Sex education and the female body: the long term effect of formal sex education in middle and high school on how women view their own bodies

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study is to examine the long term effects of formal sex education inmiddle school and high school on college aged women in regards to how they view their own bodies. The hypothesis was that the women who received the certain factors of formal sex education were more likely to have a higher self image, more self-esteem andwould view their bodies more positively. These factors are comprehensive formal
sexeducation that covered feelings, emotions, and body image, specially trained teachers thatwere accepting of everyone, and the opportunity for students to ask their own questionsand have them answered. Eighteen college aged women were interviewed for thirty tofifty five minutes about their formal sex education in middle school and high school.Questions also covered how they feel currently about their body, what effects they feeltheir formal sex education had on them, and how they feel sex education should betaught. The findings were that while most women who were interviewed had a relatively positive body image of themselves and felt personally unaffected by their formal sexeducation, they felt that formal sex education could and does in fact affect how womenviewed their bodies. Positive factors included a combination of single sex and co-educational classrooms; accepting teachers who answered questions from students;subjects that were discussed including body image, eating disorders, feelings andemotions involved with puberty and sex, the female body, and sexual assault; and howmuch formal sex education they received. Negative factors included closed minded anduntrained teachers; short periods of formal sex education; lack of discussion of theaforementioned subject; not being allowed/not feeling comfortable enough to ask questions and co-educational classrooms in which female students felt uncomfortabletalking in front of the male students. Other factors that affect how women view their  bodies included family; activities; the media and peers.1

 

INTRODUCTION

Sex education is an issue under raging debate in our country. The biggest issueregarding sexual education in the United States is that of what should be taught and howit affects the actions of the students. Some sides, including groups such as the HeritageFoundation (2005) and Focus on the Family (2005), are arguing for abstinence onlyeducation in hopes of reducing teenage pregnancy rates and lowering the rate of sexuallyactive teenagers who are contracting sexually transmitted infections. On the other end of the spectrum are those who want comprehensive sex education to be taught, for many of the same reasons. The difference is that abstinence only education offers abstaining fromsexual activity until marriage as the only option, where as comprehensive sex educationteaches students about the different types and effectiveness of contraceptives and birthcontrol.Both types of formal sex education teach information about other subjects as well,including, but not limited to, reproduction, pregnancy, the female body, the male body, puberty and bodily changes, sexually transmitted diseases and infections, homosexualactivity, heterosexual activity, sexual assault. No two programs are the same, and inmany states, the decision of which subjects are taught is left up to the discretion of theteacher and/or the parents of the students.Some schools offer no formal sex education. Others offer it as an elective or aclass students may opt out of, while still others require it as part of the curriculum.Whether or not formal sex education is taught depends a lot on state and country laws andregulations. Students in some areas may receive as little as one day of formal sex2

education between their time in middle school and high school, even as other studentsreceive formal sex education every year sixth grade through twelfth grade.The format and capacity of formal sex education also vary. Lectures,question/answer format and group conversations/dialogue tend to be the most often usedformat for teaching sex education. However, other teachers may have other methods,including movies, skits, speakers, etc. Some schools have sex education as its own class;others mix it in with some other specialty subjects, like a freshman orientation class, or inconjunction with another smaller subject like driver’s education. The most common and popular approach is to have the sex education as a unit in a traditional required class,usually biology or another science, health or gym class. Teachers of formal sexeducation range from the school nurse, to a gym or biology teacher to a speaker from anorganization like Planned Parenthood to specially trained teachers hired by the school.With all of these different approaches to offering formal sex education, it is clear that there is no regulated information that all students are getting. Some students may begetting misinformation or a much smaller amount of education than their peers indifferent schools. Some groups such as the Heritage Foundation (2005) and Focus on theFamily (2005) may advocate that many of these subjects taught in formal sex educationare unnecessary or subjects that should be taught to students by their parents. However,this is most often not the case. In a perfect world, all children would have wonderfulrelations with their parents, and all parents would be open and informed about puberty, bodily changes, reproduction, male and female bodies, body image, eating disorders,sexual assault, gender and sexual identity, and other issues that are crucial to the physicaland mental health of adolescents in our society. Sadly, not all children learn this

 Many of the points she makes about advertising can be also made about how formal sexeducation is taught. She discusses how the way things are phrased can affect women, aswell as the pictures they are shown. One could look at formal sex education and wonder if the pictures that are used in the textbooks might influence the women in the class.Kilbourne has a text dedicated to the theme “the more you subtract, the more you add(1999)” which talks about images of women who are thinner, and who are in closed off  positions. These images make women feel they need to be quieter in order to be anaccepted member of society. The same idea could apply to sex education; females mightfeel that if they are not encouraged to ask questions, the message they receive that to beaccepted, they should not talk about their bodies and sex.A woman’s body image is not the result of just one influence; the media, a child’s peers, parents, and many more items factor into play. However, it is possible that theway sex education is taught could affect how a woman views her body, both at the timeof the formal sex education, and later on in life. If this is a feasible possibility, it is worthlooking into formal sex education for the future generations, and how they are taughtabout their bodies and sexual activity. The studies mentioned earlier have covered somany aspects as to what affects self image and how women view their bodies, but haveleft out how sex education affects women’s views of their own bodies. Therefore, I feelthat this study of the long term effect of formal sex education on how women view their  bodies will help to bridge the gap in the literature, and help to discover more aboutanother influence on women’s self image and identity.

The Theories Behind this Study

15

 

Sex has been around since literally the beginning of life. Philosophers andtheologists have been theorizing about sex and sexuality for just as long. The most wellknow of these is Freud, whose theories of castration anxiety and penis envy influencedthe work of many subsequent scholars. Foucault is also a well known theorist onsexuality. In his book The History of Sexuality (1978), he explains why humans are sointerested in learning about sex and the functions and processes associated with sex.Between each of us and our sex, the West has placed a never ending demand for the truth: it is up to us to extract the truth of sex, since this truth is beyond itsgrasp; it is up to sex to tell us its truth, since sex is what holds it in darkness. Butis sex hidden from us, concealed by a new sense of decency, kept under a bushel by the grim necessities of bourgeois society? On the contrary – it shines forth, itis incandescent. Several centuries ago it was placed at the center of a formidable

 petition to know

. A double petition, in that we are compelled to know how thingsare with it, while it is being suspected of knowing how things are with us(Foucault 1978: 77-78).In this, he states that within each of us is an urge to learn all we can about sex and theforces that drive it, and how it connected to us. Foucault goes on to state that even in amore conservative society, the yearning to strive for the answers is there none the less.That explains why we as a society feel the need to, and consequently need to learnabout sex, and how sex works. But why should this study focus on women? In her essayentitled Thinking like a Woman (1990) Okin references many difference sociologists andtheir different ideas as to how men and women differ in their thinking. One theorist,O’Brien, “finds the roots of men’s and women’s modes of thinking in their biology, butwhat she considers determinative is women’s power to reproduce, and men’s alienationfrom reproduction (1990: 154).” She is saying that one main difference in the thinking patterns of men and women is caused by the function of reproduction in women.Later on in her essay, Okin talks about theories belonging to Miller, saying:16

 

As subordinates in a male-dominated society, they [women] are required todevelop psychological characteristics that please the dominant group and fulfill itsneeds. Such qualities as submissiveness, dependency, the desire to please andconform, lack of initiative, inability to act assertively or think independently, andthe like have been regarded as signs of good adjustment and mental health inwomen, and as the opposite in men. Sociological studies of sex-role stereotypingconfirm these assertions. The catch in all this stereotyping and in the socialization patterns that go along with it is that what has been regarded as a healthy, well-adjusted

adult 

turns out to be a healthy, well-adjusted

man

. The qualities fosteredin women are seen as functional only for subordinate status (1990: 154).Given what she is saying, one makes the assumption that women are taught in our society to be submissive, dependent, and see themselves as subordinate citizens. Is it possible that formal sex education is also giving a negative idea to women? Perhapsformal sex education is teaching women to think submissively, and this could be having anegative impact on their bodies.As mentioned by O’Brien, biological differences, and the function of reproductionhave an effect on how women think. Maybe the way formal sex education presents the biology of male and female bodies and reproduction can affect how women think aboutand view their bodies, not only at the time of the formal sex education, but also later on.Therefore, this study discusses formal sex education. It talks about the experiences of eighteen women that have received formal sex education in middle school, high school or  both. It attempts to figure out if this theory might hold true – and sees if how women aretaught about these very biological differences and reproduction does in fact affect howthey view their bodies