A comprehensive program of sex education is desperately needed across the British schooling system. The current efforts to amend the embarrassing lack of effective classes in our schools are simply not good enough, and we are allowing young people to be educated not by qualified teachers in a safe teaching environment, but on the internet, where young people now have unparalleled access to pornographic material.
Those who argue that sex education erodes childhood innocence are clearly blind to the sad reality; if we allow ourselves to ignore this issue because of our own embarrassment, the generations of the future will instead seek answers elsewhere.
Here, the porn industry has managed for some time to promote its own ideals in the place of serious education. This is, of course, counter-educational, promoting an image of sex and sexuality which is far removed from the reality of the actual world.
No effort to prevent children from accessing pornography has yet been made. Most adult websites simply ask children to say that they are 18 before they enter. The reason for this is clear. Online pornography is a massive multi-billion dollar industry, and free hosting websites which are popular with young people rely on advertisers using their sites to make revenue. Advertisers pay large amounts of money to have adverts placed on popular websites, and will study the number of “hits” a site receives. Adult websites simply do not care where the “hits” come from; as long as the number is high, they make money.
Studies indicate that most of the people who access online pornography are between 12 and 17, and so this demographic provides a great deal of income for adult websites. These sites will not target young people directly, but they make it as easy as possible for them to enter their online world.
The fact that the average age that a child first accesses pornography is 11 may be shocking for those parents who do not feel that sex education is appropriate at such a young age. A recent survey found that 54% of teenage boys find porn “really inspiring”. It is being used as a training manual by a generation which has no real education in the matter, but has the resources to “educate” itself.
Some psychologists believe that porn is as addictive or more addictive than alcohol and drugs. Almost all psychologists agree that having access to porn as a child means that a person will probably develop differently while they grow up.
The future for women’s rights and recognition does not look good; evidence shows that boys who view pornography are more likely to perform violent acts on women, and porn generally treats women as objects, toys and media for satisfaction of male fantasies.
Feminist groups are right to be worried, the new generation of youths with internet experience are being informed with sexist and violent stereotypes before they even lose their virginity. Of all the young people that I know, I think I am the only one who has come to the ethical conclusion that porn is fundamentally damaging, whether we feel we are being damaged or not.
It is time, therefore, to do something about sex education. We already have a limited amount, which seems in my experience to focus mainly on sexual infections and contraception, meaning that it is an easy target for the religious, who claim that sex education is an immoral thing. Relationships are almost completely ignored, leaving the attitudes towards violence and aggression planted by porn to fester.
Even this measly offering is not effective because it is not compulsory. Parents are allowed to remove their children from sex education classes in the name of protecting their innocence, seemingly unaware that the chances are that the children they are taking out of sex education are probably the victims of sex misinformation on the internet.
So, the government must make a move to deal with this issue before it is too late.
The answer is not conservative; we cannot be regressive, shying away from reality and hiding behind the barrier of prudence. We must be progressive, taking an approach that is liberal.
We must recognise the need for a full and comprehensive curriculum which engages and informs young people. A curriculum which, like the Dutch system, covers a much broader swathe of the subject. It must also be compulsory. If PE, English and Maths are compulsory, then sex education, which is probably more important for the psychological development of a child, must be protected.
It is the desire of most teenagers that sex education be improved. It should be the desire of all those who believe in women’s rights, and all those who believe that rape, teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted illnesses must be dealt with. It should be the desire of progressives across the country. It should be the desire of Liberal Democrats.
* The author is a 16 year-old member of the Lib Dems, who has asked that Lib Dem Voice publish this article anonymously.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The Joy of Six 1528
Endometriosis and acetylation
Reform makes first gain from Conservatives in this by-election cycle
How Chancellor Reeves torpedoed the economy
Michael Meadowcroft: A Liberal of Intellectual Rigour and Uncommon Integrity
Geoff Reid
Tom Bailey
Leonora Scipio
Kira Collins
Daniel Walker
19 Comments
That doesn’t follow. Just because teenagers look at porn doesn’t mean they’re paying for it. (Really, it’s not hard to get without paying, and since you need a credit card it’s much easier for teenagers to not pay)
Not really. It shows that almost everybody looks at it, and the few who don’t are the obsessive religious or guilt-ridden types who are extremely unlikely to engage in direct violence.
That’s more an observation about the sort of thing you’ve been looking at. There’s all kinds of stuff out there. Granted the type you’re referring to has the support of the free Hollywood advertising, but that’s not the same thing.
“Of all the young people that I know, I think I am the only one who has come to the ethical conclusion that porn is fundamentally damaging, whether we feel we are being damaged or not.”
I just want to say that I’m with you on that. I too often feel I’m nearly the only young person I know (I’m 19) of a similar inclination.
Also brilliant and passionate blog 🙂 – Thumbs up from me 🙂
Protip: using the word ‘porn’ several times in one post trips a spam filter. Very inconvenient here.
Ben- Thanks very much, and glad to know that I’m not alone.
Andrew- Sorry about the spam filter.
Sorry, I cocked up the quote thingy. Each giant ” is in response to each of your three points. Thanks!
The first half of this post is nonsense, which is a shame because the second half is quite sensible. I would suggest that a 16-year old is probably not in a position to lecture adults about their sexuality and the kind of sex, unless they have lived a very unusual life indeed.
^^ “the kind of sex they like”
have no money or marketing and are basically irrelevant. Strictly basement operations. They’re parasites on the internet, nothing more.
Citation needed. (The actual status of research into this subject is that nobody really knows; weak correlations in both directions have been found, and the researchers concluded that there was no evidence of causation in the general population)
I’ll give you a hint: slightly more than half the population is female.
When aimed at men, sure. That is precisely what it is supposed to be. I realise this may be a shock to you, but “male fantasy” does not generally mean “treat women as objects, toys and media”. Not many people are actually into that.
Thanks for the article. You make a number of good points.
I think a lot of parents are blissfully unaware that, even if they police the internet in their own home, the parents of some of their child’s friends do not.
“We already have a limited amount, which seems in my experience to focus mainly on … infections and contraception, meaning that it is an easy target for the religious, who claim that (this kind of education) is an immoral thing. Relationships are almost completely ignored, leaving the attitudes towards violence and aggression planted by (this kind of thing) to fester.”
I agree that teaching the mechanics of sex is the easy bit, but that relationships is the important bit. Ironically, I think conservatives would also agree with you. I’ve also heard experts in the area say the same thing.
Teaching about sex with an emphasis on relationships is very difficult. But teaching it without an emphasis on relationships is, in itself, making a pretty loaded statement, and one which I disagree with.
I’m uneasy about making lessons compulsory. I think it’s a good principle to avoid compulsion wherever possible.
Do you think the children who are being withdrawn from this kind of education are getting less advice from parents about the relationship side of sex, or have particularly bad role models?
@MBoy “I would suggest that a 16-year old is probably not in a position to lecture adults about their sexuality …, unless they have lived a very unusual life indeed”
Sorry, MBoy, but I completely disagree with you here. (S)he is talking about lessons which most adults never get to see, and (s)he is present when teenagers are privately chatting with their peers, which again, we never see. I think there might be useful insights here which the rest of us don’t have.
PS An interesting education about spam filters, trying to respond to this subject. Quite funny really. But I’m not criticising LDV, we need those filters or the site would be overrun.
Thank you for posting this – you’re spot on! Two additions from me:
Firstly, I think it’s vital that we go beyond mere “sex education” – it needs to be very much “sex and relationships education”.
Secondly, this is one of the scary side effects of Michael Gove’s academies and free schools policy: by taking schools outside of LEA and government control, we lose control over the curriculum. It makes it a lot easier for groups who, for whatever reason, don’t want children to have access to sex and relationships education to just set up their own school and circumvent standards and requirements in this area.
Again, thank you for writing this.
The author betrays his/her social athoritarianism when he/she insists that ordianry people cannot be trusted to view pornography, though (presumably) the censors can (Mrs Whitehouse claimed that it was safe for her to look at it because she had special dispensation from God).
Who are these “psychologists” who believe that pornography is more addicitve than alcohol and drugs? Who are they, who hires them, where do they get their bread?
Sadly, the two groups who get most worked up about pornography, and especially (horror of horrors) young people having sight of it – that is to say, religious conservatives and feminists – rarely deign to support their claims with evidence and reasoned argument. They shriek and they harangue, and they abuse and insult anyone who has the temerity to disagree with them. Hardly the way to conduct a rational debate.
Let’s get real, shall we? The internet has obliterated any residual notion that pornography can be suppressed. Would it not be better to focus our energies on dealing with criminal pronography rather than the kind that involves consenting adults?
Some of these comments seem OTT. The OP is advocating compulsory sex education, not banning pornography. Also, I detect no shrieking or haranguing.
This issue is a moral one, not something that should be used as a political football by any political persuasion.
‘
That one sentence should tell you why you dont have the right to decide for other people. We live in a free society where one group does not get to dictate to all the others.
I hate to bring age into it as I really respect the fact that a sixteen year old is getting involved, but the truth is it is not your decision. It is up to your parents to decide how you get taught. When you have children of your own you get to decide how they are brought up and get to try to instill your moral values in them. However, for other peoples children it is up to their parents, not you.
The true solution to sex education should be local and optional. All forms of education should be available to all children and parents asked which forms they want taught to their children. If it was me deciding for my children I would probably choose to let them receive full education, but I respect the rights of a religious family to educate their children differently if they choose to do so.
Lots of comments, so I’ll respond to a few comments which I think are significant.
First, my age. OK, so I’m not as qualified as most of the people who have read this article to talk about sex and sexuality. I am, as one person has said, more qualified that most people who have read this article to talk about the response of teenagers to adult sites and the lack of sex education in schools. As a liberal, I recognise that I have a lot to learn from your generally interesting and insightful comments. The same could be said in the opposite direction.
Secondly- I don’t support censorship, not at all. I support education. Porn will always be with us, and it always has been with us; but it’s a form of media, not a teaching manual. My argument is not that we should get rid of it. It’s that we should allow those who want to watch it to watch it, but everybody should have an education in the subject so that they’re not getting a completely one-sided perspective. And does anybody in their right mind really believe that it’s fine for an 11 year old to watch an adult video on the internet?
Thirdly- I agree that including relationship education is essential. It’s one of the many things that using adult websites as an instruction manual won’t tell you.
Finally a reply to Andrew Suffield, when you say that free adult sites have “no money or marketing and are basically irrelevant”. In actual fact, the larger sites, and the ones which I know most teenagers use, are funded in much the same way as newspaper websites are funded; through what is, I think, generally called “the advertising model”.
I’d just like to say that I’m 18, an avid Liberal and I have no real political/ethical objection to internet porn. I agree that sex education should be better in schools and that most of the education you learn is from older friends and the internet.
I don’t think studies really support your conclusions that watching p-orn makes you more likely to be violent to women and even if it did increase that likelihood the answer is not to ban watching porn, just because something causes some people to act irresponsibly does not mean that every responsible person should be banned from doing it (examples: driving, alcohol etc).
I actually think p-orn is always going to be part , and a useful part, of sex education for teenagers now. It should be coupled with school education and in a good family hopefully parental guidance. Porn however, gives individuals a private way of learning things they want to learn and exploring their sexuality without necessarily having to go out and act, think of it as a training ground almost.
There is plenty of room to argue about how much or how little harm pornography does, but I do not think many people would sugest that pornography is the ideal way for children to learn about sex and relationships. The only real difference is between those who want to proetect childre from sex, by use of internet filters and other measures to block their access to porn and those who believe that education is a better bet. From a purely pragmatic point of view I do not believe that it is possible to completely shield children from pornography which means the choice is who teaches our children about sex and relationships, parents, teachers or porographers. In an ideal world parents may be the ideal choice but in reality I think most parents would prefer teachers to do the job for them.
Andrew- Agreed 100%. That’s basically all I’m saying. I’m not advocating censorship, just education.
In any case, it’d completely ludicrous to think that porn is only an issue now the internet has come along. It might seem strange to people who dont know the world without the internet, but teenagers in the 80’s and before still had access to magazines, which were always to be found in cupboards, and strangely multiplying under hedges in urban areas.
As the pc brigade are forcing younger and younger children to have sex education the more we are hearing of six year old raping 4 year olds. It’s disgusting!! They should not be subjected to something they cannot understand, and by that I mean they are too young to understand even if you try to educate them.