Sex Education

Historical Overview

Significant material changes, such as those associated with urbanization, at the end of the 19th and early 20th centuries made it necessary to warn adolescents of the dangers of sex. The concern at that time was that the risk of disease (syphilis and gonorrhea), exploitation, prostitution, and unwanted pregnancies [Page 746]in urban areas would disrupt the successful transition from adolescence to adulthood. Although literature was provided to parents to warn their children about the dangers of masturbation—the erosion of self-discipline and self-control that would inevitably lead to poor health, disease, and even death—professional experts were also considered necessary to respond to this potentially precocious adolescent sexuality. Educators in schools used botany and nature study to discuss reproduction and, through this emphasis on the science of sex, resolved the anxiety and tension that existed between the need to discuss sexual matters and the fear of putting undesirable ideas into young minds.

Soaring rates of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) among soldiers during World War I and the fear that disease would spread into the civilian population led to an intensification of the school project. Lectures by early social hygienists who visited schools emphasized the horrors of STDs. Their slide shows depicted the worst possible physical consequences of syphilis and gonorrhea with the hope that fear would lead to responsibility, discipline, and good moral character. The prevailing strategy at the time was to control male sexuality, to elevate men to the standard of female purity and chastity while providing women with only basic information on menstruation and the dangers of sex.

A new youth culture of the 1920s and 1930s— marked most notably by changes in female dress and dancing as well as some access to birth control by married couples, the popularity of marriage manuals, and premarital sexual activity (“petting”)— challenged the idea of an innate chastity and innocence of girls. These social changes led to a shift in educational strategy. Although the physical, social, and emotional consequences of sex were still emphasized, the idea was to foster a desire for sexual fulfillment but only within a married relationship. Adolescents were educated to practice premarital chastity.

The discovery of penicillin as an effective treatment for syphilis and gonorrhea and the presumed promiscuity of civilian women who were giving sexually transmitted diseases to soldiers during World War II (rather than the prostitute women of World War I) provided a new focus for educational efforts: promiscuity and safeguarding the family. Education on marriage, home economics, and the family relationship through discussions on courtship, mate selection, and prenatal growth and childbearing solidified the proper place of sex: in a married relationship. Premarital sex carried certain risk, including STD and harm to future relationships.

With increasing access to birth control—particularly the arrival of “the pill”—and abortion services as well as an increasing age of first marriage, adolescents of the 1960s questioned or were against the taboo on premarital sex. Liberal legislation and court decisions on contraception and homosexuality as well as an increased incidence of extramarital and premarital sex and out-of-wedlock births of the 1970s contributed to what was considered a sexually permissive culture. The sexual revolution, however, also led to what was deemed an epidemic of teenage pregnancy as well as soaring rates of STDs among young people. Once again, sex education efforts were challenged—could they could adequately respond to these changes or would they add to the culture of permissiveness? Ultimately, sex education efforts emphasized abstinence but also provided information about contraception.

...