As a student in a middle school health class, I had heard the word “condom” used only a few times and it wasn’t until I was in high school that I actually knew what one looked like or how it functioned. Not only was the subject of contraception still foreign to me then, but it reinforced my apprehension about all topics of conversation regarding sex, the opposite gender, and childbirth. Had I felt comfortable asking my questions about sex, perhaps I would have learned about contraceptives in a safe and open environment.

I’ve grown up in Rockingham County and the City of Harrisonburg. I went to school at public county schools. These regions, which are predominantly Christian, are ground zero for the evangelical purity movement. I’ve seen that the people from Rockingham County and the City of Harrisonburg want their children to succeed, to be economically prosperous, to be morally upright, and to live fulfilling lives. There is no question that teen pregnancy hinders these dreams. This is the care and legitimate concern that is the driving motivation of Purity Culture. 

While evangelical “Purity Culture” may be a new term to some, its key characteristics are more recognizable: Purity rings and pledges, and abstinence-only sex-education. These are red flags. In close ranks with these practices are deep shame, sexual confusion and tension, and heteronormativity that cripple young people. These feelings of shame and confusion have resulted from brushing conversations about sex under the rug. Purity culture associates virginity with value and intentionally keeps youth ignorant to prevent pre-marital sex. 

We’ve been viewing the harmful side effects of purity culture as a necessary cost of lowering the teen pregnancy rate for so long that we’ve overlooked another possible solution: comprehensive sex-education. In a study conducted by Douglas Kirby, it’s evident that not only does comprehensive sex education ensure that young people who choose to have sex are doing so safely, but it also delays the age which they first have sex. Another study conducted by Mathematica Policy Research Inc. expresses that abstinence-only sex education was no more effective in convincing youth to remain abstinent until marriage than no sex education whatsoever. When combined, narratives like that of Linda Kay Klein in her book Pure and these studies validate that abstinence only sex-education is harmful to young people and isn’t effective. Your children’s potential psychological harm is the cost you’re paying for a program that doesn’t work. 

Abstinence-only sex-education is the brainchild of evangelical Christian circles, and while their intentions are pure, it’s steeped in heteronormativity and rejection. From a first glance, the term heteronormativity might appear to be another politically correct classification regarding the LGBTQ+ community, but in reality, this term refers to straight culture. Heteronormativity is used to describe all beliefs that set heterosexuality as the default, purity culture and abstinence-only sex-education included. Evangelical beliefs of “God’s intention for marriage” are prevalent in abstinence-only sex-education, which invalidates the identities of the entire LGBTQ+ community. For youth who are exploring their sexuality and/or gender identity, they are left to do so in the dark. These youth deserve to feel safe and heard in all situations, but especially in the sex-ed classroom. When sex-education curriculums refuse to acknowledge and legitimize LGBTQ+ people, they are putting a massive group of people at risk and reinforcing the homophobic ideas that have been harming people for centuries. 

Comprehensive sex-education is not anti-abstinence sex-education. The American Bar Association expresses that comprehensive sex-education as a program that promotes abstinence until marriage as an effective way to keep teens from getting pregnant. Unlike abstinence-only sex education though, comprehensive sex-ed promotes healthy conversation about sex. Through these conversations, we can dismantle the shame-inducing stigma that shrouds sex in American society. Learning about anatomy, sexuality, and contraception methods are all topics that have been, to some extent, taboo in federally funded sex-education, causing uncomfortable ignorance among youth. 

In addition to learning about abstinence and contraceptives, the comprehensive sex-education curriculum created by Planned Parenthood includes topics that benefit young people’s safety and their ability to live as their most authentic selves (plannedparenthood.org). From bullying and dating violence to gender identity and sexual orientation, comprehensive sex-education offers insight to the well being of the whole person, ensuring that they are knowledgeable and able to recognize and avoid dangerous situations. 

Addressing questions and sex curiosity in the classroom keeps students from turning to more experienced friends, pornography, or the internet. All of these sources are unreliable and can do anything from misinform youth about healthy boundaries to risk their safety. In a classroom, the controlled space should be one where students are educated in a safe and constructive context so they don’t have to learn from experience.

Abstinence-only sex-education often overlooks these harmful alternatives because it is built on the fundamental purity culture idea of dating to marry. Discouraging dating takes the place of educating students about what a healthy dating relationship looks like. On the opposite side of this same coin, young people are unable to identify unhealthy relationships as well. Abstinence-only sex-education sacrifices imperative dating safety education under the impression that their audience won’t be dating. Assuming that the audience will not find themselves in dating situations is naive and leaves young people unprepared when problems in their relationships arise. 

Comprehensive sex-education is so much more than teaching youth about contraceptives. Comprehensive sex-education is an all-encompassing, whole-person benefiting curriculum that prepares young people to make their own safe choices. As it turns out, teaching students to make safe decisions for themselves is an excellent means of preventing pregnancy, slowing the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, and promoting safety and comfort in their bodies.