Should oral sex be taught in schools?

Curt Harris and Curt Harris

School children younger than 16 are being encouraged to experiment with oral sex as part of a government-backed drive to cut Britain’s sky-high teenage-pregnancy rate. The plan is pioneered by Exeter University and backed by the Departments of Health and Education. It will train teachers to discuss pre-sex “stopping points.”

The idea is to reduce promiscuity by encouraging pupils to discover “levels of intimacy,” including oral sex, instead of full-sexual intercourse. It is not surprising that family campaigners condemned the idea, arguing that it would only encourage children to experiment with sex. Robert Whelan, director of the Family Education Trust, has said that, “I don’t think that anyone believes that teaching pupils about oral sex will stop them having full sex — it is more likely to make them want to try it and it doesn’t protect them against sexually transmitted diseases.”

Has it really come to this? Has sex-ed become a “How-to” course and no longer a factbased discussion of where babies come from?

I mean, it used to be that the closest thing to a how-to course about sex was when the teacher put a condom on a banana. I didn’t realize the teachers were now eating the banana afterwards. Granted, at this point in time it’s merely a British idea, but how long before it crosses the pond? I will admit, however, I do like the idea of promoting different “levels of intimacy,” but is oral sex really the best level to promote? Promoting oral sex does prevent pregnancy, but does it do anything to prevent STDs? Is promoting oral sex really the best way to prevent kids from having sex?

Personally, I’d like to see other, lower levels of intimacy promoted as a way to enjoy each other in a semi-sexual way, but I don’t think it’d work. Let’s face the facts: children today are already participating in all sorts of sexual activities that you really don’t want to know about, oral sex being one of them. If the goal is to simply prevent teen pregnancies, then this option, as uncomfortable as it may be, works.

It’s simply not possible to convince children that oral sex is the same level of intimacy as sex. A teacher can talk until they’re blue in the face making the argument that there is no difference, but when push comes to shove, whom are kids going to believe? Are children going to believe teachers or the former leader of the free world?

In America, Britain and other countries, school-children are taught about how wonderful democracy is. Then one day they spring this whole sex concept on you. Thanks to Bill Clinton, we’ve tied sex and government together. Now, without realizing it, we have had the government’s and, yes, the entire free world’s concurrence that oral sex is not the same as sex.

By the way, I’m blaming part of the rise in sexual activity on Bill Clinton and his scandals. I don’t think his sex life should have ever been made public, but once it was, regardless of wheter what he did was wrong or right, there was a responsibility there. As president of the United States, you are the ultimate role model. Not only a role model to Americans, but to other people as well.

So now, we’re stuck. It’s not preferred, but now we have to teach children about oral sex, not only in sex-education classes, but also in history classes. So, like it or not, having our teachers stand in front of a classroom promoting oral sex is the most effective, realistic way to prevent teenagers from having sexual intercourse.