Depriving children of access to LGBT-inclusive sex education isn’t protective – it’s destructive

Back in February, the UK government published draft statutory guidance on Relationships education and Relationships and Sex Education (RSE) and health education, which means that from September 2020, all will become compulsory in all UK schools. Although the move is welcomed by many, analysis of the guidance document could be seen as biased towards specific types of relationships, as echoed in numerous attempts to restrict LGBT+-inclusive lessons in schools. 

Several references promote the benefits of marriage, “committed, stable relationships”, “healthy one-to-one intimate relationships”, and a recommendation that marriage and its special legal place is taught from primary age. Which, on the surface, sounds harmless enough. But it’s important to note that the guidance both explicitly and implicitly places marriage above other forms of relationships – which needs challenging.

This is especially true when you look at the ways in which the guidance sets out the rights of parents/carers to withdraw pupils from some or all elements of the sex education component, with Relationships and Health Education still being mandatory. The fact that some pupils are still being pulled out of classes, for example, could severely inhibit the potential for positive changes in societal attitudes towards sexuality and pleasure.

Schools Week recently reported that a number of Jewish schools have already sought legal advice on how to use this loophole prevent the teaching of LGBT+ issues, which is an early indication of widespread pushback. Students and pupils themselves have also been targeted by anti-LGBT+ groups in recent weeks. And, of course, protests against such education in a number of Birmingham schools have gained a huge amount of traction over the past few months. 

Historically, the marriage model centred in western Anglo-based cultures is inherently patriarchal and is given undue precedence. Teaching young people about the full spectrum and range of sexual identities and pleasure-seeking experiences, alongside non-partisan descriptions of diverse family structures will help those who identify with some, or all of the key marginalised intersections of sexuality, i.e. being a person of colour, non-binary and/or homosexual. Affirming that these existences as 100 per cent valid and valued is necessary for a society that claims to accept LGBT+ people, but routinely falls short. As we’ve seen this month, erasure fosters toxicity and violence.

Gayathiri Kamalakanthan, a sex educator at, Sexplain – an independent organisation that provides inclusive and comprehensive sex education workshops for young people – says, “Teaching RSE in the classroom can be challenging, especially when many students will have inherited prejudices that requires focused and committed unlearning. Starting out with something as simple as, ‘When you ask a question, could you please tell me your name and pronouns you use?’, immediately sets the tone in the room as being inclusive and unassuming.”

For all students to feel safe, there needs to be a minimum level of basic respect for all identities discussed, as it’s highly likely that there will be people in the class who either know people close to them who reject cisgender and heterosexual normativity, already identify as queer, and/or will “come out” later on in life.

Sarah*, a secondary school RSE teacher from North London told me: “One issue we face is teachers is being familiar with the language and range of terminology and ensuring this is used accurately. While there have been many positive steps forward there is still a long way to go, and it can be dangerous to assume that young people are now more adept at dealing with these topics.”

Of course, it can be quite tough for educators, as there is a need to remain emotionally balanced while also executing a zero-tolerance policy on hate. Sex education facilitators also have to contend with the fact that transphobic material, which described gender theory as a “delirious ideology” based on “mere whims”, is being distributed to students by institutions such as the Archdiocese of Liverpool. 

Spreading hate under the guise of religious doctrine is nothing new, but meaningful allyship, which involves taking responsibility for challenging harmful dogmas, can propel societal change for good.

*This name has been changed

Join The Independent for a panel discussion and Q&A where we ask: what is the role of Pride in 2019? Book your tickets today