshman

biology, in which abortion was never mentioned and frighteningly little was taught about contraception.

Her high school left her seriously unprepared to deal with any real life situations, and now she was

suffering the consequences.

1
 2193490

The best example of what she, and the vast majority of high school students my age, have learned

in sex ed is summarized in one quote from the popular teen movie ​Mean Girls. ​Early in the film, a group

of teenagers is shown seated in front of a disgruntled PE teacher who was given the responsibility of

teaching sex ed. Instead of actually teaching the students, he simply barks, “Don’t have sex. Because you

will get pregnant. And die,” and that is that. Although this movie is unarguably a satire of the teenage

high school experience, their display of sex education is unfortunately accurate. In the majority of places

across the country, students are taught not to have sex and not to get pregnant or an STI. That is all folks.

Oh wait, almost forgot: if you do get pregnant, do not get an abortion. But also do not have a kid; it will

ruin your life. The end. Good luck out there.

As I reflected on my own experience with sex ed, I found that it was strikingly similar to hers

(and to ​Mean Girls​). But then I talked to my sister, who is a sophomore right now, about her experience

with sex ed. To my surprise, it was completely different than mine. She wound up lucky enough to start

sex ed in 2016, under a brand new curriculum. She learned everything, from STIs to sexual orientation to

anatomy, including abortion. To her, abortion is not some unspoken, taboo action; it was something she

learned about in school that is a viable option for an unwanted pregnancy, especially at a young age.

I was taken aback; why had her program been so different than mine? Why did the district not

bring a similar course with the same curriculum to the high school students who missed it? And if this

was a new policy in California, was the rest of the country doing it too? Well, the answer to that last

question is no, and I cannot even fathom an answer to the first two. All I know is that there are some

serious gaps in sex education in this country, some even present in my own life.

All of these experiences, from my friends pregnancy to the differences in my sister’s education,

culminated into frustration. I felt as if students are being cheated and left without necessary information,

while also being taught to think differently from one another. And that is why I am asking the question:

How do current sex education systems in the United States impact attitudes towards abortion?

2
 2193490

Basically, American public schools follow two standard sex education systems: abstinence-only

education and comprehensive sex ed. The first of the two, abstinence-only, is the one the government

favors; the people, however, favor the latter. In essence, abstinence-only teaches one thing: that

“monogamous, heterosexual marriage [is] the only appropriate context for sexual intercourse”

(McCammon). This idea, based mostly on religious teachings, has been around for the past 37 years,

starting with President Reagan and his administration. In 1982, Reagan created an eight-point curriculum

for sex education, outlined in Sec. 510(a)(2) of the Social Security Laws, which focuses on the “the

social, psychological, and health gains to be realized by abstaining from sexual activity” (“Separate

Program”). The program Reagan created existed from 1982 to 2010, then was briefly altered by President

Obama, but was reinstated in 2016 by President Trump under the name Sexual Risk Avoidance

(“Abstinence-Only”). As one can easily see from the history, abstinence-only, or SRA, as it is now

referred to, has always been a champion of the Republican Party. Its principles, all of which can be seen

in the Social Security Laws, are largely based on religion and conservative politics. Its ultimate goal is to

discourage teenagers and young adults from having sex due to “danger.” Bethan Lamb, a health

professional and the current health teacher at Ygnacio Valley High School summarizes the foothold of

conservative fear in one simple statement: “[T]he commonly held belief is that if you talk to kids about

sex then they'll want to do it.”

Comprehensive sex education, on the other hand, is literally on the other side of the spectrum.

The United Nations says that comprehensive sex ed “​includes scientifically accurate information about

human development, anatomy and reproductive health, as well as information about contraception,

childbirth and sexually transmitted infections (STIs), including HIV” (“Comprehensive sexuality”). In

addition, the program informs students about more sensitive topics, like gender orientation, sexuality, and

abortion, all of which are completely excised from abstinence-only. It is based on the idea that “sex after

puberty was normal, even inevitable” (“Sex Education”), but still takes into account the risk factors of

3
 2193490

sexual activity. Many studies by programs like the Kaiser Family Foundation, Pew Research Center, and

Gallup have found that the majority of parents, students, and educators believe that comprehensive sex

education is the correct route; however, it is far less prominent than abstinence-only. It is deemed “too

liberal” or “too left” by the right-winged administration, and therefore cannot find a foothold in many

places (Dailard).

The real issue at hand, however, is the gaps between the two systems. For starters, only 24 states

require that sex education be taught in public schools, ​and only 20 of those require that the information

provided must be factually accurate (“State Policies”). That alone shows that there is a problem; sex ed is

not even required in more than half of the states, and may not be factually accurate, leaving room for

corruption by personal beliefs and biases. But, even more worrisome than that, is the fact that not all

states receive the same funding for their sex ed programs. Southern states, namely Texas, Kansas, and

Alabama, receive the most federal funding for their sex education programs, along with a few northern

states, like Michigan and Illinois. This funding means that those states are required by law to teach

abstinence-only, and could face serious repercussions if they do not do so (Dailard). Other states, namely

California, have chosen to completely reject federal funding and use their own state funds to finance their

sex education programs, giving schools the option of whether or not they want to teach comprehensive or

abstinence-only. What this does is creates a massive gap between what children are learning in different

regions; conservative areas, those whom receive federal funding, primarily use abstinence-only, while

liberal areas, the ones who have rejected the funding, largely use comprehensive sex education. For

example, Ms. Sarah Perez, a seventh grade teacher at Foothill Middle School in Walnut Creek, California,

explained that she teaches a range of subjects from “knowing all the parts, menstrual cycle, understanding

the menstrual cycle, knowing how you get pregnant, fetal development, and again like the preventing [sic]

of pregnancy” to gender and sexual identity, contraception, and options for women who become pregnant.

In stark contrast, in the state of Texas, “96 percent of… school districts taught abstinence only or no sex

4
 2193490

education” (Zeilinski). Thus is the massive divide over sex education in the United States; politics and

finance have defined two completely different branches of teaching.

Almost parallel with the divides in sex education programs come the divides in attitudes towards

abortion in liberal and conservative areas; in liberal areas, naturally, abortion is more accepted. In 2014,

there were 157,350 abortions performed in California alone, accounting for 17.0 percent of all abortions

in the United States (“State Facts”). And, also in 2014, “​the highest percentage of pregnancies were

aborted in the ​District of Columbia​ (38%), N

​ ew York​ (33%), and ​New Jersey​ (30%)” (“U.S. Abortion”) .

All of these states, notably New York and California, have extremely liberal policies and, unsurprisingly,

use comprehensive sex education a lot more than abstinence-only. Those states typically use public

funding from their own state treasuries to fund abortions because they do not receive any federal funding:

“88,466 abortions in ​California​ were paid for with public funds. Public funds paid for 45,722 abortions in

New York​” (“U.S. Abortion”). What these statistics indicate is obvious: liberal states and regions in

general are more open towards abortion. The idea of getting an abortion is less “taboo” or wrong, it is

simply a medical procedure. Not to mention that these states have much more access to birth control

methods, emergency contraception, and abortion centers in general. There are currently 107 operating

Planned Parenthood clinics in California, all of whom receive public funding for their practices (“Health

Centers”). Women who receive abortions in these areas, for the most part, are accepted and respected for

their decision. They underwent a necessary medical procedure, and nothing about that is deemed wrong.

New York, California, Oregon, and Washington all have much lower teen birth rates than the national

average (Jayson), presumably because of the access teenagers have to birth control and abortion clinics

like Planned Parenthood.

But on the other side of the chasm, there are the conservative areas of the United States. These

regions operate under a long history of religious rites and gender roles, and, therefore, their attitudes on

abortion are starkly negative. Because of this, “[t]he lowest percentage of pregnancies were aborted in

5
 2193490

Utah​ (5%), ​South Dakota​ (4%), and ​Wyoming​ (<2%),” (“U.S. Abortion”). These three states, especially

Utah, have a fairly large amount of religion present, from Mormonism to Catholicism. And, out of those

three, only Wyoming provides funding for abortions, thus barring many underprivileged women from

receiving necessary abortions (“U.S. Abortion”). The Biblical bias is quite obvious here; the Bible states

that “[i]t is wrong to murder a person… the unborn is a person… therefore, it is wrong to murder the

unborn” (Turner). The use of the word “murder” itself provides a deep reflection on conservative

attitudes: if abortion is considered the same act as the murder of a human being, there is no way it can be

accepted. In those areas, abortion ​is ​murder, therefore making it socially unacceptable and rejecting it as

an option for many women. Women who have abortions get blacklisted, even shunned, by churches and

family members, leaving them with no real options (Turner). For that reason, the ten states with the

highest teenage birth rates are ​all​ in the South: New Mexico, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana,

Mississippi, Alabama, Kentucky, and West Virginia all have teenage birth rates of over 40 per 1000

women ages 15-19, far higher than the national average of 29.4 (Jayson). Abortion is not even an option

for teenagers, forcing them to have children at a young age and deal with the consequences.

Going along with that data, it is no secret that attitudes towards abortion are starkly divided across

the nation. In a recent Gallup poll, researchers found that ​“[c]urrently, as many Americans personally

identify as ‘pro-choice’ on the issue as say they are ‘pro-life’” (Jones). That statistic as it stands illustrates

the moral divide over abortion; almost half of people disagree with abortion for moral reasons and the

other half believe it is acceptable. But the controversy does not stop there: the division traverses into the

political side of abortion as well. When asked about ​Roe v. Wade, t​ he 1973 Supreme Court case that

legalized abortion across the nation, a Kaiser Family Foundation survey “found that 67 percent of

respondents did not want to see the court ruling overturned” (Kelly). In addition to their views on ​Roe v.

Wade, ​many people disagree over when and in what circumstances it should be allowed, over funding for

abortion, and access to abortion.

6
 2193490

There are many reasons for this divide, like religious beliefs, political bias, and moral conscious,

but the one blatant reason that many people do not think of is right in front of them: sex education. Think

about it: the United States carts around two types of sex education that might as well be the poles of a

magnet. On one end, there is abstinence-only, which attracts conservatives and satisfies their

religiously-biased political beliefs. On the other side, there is comprehensive, which fills the liberal and

progressive views of equality and attracts the more accepting side of society. Each side of the magnet has

an opposite view on abortion, one a positive charge and the other a negative. In this case, the opposite

ends of the magnet do not attract; in fact, they repel each other. They push each other away, desperately

trying to pull more people in to their side and rip them away from the other. It is a constant power

struggle, with neither side making any real advancements. It is the political equivalent of a stalemate.

And, as of right now, the United States ​is​ in a stalemate. After an incredibly brief period of

nationally-funded comprehensive sex education, President Trump reinstated Reagan-esque policies under

his program called “sexual risk avoidance.” In April 2018, the Department of Health and Human Services

made an announcement regarding funding for sex education. Their new funding system explicitly favored

those programs who embrace the abstinence-only approach and majorly cut funding for those that

practiced teen pregnancy avoidance. Although this program “does not exclude programs that provide

information about contraception and protected sex” (Belluck), 81 liberal organizations were informed that

their $89 million a year federal grants, given under the Obama administration, would end in June 2018,

two years earlier than they should have. Naturally, there was a huge liberal pushback: “[s]everal of the

organizations sued to keep their funding” (Belluck) in April 2018, and, since then, many of them have

won. In addition to filing lawsuits, the more liberal organizations that lost funding have begun to slightly

alter their programs in order to better comply with the new curriculum, but still maintained many of their

core principles. They’re attempting to align with Trump’s ideals, while still maintaining the high

standards they have for their sex education programs (Belluck).

7
 2193490

Despite Trump’s push for conservatism within the classroom, many states still fail to follow suit.

California, the most notable of the resistors, has one of the most liberal sex education systems in the

country, and, as Perez pointed out, “here in California… there is health education code, like law, that we

teach this.” The new curriculum she was given in 2016 was directed by new state legislation that actually

required her to teach it. And Lamb, another young, public health specialist and teacher said that, while she

is required to follow the Ed Code and the Healthy Youth Act, she uses “curriculum that I have developed

at YV and in my career before becoming a teacher to bolster the class.” She expressed that she has a

general freedom when it comes to teaching sexual health, something that is rarely found in other states.

Most other states lack any degree of autonomy when it comes to teaching sex ed; they are constantly

under the stern eye of the federal government. And, by no surprise whatsoever, this is also creating

divides over what the children are learning.

Sex education in the United States is a political battleground. In her novel ​When Sex Goes to

School: Warring Views on Sex- And Sex Education- Since the Sixties,​ sociologist Kristin Luker writes that

“sex education, like abortion twenty years ago, was driving ordinary people into a level of political

activism that was completely unprecedented for most of them” (6). Throughout her novel, she comments

on the virtual war that sprang out over sex education after the sexual revolution in the 1960s and 70s, and

how that battle has affected the educational system ever since. This battle, however satisfying to

politicians, is all at the expense of the American youth. Children are volatile learners; they accept what

they are taught as golden, purely because they do not know any better. The things they hear from the

adults in their lives become ingrained in their brains, resonating within them well into adulthood. In sex

education, it is an even stronger sense of acceptance; sex education is the “scary” unit, the one they’ve

doomed since the first day of seventh grade. It is all completely brand new, leaving them infinitely

susceptible to everything they are being told.

8
 2193490

The lessons they learn in sex education embody all the greater issues at hand, including religious

influence, political bias, and personal opinion. Luker wrote that “fights about sex are also fights about

gender, about power and trust and hierarchy, about human nature, and, not surprisingly, about what sex

really is and what it means in human life” (7). From that statement, it can easily be inferred that abortion

fits in there as well. The discrepancies in sex education within public schools are such an overly-ignored

contributor to the divisive attitudes towards abortion in the United States. In essence, children are being

taught to disagree, to go against those who do not see the same way they do, especially on a major issue

like abortion. Students who learn that abortion is wrong from the very start quickly believe that the people

who accept abortion are immoral, and those who learn to accept it think that their counterparts are

stringent, sexist, and unfair. there is no middle ground, no grey area: you are pro-choice or pro-life, you

are in the white zone or in the black zone. Not only this, but, because this is what they are being taught in

schools, the students automatically assume they are right. This leaves no room for negotiation or

compromise or anything remotely productive. It only makes space for conflict, and conflict it brings.

That conflict has become so pervasive that it rips families apart, ruins relationships, and pits half

the population against the other half. And it has become so normal that people rarely notice it anymore

and let it take over their lives, all because the United States is fostering this attitude of division from a

young age. Now is not the time to start more division; now is the time to compromise, to teach

acceptance, to teach love. And that is why the sex education system needs to be reformed; in this political

climate, children should not be taught to fight and disagree, but rather to love, accept, and respect. Despite

political divides or bias, students should all be learning the same things.

Take the country Denmark as a prime example. Denmark imposed a federally directed

comprehensive sex education system for all schools in their country. The students start learning explicitly

about sex at the age of four, and they include all topics, from STIs to sexuality to sexual intercourse, even

at an extremely young age. Abortions are fairly normal occurrences for young women, and the country

9
 2193490

has vastly more resources for contraception, STI treatment, and abortion services. For the most part,

abortion is not a taboo subject. In fact, their sex education has become so effective that they are “growing

increasingly anxious about low birth rates” (Hakim; Bell). And in Canada, another fairly progressive

country, a new sex education system has recently been implemented that follows this curriculum:

anatomy in grade one, consent in grade two, gender/sexual identity in grade three, puberty in grade four,

intercourse in grade five, masturbation and gender expression in grade six, and contraception, anal and

oral sex, and STIs in grades seven and eight, along with “online bullying and the danger of sharing

sexually explicit images electronically” (The Canadian Press). Canada also has a much more relaxed

attitude towards abortion; it became federally legal in 1988 and only 27% of the current population

disagrees with it. Since the 1990s, Canadian political parties have avoided debate on the morality of

abortion and left it to the jurisdiction of the Canadian Supreme Court, which has upheld its 1988 ruling

that abortion should be legal in all cases up to this day (Long).

So there you have it: unity is possible, as it has been proved time and time again by other

countries. Yet the United States fails to follow suit, even after all of these other places have proved what

is blatantly obvious. Take it from the words of a teacher: Lamb, a well-educated young woman, stated

that, “If every kid (as early as kindergarten) just had a basic course that was age appropriate and did not

push abstinence but rather a sex positive autonomy forward perspective, a number of our social, political,

and economic issues would be eradicated.” Our educators, the ones teaching our children, know that we

need change. They know what needs to change, how that change will affect us, and, most importantly,

how that change will affect our children. Because that is all we should be worried about: the children.

Teaching our children to hate, to divide themselves, and to look away from what is right will never and

could never be productive to the future of this country. Our children ​are t​ he future; if we keep teaching

them to act like we do, to keep pushing the divides, we will not go anywhere. Ever.

10
 2193490

Works Cited

“Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Programs.” ​Planned Parenthood Action Fund.

h​ ttps://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/issues/sex-education/abstinence-only-programs.

Accessed 22 Feb. 2019.

Bell, Taylor. “How Europe Proves that U.S. Sex Education Sucks.” ​ATTN:, ​4 April 2016.

https://archive.attn.com/stories/7020/sex-education-europe-compared-to-united-states. Accessed

25 Feb. 2019.

Belluck, Pam. “Trump Administration Pushes Abstinence in Teen Pregnancy Programs.” ​The New York

Times, ​23 April 2018.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/23/health/trump-teen-pregnancy-abstinence.html. Accessed 15

April 2018.

The Canadian Press, “Five Facts about Ontario’s New Sex-Ed Curriculum.” ​The Huffington Post,​ 5 April

2015.

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/05/04/five-things-to-know-about_n_7204262.html?utm_hp_

ref=ca-ontario-sex-education. Accessed 25 Feb. 2019.

“Comprehensive Sexuality Education.” ​United Nations Population Fund, 3​ 0 Sept. 2016.

https://www.unfpa.org/comprehensive-sexuality-education. Accessed 23 Feb. 2019.

Dailard, Cynthia. “Sex education: politicians, parents, teachers, and teens.” ​Sex Education: Politicians,

Parents, Teachers, and Teens, ​Guttmacher Institute, 2001, p. 1+. Student Resources In Context,

link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A80304429/SUIC?u=wal55317&sid=SUIC7xid=8ed0dab0.

Accessed 3 Feb. 2019.

Hakim, Danny. “Sex Education in Europe Turns to Urging More Births.” ​The New York Times, ​8 April

11
 2193490

2018.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/09/business/international/sex-education-in-europe-turns-to-urg

ing-more-births.html. Accessed 25 Feb. 2019.

“Health Centers in California.” ​Planned Parenthood.

h​ ttps://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-center/ca. Accessed 6 March 2019.

Jayson, Sharon. “Teen births: Most are in the South and Southwest.” ​USA Today, 2​ 0 Aug. 2014.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/20/teen-births-states-historical-trends/1429

4003/. Accessed 6 March 2019.

Jones, Jeffrey M. “U.S. Abortion Attitudes Remain Closely Divided.” ​Gallup News, 1​ 1 June 2018.

news.gallup.com/poll/235445/abortion-attitudes-remain-closely-divided.aspx. Accessed 29

Jan. 2019.

Kelly, Meg. “How many Americans back abortion rights?” ​The Washington Post, ​19 July 2018.

www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/07/19/whos-in-favor-of-abortion/?u

tm_term=.357b9922d414. Accessed 29 Jan. 2019.

Lamb, Bethan. Public health specialist and high school health teacher. Personal Interview. 17 March

2019.

Long, Linda. “Abortion in Canada.” ​The Canadian Encyclopedia, ​24 Oct. 2016.

https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/abortion. Accessed 8 March 2019.

Luker, Kristin. ​When Sex Goes to School: Warring Views on Sex- And Sex Education- Since the Sixties.

W.

W. Norton & Company, 2006.

McCammon, Sarah. “Abstinence-Only Education Is Ineffective and Unethical, Report Argues.” ​NPR, 2​ 3

Aug. 2017.

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/08/23/545289168/abstinence-education-is-ineffec

12
 2193490

tive-and-unethical-report-argues. Accessed 22 Feb. 2019.

Perez, Sarah. Middle school teacher with seven years experience teaching sex education. Personal

Interview. 19 Feb. 2019.

“Separate Program for Abstinence Education.” ​Compilation Of The Social Security Laws.

h​ ttps://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title05/0510.htm#ft25. Accessed 23 February 2019.

“Sex Education.” ​American Decades: 2000-2009, e​ dited by Eric Bargeron and James F. Tidd, Jr., Gale,

2011, pp, 143-145. Student Resources In Context,

link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/CX1929800062/SUIC?u=wal55317&sid=SUIC7xid=9dd95aa.

Accessed 3 Feb. 2019.

​ ay 2018.
“State Facts About Abortion: California.” ​Guttmacher Institute, M

https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/state-facts-about-abortion-california. Accessed 24 Feb. 2

2019.

“State Policies on Sex Education in Schools.” ​National Conference of State Legislatures, ​1 March 2016.

http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/state-policies-on-sex-education-in-schools.aspx. Accessed

23 Feb. 2019.

Turner, Ryan. “What does the Bible say about abortion?” ​Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry.

h​ ttps://carm.org/what-does-the-bible-say-about-abortion. Accessed 6 March 2019.

“U.S. Abortion Statistics.” ​Abort73.com, ​18 Feb. 2019.

https://abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_abortion_statistics/. Accessed 24 Feb. 2019.

Zeilinski, Alex. “83 Percent of Texas School Districts Teach Abstinence-Only Sex Ed- Or None At All.”

The San Antonio Current, ​14 Feb. 2017.

https://www.sacurrent.com/the-daily/archives/2017/02/14/83-percent-of-texas-school-districts-tea

ch-abstinence-only-sex-ed-or-none-at-all. Accessed 23 Feb. 2019.

13
 2193490

14