For quite some time now, literature has been on the side of comprehensive sex education, with many studies pointing to the fact that abstinence-only education is less effective at preventing pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) than comprehensive sex education. Unfortunately, the problems with this approach to sex education go beyond unwanted pregnancy and increased STI transmission rates. Often, abstinence-only education is also plagued with hegemonic power structures, favoring the white, cisgender, heterosexual perspectives. Recent academic literature points towards abstinence-only education being especially harmful to minority groups like people of color and those in the LGBTQ+ community. 

A recent thematic study found that students of color often felt that implicit messages within abstinence-only curricula--or within teachers' own biases--oversexualized them to a destructive degree and created an atmosphere of shame and fear around sex. These students are typically excluded from the protection offered to white youth, such as the idea that white youth are simply exploring their natural curiosity or making youthful mistakes. 

Meanwhile, students in the LGBT+ community reported feeling otherized and left more emotionally vulnerable about their sexuality due to the fact that abstinence-only education tends to demonize and exclude these students. This exclusion and stigmatization contribute to a homophobic, unsafe school and community environment and deny LGBTQ students the opportunity to find information on healthy sexual practices and relationships. 

Moreover, lessons on proper attire and behavior, messages of prescribed male aggressiveness versus female submissiveness, and discourses painting women as in need of protection contribute to the objectification and disempowerment of women. 

This means that not only does improper sexual education result in worse health outcomes, but it contributes to systemic injustice and stigmatization of minority students. Because of this, more recent academia has shifted to an intersectional feminist approach to critiquing current sexual education policies as it opens a more nuanced dialogue of the structural barriers marginalized students face when they cannot access comprehensive sed ed. 

Aside from the views of academia, the public sphere has always had a role in the polarization and politicization of the issue of sexual education. Looking at this phenomenon from a Texan perspective, activist organizations have been some of the loudest voices on all sides of the argument. For instance, the Teach the Truth campaign by the Texas Freedom Network has been a longstanding advocate for comprehensive sex education in Texas, hosting events and mobilizing voters against bills aimed at censorship in the classroom. However, Parental Rights grassroots organizations (discussed more below) mobilize conservative voters in favor of abstinence-only or non-inclusive education.  

Teachers are essentially caught in the middle of this issue. Oftentimes, compliance with state laws means teachers who want to give their students comprehensive and intersectional sexual education are not able to obtain or use the curriculum and resources needed. We hope to learn more about the teachers' perspectives as we continue through the semester.

Additionally, we plan to explore this issue from the perspective of a healthcare professional. Healthcare professionals are important stakeholders in this debate as sex education influences health outcomes for patients later on. Perhaps due to this, many activist organizations consist of healthcare workers.