SEX EDUCATION

Many terms are associated with the provision of school based sexuality education. The most
common being ‘sex education’, which has its roots in the bio-medical and physiological aspects
of sexuality or what we often hear referred to as the ‘plumbing’ or functional approach (Farrelly
et al. 2007). A concern about hygiene, birth rates and family life focused early approaches to
sex education around a traditionalist approach, concerned with sexual safety, abstinence and
improving birth rates in the context of family life (Peppard 2008). Although the content of
sexuality education has broadened over the past 40 years, the focus on safety and hygiene has
remained.

Health and human relationships education gain prominence (McLeod 1999) and curriculum
policy frameworks positioned sexuality in the broader social context of relationships (c/f MOE
Personal Development Framework, 1989). Many researchers argue that HIV was the single most
important reason for this change (Peppard 2008; Altman 1992). However, another important
influence was the clear link between sexuality issues, such as sexual violence and unintended
pregnancy, and school retention rates, and girls’ educational performance (Commonwealth
Schools Commission 1987). This led to the inclusion of strategies to address gender-based
violence in sexuality education (Ollis and Tomaszewski 1993; Ollis 2009). This broader
approach was more inclusive of the personal and social aspects of intimate relationships.
However, it failed to acknowledge sexual and gender diversity. It also failed to promote a sex
positive approach to human sexuality that acknowledged sexual desire, pleasure, and intimacy,
and worked towards alleviating shame, guilt and fear.

Further research with young people clearly showed that sexuality education needed to
acknowledge the importance of intimacy, desire and pleasure in sexual relationships. This
acknowledgement would assist young people to feel positive about themselves, their sexuality
and their bodies (Harrison and Hillier 2002; Allen 2005; 2011). Comprehensive sexuality
education in this project draws on this understanding of sexuality and therefore maintains that
comprehensive, school based programs should address these issues in culturally sensitive, and
age and developmentally appropriate ways within the context of everyday life. In line with the
sentiments of Mazin (2014), we believe that ‘sexuality education is meaningful only when
humanized - when placed in the landscape of our everyday life’. This helps young people make
sense of the social world in which they make decisions about their sexuality and sexual health.