Sex education and views of young people on gender and sexuality in portuguese schools

This paper** draws upon the recognition of sex education as an educational space for the development of youth sexual citizenship and gender equality. Despite the more open political and public debates in Portugal during the last three decades, around the implementation of sex education in schools, the relationship between education and sexuality is still seen as a «problem» and not as a citizenship right. Going beyond the health centred approaches, the paper explores new possibilities for sex education based on sexual and intimate citizenship concepts. Firstly, a brief outline of the advances and setbacks in sex education and gender policies in Portugal is presented to better contextualize this question. Secondly, an interpretation of young people’s views on sexuality, more concretely on sexual pleasure and sexual pressure and the implications of sex education for intimate relationships are taken into account, based on interviews from male and female pupils in Portuguese schools. Finally, the need to rethink sex education is emphasised with consideration of young people’s views for overcoming revealed issues and constraints in order for an educational agenda on equality and citizenship to be created. Keywor ds: sex education, gender, citizenship, equality, youth 29 Educação, Sociedade & Culturas, nº 35, 2012, 29-44 Sofia A. Santos, Laura Fonseca & Helena C. Araújo* SEX EDUCATION AND THE VIEWS OF YOUNG PEOPLE ONGENDER AND SEXUALITY INPORTUGUESE SCHOOLS *CIIE – Centro de Investigação e Intervenção Educativas, Faculdade de Psicologia e de Ciências da Educação, Universidade do Porto (Porto/Portugal). ** This work is funded by ERDF – European Regional Development Fund through the COMPETE Programme (operational programme for competitiveness) and by National Funds through the FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology) within the research project «Sexualities, Youth and Teenage Pregnancy in the North West Portugal» (2007-2010), with the ref. PTDC/SDE/67931/2006. This project was developed by researchers from the Centre for Research in Education of the Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences of the University of Porto (CIIE/FPCEUP). The methods used to collect data were focus group discussions, interviews, and life stories. Intr oduction Over the last 30 years, sexuality and gender equality has come to the fore of political, educational, and theoretical debates. The moral panic around higher rates of teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections (STI), in particular HIV-AIDS, the assumptions of an increasingly earlier start to sexual activity among young people and the emergence of new sexualities led governments to implement a set of health and educational policies, from which the implementation of sex education in schools was relevant. Therefore, sex and health education may be seen as emerging in Portuguese schools as a political strategy to control young people’s sexualities that often emphasised both medical and moral values. Several researches have highlighted the gap between sex education and young people’s practices (Vilar, 2002; Measor, Tiffin, & Miller, 2000; Kehily, 2002; Allen, 2005), as well as the devaluing of sexism and power relationships in young people’s experiences. As Fine (2009) stresses, there is a total «missing discourse of desire» in sex education programs, in particular in relation to female sexual desire. This absence of female sexuality (Lees, 2000, 1993; Fonseca, 2009) and «female citizenship» issues (Arnot & Dillabough, 2000; Araújo, 2007) in school both denies the possibility for young people to be perceived as «sexual subjects» (Epstein, O’Flynn, & Telford, 2003) and privileges the «compulsory heterosexuality» (Rich, 1987) or the «heterosexual matrix» (Butler, 1990). Furthermore, different femininities and masculinities are also still marginalized in education (Mac An Ghaill, 1994; Nayak & Kehily, 2006; 2008; Alldred & David, 2007; Moita, 2001). The main concern in this paper is to understand young people’s views about sex education and its importance to increase their sexual knowledge and to discuss the way they relate to each other, particularly with regards to their experiences of sexual pressure and sexual desire. The focus on both dimensions is due to the fact that they have clear implications in gender inequalities concerning sexual experiences, as they are very much present in intimate relationships. Sexual pressure means the social gender pressure that is carried out by a partner and peer groups on boys and girls to become sexually active, sometimes assuming violent, oppressive, and abusive forms. It also refers to youth meanings of having safe sex, how they promote a context of negotiation, and how young women have control and power over their own safety and sexuality (Holland, Ramazanoglu, Scott, Sharpe, & Thomson, 1990; Holland, Ramazanoglu, Sharpe, & Thomson, 1991). This dimension is tightly bound with sexual desire, on the way young people feel and express their own sexuality. From young people’s silence and conversations about sexual desires, fantasies, and pleasure, the relevance of gender power relationships is considered to shape the construction of masculinities and femininities. More concretely, this paper attempts to develop a critical gender approach to young people’s perspectives and, additionally, it suggests a new approach to sex education, as a place of citi30 zenship and equality, throughout the concepts of sexual and intimate citizenship (Giddens, 1992; Plummer, 2003; Richardson, 2000; Fonseca, Araújo, & Santos,2012). The paper s starts with an overview of Portuguese legal documents about sex education, for a broader contextualisation on gender and sexual policies. Secondly, the relevance of sexual and intimate citizenship concepts for a new design of sex education programs in schools is examined. In the last part, sex education is supported as a space where young people can talk about and listen to experiences of equality, respect and recognition. Based on content analysis of pupils’ interviews, a selection of analytical categories of young people’s experiences is presented – sex education, sexual desire, and sexual pressure. 1. Sex education policies in Portugal: an equality issue? After the end of the authoritarian regime in 1974, the Portuguese government has been challenged by cultural, political, and social movements to change policies regarding sexual freedom, gender, and family relationships. More recently, the state, through the Commission for Citizenship and Gender Equality (CIG), has reinforced its compromise with the promotion of gender and sexual equality, as expressed in several strategic documents1.Additionally, sexual and reproductive rights have been inserted in to the political agenda: the law on decriminalization of abortion was passed in 2007 and same-sex marriage was legalized in 2009. Alongside these political changes, the educational field was also challenged through the implementation of sex education in the school curriculum. The claim for the education of sexualities in state schools has been a controversial political issue since the 1980s. At that time, sex education in schools was mainly concerned with the values of family planning and maternity. At the end of the 1990s, sex education acquired new meanings. It changed from a view on sexuality restricted to the family debate and reproductive health2towards a perspective focused on individual health and wellbeing3. Feminist struggles against sexism and gender inequalities inside private and public spheres and later Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) claims for sexual rights and denunciation of homophobic and bullying were important results of these changes (Nogueira, 2001; Santos, 2006). 31 1IV National Plan Towards Gender Equality, Citizenship and non-Discrimination 2011-2013 (IV Plano Nacional para a Igualdade de Género, Cidadania e não Discriminação) and the Strategy Towards Equality between Men and Women 2010-2015 (Estratégia para a Igualdade entre Homens e Mulheres). 2Law No. 3/84. 3Law No. 120/99. During the 1990s, however, sex education was used more as a political strategy to fight STIs (sexually transmitted infections) and teenage pregnancies, a health concern – than an educational concern per se. Later, from the year 2000 onwards, new configurations of sex education have emerged. Indeed, an educational strategy of sex education began with the involvement of teachers, health professionals as well as young people in programs related to sexual rights and citizenship. This gave room for the Young People’s National Health Plan (Marques, Prazeres, & Pereira,2000) and the current Schooling Guidelines for Sex Education (Sampaio, 2007). In spite of these developments, it was not until 2010 that Portuguese schools, after many conflicts, officially implemented sex education as a compulsory subject, based on health, wellbeing and citizenship rights4. The respect for sexual «difference, pluralism and orientation», along with a wider range of information, are stated in this new document. It also underlines the importance of affection and gender equality on the negotiation of contraception, in order to tackle the consequences of risk behaviours and situations of sexual abuse, violence and exploitation. Then, the inclusion of sex education in the curriculum, as part of citizenship education, appears to reveal a new political dimension in schools based on deconstruction of norms, myths and meanings (Spencer, Maxwell, & Aggleton, 2008). As Lees (2000) emphasises, social changes on this matter are only possible if schools and subjects, such as sex education and citizenship education, put into question gender power relationships. Framed by this new «status», sex education may be an opportunity and space to promote practices of sexual and intimacy citizenship, giving access to sexual information and knowledge, and an empowerment tool for boys and girls to transform their lives into relationships of equality, free from coercion and violence. Issues of heterosexuality, homosexuality, sexism, and homophobia should also be addressed as a way of questioning the dominant masculinity and femininity patterns. To conclude this brief analysis, it is important to stress that, despite the important steps on gender and sexual policies in public life (for instance, attempts to implement equal wages, equal working conditions, and equal treatment in social security between men and women, cf. Meier & Lombardo, 2008; Ramalho, 2004), «equality of condition» (Baker, Lynch, Cantillon, & Walsh, 2004) is far from being achieved to assure recognition, respect and participation of women and other social groups, in different social spheres. In the next section, a discussion of sexual and intimate concepts follows as a contribution to a new sex education approach. 32 4Law No. 60/2009, amended in March 2010, Portaria No. 196-A/2010. 2. Sexual and intimate citizenship: a new lens to impr ove sex education Within the aim of contributing to a new framework for sex education in schools, it seems important to clarify the concepts of sexual and intimate citizenship, especially taking into account the perspectives of Giddens (1992), Richardson (2000), and Plummer (2003). Firstly, sexuality as a citizenship right implies questioning public and private spheres: while sexuality was always seen as a private issue, in the last three decades it has started to be seen as a public issue. Similarly, while citizenship has traditionally been considered in the political and public spheres, it is now called to protect private problems, respecting and recognising individual freedom (Pateman, 1988; McRobbie, 2009). As a result, intimacy began to be interpreted and understood as a citizen’s right and responsibility, which lead us to the concept of sexual citizenship (Evans, 1993). If the concept of sexual citizenship apparently emerged as a «contradiction of terms» (Weeks, 1998), it also represents a political claim for sexual respect and acknowledgement of the other in private and public spheres. It supports the access to citizenship and sexual rights for all and not only related with the institutionalization of heterosexual and hegemonic masculinity (Richardson, 2000). Beyond the scope of rights and recognition, this claim is also linked with the notion of intimacy stressed by Giddens (1992), as a restructuring of intimate relationships based on democracy (sexual and emotional equality, freedom, and right to pleasure). This idea appears not to restrict citizenship to «sexual rights» and to categories of «sexual difference», but it extends it to intimacy values. Therefore, the citizenship right also means «the control (or not) over one’s body, feelings, relationships; access (or not) to representations, relationships, public spaces; socially grounded choices (or not) about identities, gender experiences, erotic experiences» (Plummer, 1995: 151). This review of both concepts can frame the concerns with sex education in schools in order that young people would guide their social and intimate relationships as practices of recognition, respect, and freedom. In the next section, boys and girls voices are taken into account regarding their experiences of sex education in schools as well their own experiences with sexualities. 3. The interpr etative appr oach: some methodological notes The interviews (100) with young people took place in 14 secondary schools from different areas in North West Portugal (including rural/interior, periphery/industrial settings as well as urban cities). Forty-seven boys and 53 girls, ages 13-185, participated in this process. The inter33 5The pupils interviewed were in different school years or courses: year 7 to 9 (77 students); year 10 to 12 (23 students). views were mainly focused on their feelings and views on sexualities. In these conversations, young people shared with the researchers their learning paths around sexual, gender, and loving relationships. They were asked about their experiences and expectations of sex education in schools, the influence of family and peers as contexts of learning, regulation and pressure, among other issues. In accordance with ethical concerns guiding the research, interviews were conducted with young people who volunteered to participate in this research. Informed consent was given by the parents and the interviews were tape-recorded. The names are fictional as well as are other aspects that could allow for identification of the participants, in order to keep their anonymity and privacy. In this paper, we focus on only three analytical categories, among several others6that emerged from the content analysis of interviews: sex education experiences, sexual desire, and sexual pressure. These categories are important insofar as they aim to bring gender issues into the field of sexuality research. We are particularly interested in understanding how sex education, both in an explicit and a hidden way, is perceived to deal with gender pressures (in particular, the way they crosscut sexual experiences, the initiation of sexual activity; the feminine and masculine sex roles in those intimate moments; the way boys and girls talk about their sexual desire, the female reputation and male popularity according to sexual experience). 3.1. Sex education experiences in school 3.1.1. Sex education in school as a space of experimentation and a space of control Before exploring youth experiences of sex education in schools, the focus is on understanding if, accordingly to young people, the school is a legitimate space for sex education. Based on the interview analysis, it is evident that ideally school is seen by the majority of students as the «right place» to receive sexual knowledge and to learn about gender and sexual protocols (Nogueira & Fonseca, 2010: 261). We spend most of our time in school… so I think it is the right place for sex education. (Deolinda, 14 years old) 34 6Topics and themes of the interviews were: sexualities and affections; dating and flirting; initiation of sex activity; abortion and STIs; teenage pregnancy; female reputation; places of sexual and gender learning; sexual information; and contraception. We should have it [sex education] in school… because we never feel comfortable to speak with our family about that… and sometimes looking in health centres or searching for information is not an easy task… the school is always our second home. (Helena, 16 years old) Sex education is an essential subject at school. (Juliana, 14 years old) However, in practice, schools are still being defined as institutions which ultimately control, discriminate and forbid sexual desires, bodies, and behaviours. Expressions of affection and sexuality are apparently learned within a shame and «official silence» context, resulting in lack of information and ignorance (Epstein et al., 2003). Teachers told us that it was forbidden to smoke and to date at school. But people still date. Last year, one teacher advised one friend of mine, who was kissing her boyfriend, to stop dating in school. (Valéria, 16 years old) There are a lot of people watching us… like the staff/employees… (Graça, 17 years old) In addition, as Louro (2001) notes, there is a visible attempt of «schoolaization of the body», to control the construction of masculinities and femininities and sexual behaviours by focusing on «proper ways» of using bodies and on delaying sex to adult life. The rational emphasis of «the mind» and of academic subjects in detriment of bodies and personal development explains the difficulty for the school to recognise young men and women’s desires about sex and sexual relationships (Paechter, 2006). These signs of schools as desexualized places generate both provocation and resistance to rules outside of the classroom, often increasing heterosexual and male power over girls and other masculinities. In fact, Nayak and Kehily (2006) highlight the importance of these behaviours, in particular the use of sexual jokes, as a cultural sign of male peer groups to regulate gendered and sexual hierarchies. Therefore, what could and could not be said in relation to sexualities in schools and in sex education lessons has been censored by moral considerations. Thus, issues of sexual diversity, sexual desire and pleasure, or masturbation, for instance, have been excluded from sex education programs that still privilege heterosexuality as the «right» option. As Alldred and David (2007: 78) stress, «sex education in schools is about how norms, values and identities about gender and about the individual’s relation to their body are produced». The following quotations are an illustration of the censorship for what can be said: Here, in school, nobody tells us anything about sexuality and homosexuality! (…) In our class, teachers just give us the required subject matter, they don’t say anything else! (Carlos, 12 years old) Homosexuality… teachers never talk about that. Maybe, it is because of that that I don’t understand it… I have heard very little about it. (Marta, 14 years old) 35 3.1.2. Experiences of sex education: «this is new for us» In relation to sex education experiences, both boys and girls showed difficulties in remembering specific knowledge on sexuality and sexual health as practices of sex education in schools. Therefore, most of them have answered that they never had had sex education lessons. This leads us to the question of the importance and the status of sex education within the national curriculum. Since it was only implemented as a compulsory subject in 2010, this non-recognition of young people means that the initiatives of teaching about sexuality in other school subjects such as the sciences, during former years, are not perceived as sex education practices. This fact devalues the efforts of some schools and communities, which participated in the project mentioned above, and teacher’s initiatives in particular, who have worked hard to improve sex education in and outside of the classroom in those schools. It also highlights the difficulties pupils experience in understanding and recognising non-formal practices in school as educational moments. We talk about sexuality in science… but this is new for us, we never had it before. It is just about menstruation. (Deolinda, 14 years old) We never spoke about sexuality. We spoke about women and men’s bodies, but nothing beyond that. (Mafalda, 17 years old) We had some campaigns about AIDS, but never about sexuality. (Ânia, 15 years old) I remember talking about sexuality, but we never had a lesson or a subject of sex education. (Henrique, 14 years old) 3.1.3. Learning sex education is «pivotal» Concerning the status of sex education, the majority of young people expressed the view that sex education needs to be an independent subject in the curriculum to «inform» but also to explore «new realities and to open young people’s minds» regarding their own experiences. In their opinion, sex education should question dominant gender and sexual processes and discuss their sexualities beyond informational and biological dimensions. Their proposal draws upon a construction of an institutional educational space that focuses on social relationships between peers and teachers. Both boys and girls have recognised sex education as a safe place, contradicting the assumption that sex education is more related with girls’ concerns (as some authors have pointed out such as Kehily, 2002; Measor, 2004). This point of view expressed by the interviewees contributes to conceptualize an agenda of sex education which, in accordance with our perspective, can be analysed through the lens of sexual and intimate citizenship as mentioned earlier. 36 Lessons could be to open up people’s mentalities. (Aurora, 17 years old) Sex education is important to give people a sense of reality. (Bruno, 15 years old) Sex education would be good to clarify things for boys and girls. Mainly to girls who are very afraid… Girls think that virginity is like gold. (António, 16 years old) In this way, it became important to understand in what way sex education contributes to the way in which young people express gender and sexual relationships, namely those intersecting with issues of sexual desire and sexual pressure. In the next section, the evidence to illustrate these analytical dimensions in the perspectives of young people is presented. 3.2. Sexual desire: a possibility for young women? The second analytical dimension is based on sexual desire. The idea that schools are usually places of regulation and control of sexualities led us to go further in the attempt to understand how boys and girls are learning to deal with and talk about their sexual desires, wishes, and needs. We are aware that gendered learning of sexuality is not limited to the control of the schools, once it is crosscut by dynamics among different agents (peers, family, media), which shape power relationships and hierarchies. However, the aim here is to understand how sexuality is learned within the curriculum and school context, as reproducing, as resisting and/or confronting relationships of domination. Following Foucault in Walkerdine that the «power is implicated in the power/knowledge relations investigated in the creation and regulation of practices» (1990: 42), it is important to rethink sex education as knowledge that could look critically to the «patriarchal culture» (Lees, 1993: 183) and could be a «discourse of possibility, where students would be empowered to examine their lives critically» (ibidem: 23). In our view, it is precisely in this contentious space of influences that sex education based on difference and citizenship could be created. Young people have been asked if they felt able to talk about their sexual desires, needs, dreams, fears, and bodies. This contradicts the idea that girls do not have sexual relations because they do not wish for it. Contrarily, it means that the perceived absence of sexual desire is more caused by the absence of a common language of female sexual pleasure and of communication with the partner (Thomson & Scott, 1992). The majority of girls talk about the fears of not being able to please boys, on a physical or sexual performance level, and of being «discovered» by their families. They also have fears of getting a «bad reputation» among peers. The power of others’ expectations in the way girls can control and assume their own sexuality is a serious constraint to achieving sexual and intimate citizenship. For young women, the use of contracep37 Nogueira, Paulo, & Fonseca, Laura (2010, November). Sexual education and the school: Perspectives and sexual protocols of young man and women. Paper presented at ICERI2010 – International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation, Madrid. Paechter, Carrie (2006). Being boys, being girls: Learning masculinities and femininities. London: McGrawHill Education/Open University Press. Pateman, Carole (1988). The sexual contract. Cambridge: Polity Press. Phoenix, Ann (1992). Narrow definitions of culture: The case of early motherhood. In Linda McDowell & Rosemary Pringle (Ed.), Defining women: Social institutions and gender division (pp. 75-87). Cambridge: Policy Press. Plummer, Ken (1995). Telling sexual stories: Power, change and social worlds. New York: Routlegde. Plummer, Ken (2003). Intimate citizenship: Private decisions and public dialogues. Seattle/London: Washington Press. Ramalho, Maria (2004). Igualdade de género e direito comunitário: Notas breves. Ex Aequo,10, 51-60. Rich, Adrianne (1987). Blood, bread and poetry: Selected prose, 1979-1985. London: Virago. Richardson, Diane (2000). Rethinking sexuality. London: Sage. Sampaio, Daniel (Coord.) (2007). Relatório final: Grupo de trabalho de educação sexual. Retrieved August 27, 2009, from http://sitio.dgidc.min-edu.pt/saude/Documents/GTES_RELATORIO_FINAL.pdf Santos, Ana Cristina (2006). Entre a academia e o activismo: Sociologia, estudos queer e movimento LGBT em Portugal. Revista Crítica de Ciências Sociais, 76, 91-108. Spencer, Grace, Maxwell, Claire, & Aggleton, Peter (2008). What does «empowerment» mean in school-based sex and relationships education?. Sex Education, 8(3), 345-356. Thomson, Rachel, & Scott, Sue (1992). Learning about sex: Young women and the social construction of sexual identity. London: The Tufnell Press. Vilar, Duarte (2002). Falar disso: A educação sexual nas famílias dos adolescentes. Porto: Edições Afrontamento. Walkerdine, Valerie (1990). Schoolgirl fictions. London: Verso Books. Weeks, Jeffrey (1998). The sexual citizen. Theory, Culture & Society, 15(3-4), 35-52. Consulted legislation Lei nº 3/84 (Law No. 3/84), de 24 de Março, Educação sexual e planeamento familiar. Lei nº 120/99 (Law No. 120/99), de 11 de Agosto, Reforça as garantias do direito à saúde reprodutiva. Lei nº 60/2009 (Law No. 60/2009), Diário da República, 1ª série – No. 151 – 6 de Agosto 2009, amended in March 2010, Portaria No. 196-A/2010. 44