Sex Education in America: Abstaining from Comprehensive Facts

Global health without sexual and reproductive health and rights? Analysis of United Nations documents and country statements, 2014–2019

“…The establishment of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s) for the Agenda 2030 marked a development which saw the inclusion of specific targets recognising SRHR in accordance with the ICPD and Beijing Declaration Platform for Action 2 7. Despite this, many countries have been slow to recognise SRHR, with an increasing global effort by countervailing forces through lobbying and direct political interference by powerful UN members,1 9 10 such as the previous US Trump Administration 3 11 12…”

“…This was also seen when the Trump Administration used their position as a permanent member of the UN Security Council to threaten to veto a resolution on sexual violence in conflict if it mentioned SRH, which was then subsequently removed 15. UN negotiations and high-level meetings also continue to be subject to efforts to replace references to SRHR with conservative language which places an emphasis on traditional, heteronormative family values which exclude individual rights 2 9 11 12…”

“…State and non-state actors, including religious and conservative non-governmental organisations (NGOs) with links to far-right politicians,16 form alliances at the UN to undermine SRHR under the guise of religion, cultural values, traditional values and national sovereignty 11. These traditional values relate to family values, which see the exercising of individual rights, particularly sexual and reproductive rights, as a threat to the family 1 2 9 11 12. The rise in right-wing political parties globally has also seen a resurgence in religious fundamentalism, where resulting alliances at the UN negotiations have been formed as part of an overall backlash on what is referred to in the literature as ‘gender ideology’,2 11 17 a term originally devised by the Catholic church in opposition to the recognition of SRHR in the ICPD and continues to be used by opponents of SRHR 18.…”

Abstinence versus harm reduction approaches to sexual health education: views of key stakeholders in Saudi Arabia

“…The abstinence-only model tends to be supported in contexts where religious beliefs are stronger and non-procreative sexual practices and partnerships are censured. Even in societies which are at least partially secular, albeit may still be greatly influenced by Judaeo-Christian influences, ideological debate continues over provision of sex education and the design of programs (Lemon 2018;Miller 2018). Conflicting views reflect not only the strength of religious beliefs and differing values, but also cultural norms and political persuasions (Santelli et al 2017).…”