Guest blog post from Reni Eddo-Lodge

This guest blog is written by Reni Eddo-Lodge who is writes about all sorts of social justice issues at renieddolodge.co.uk

Young people have always been, and will continue to be interested in sex. The critical question shouldn’t necessarily be about whether they can access sex videos online, but rather about where they get their information from. If it’s not available at school or if parents are too squeamish, it’s unsurprising that young people might turn to porn to find out what goes where. David Cameron’s solution to this is an opt-in porn filter enforced by all internet service providers. He says this will protect childhood innocence, but it strikes me that this take is much like trimming at the leaves of a tree in order to stop it growing rather than ripping it out at the root.

Very recently, Cameron delivered a speech about the dangers of porn. He described it as a cultural problem, saying: ‘Many children are viewing online pornography and other damaging material at a very early age and…the nature of that pornography is so extreme it is distorting their view of sex and relationships.’ In his speech, the concept of education was mentioned a handful of times, all in the context of online safety rather than consent. 

Though I am nowhere near being Prime Minister any time soon, I’d like to suggest a more holistic approach.  In an ideal world, age appropriate sex and relationships education and hardcore pornography could peacefully coexist .We’d have a curriculum that equips young people with the critical tools to interpret, challenge, and (if they so wish) avoid porn. The impending porn block might crack down on the perceived problem of the ‘sexualisation’ of children, but David Cameron doesn’t even attempt to broach the real problem.

Frankly, it is blatant hypocrisy that Cameron would move to crack down on access to pornography whilst abandoning compulsory sex education. It’s a move that placates the concerns of parents, whilst leaving young people high and dry. When it comes to porn, education and sex, the concerns of the different generations are not the same. In 2011 we saw the Bailey report - a review into the commercialisation and sexualisation of children. The Bailey report gave voice to a lot of worried parents. In its qualitative research, it quoted parents who said things like: “The music videos that children can watch are extremely explicit – from the clothes they wear to the words and actions. Some songs my 13 year old sings back are shocking”. 
Yet just a few years earlier, UK Youth Parliament released a report called 'Are you Getting it?' After surveying over 20,000 young people, they found that 40% said the sex education they received in school was poor or very poor, with 33% saying it was average. They also found that 57% of girls aged 15 to 17 had not been taught how to use a condom. Condoms rarely appear in porn, so it’s clear there is a problem here. Schools aren’t teaching it and porn isn’t representing reality. So how are young people supposed to know? 

The current substandard, non-compulsory state of sex and relationships education in the UK is tantamount to state negligence. This is against a national backdrop in which consent is not on the curriculum and too many people learn about it through trial and error. I wish I could say that this is an exaggeration, but  the reality is that one in five women in England and Wales have reported a sexual offence since the age of 16 - and that’s nothing on the hundreds and thousands of incidents that go unreported to victim blaming and shame.
It doesn’t look like it’s going to get better any time soon.  Personal, Social, Health and Economic education (PSHE), the traditional home of sex ed, was left languishing at non-statutory status on the national curriculum in the latest government review.

We still live in a world where young people are none the wiser until they actively seek out information.  A strong, preventative, educational line on consent could alleviate some of the fears around hardcore porn that already exists and could draw clear lines around fantasy and reality.  If Cameron is serious about protecting young people both on and offline then he has to realise that consent is the key. We’re not just at risk from paedophiles - we also pose risks to each other.

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-internet-and-pornography-prime-minister-calls-for-action
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jan/10/sex-crimes-analysis-england-wales
http://www.ukyouthparliament.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/AreYouGettingIt.pdf
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/175418/Bailey_Review.pdf
http://www.pshe-association.org.uk/resources_search_details.aspx?ResourceId=495

Pornography, young people, safeguarding and education

Over the weekend there has been significant press reporting about child sexual abuse images and online pornography. Yesterday David Cameron announced there will be new legislation making 'rape pornography' illegal. Beyond the accusations of censorship and an industry reluctant to engage, the realities are more subtle, the challenges more complex and the need for good education more acute.

You can read the full speech online here: http://www.conservatives.com/News/Speeches/2013/07/The_Prime_Ministers_speech_on_protecting_our_children_online.aspx.

All of us, as sensible citizens would agree that child sexual images on the Internet are abuse. All efforts to tackle this form of abuse, like all other forms of abuse must be addressed. It is my experience that politicians, young people, parents, police, children's services and industry agree on this. 

The more difficult challenge is understanding how best to protect children and young people from the pernicious effects of online pornography that they don't want to access, whilst recognising that technological solutions – filters – trying to do this may also prevent young people accessing vital information online that is both educational and/or advice and support for those experiencing difficulty.

Brook, and other youth agencies have already experienced being 'blocked' in the past because our content has been deemed unacceptable.  As a result our site has been placed on a 'black list' by a machine sometimes taking a long time to unblock, and young people not receiving vital information whilst this takes weeks to resolve. Solutions must be proportionate. Efforts to protect young people from harm must not create more harm than good through unintended impact.

Mr Cameron’s speech did make reference to some of the points I highlight in this blog post, and I am emphasising where extra special care has to be taken.

Some of those unintended impacts are a narrative that all pornography is bad, and all viewing of pornography leads to harm. The evidence is less clear than this. Our experience at Brook is that pornography is undoubtedly part of an increasing source of education for young people. That is worrying in the absence of trusted, reliable sources of education – parents, schools, youth and community organisations. See this article from WAtoday (Western Australia's news website) which highlights research on the impact of the lack of sex and relationships education and driving young people to look online and at pornography for information about what sex is like: http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/porn-becoming-substitute-for-sex-education-20130719-2q9e7.html. And we also know from our experience at Brook that most young people can distinguish between the fantasy as provided by pornography and the reality of real life relationships. It is our job to make sure they do.

The second unintended impact is a narrative that depicts technology as bad and largely ignores the positive benefits, including the fact that young people access tremendous amounts of information, advice and support via the Internet that can often quite literally be a life saver. 
 
Technology is of course expected to provide the solution and the answer. Yet we know that it can't and it won't alone. And that is why I worry that in all this tough on industry rhetoric there isn't a stronger accompanying message which emphasises the important role of education. The important role of parents, of schools and of communities in teaching about online safety, and about using the Internet well to benefit from all the brilliant help and advice it can offer.
 
Much more emphasis could be placed on school based sex and relationships education as part of the solution - a universal entitlement that forms part of our duty to safeguard, protect and empower young people. So my advice to Mr Cameron is be tough on industry yes, and please work with them to use their capabilities and resources well. I would also advise him to demonstrate he will do all he can by being tough on his Ministry for Education as they conclude their National Curriculum consultation which closes on 8 August. The PSHE Association has written to Ministers with recommendations about how to reflect a strong commitment to PSHE as evidenced in documents from Home Office, DH and indeed DfE.
 
A simple statement in the National Curriculum from government about the vital role of PSHE in protecting children and young people such as the one below could be a game changer and demonstrate he means business – 'It is expected that all schools will deliver Personal,  Social, Health, and Economic education to meet the statutory requirements to support children and young people's spiritual, moral, social and cultural development and to prepare children and young people to live, grow and learn in an ever changing, fast paced and technologically driven global economy.'
 
I know any action to improve school based sex and relationships education coupled with technological solutions and support for parents will be supported by the absolute majority including organisations such as MumsNet, the Office of the Children's Commissioner, the PSHE Association, the End Violence Against Women Coalition and the Sex Education Forum.
 
Finally, my advice would be make sure the organisations who work with children AND young people are involved – and be clear with different age groups come different realities – and most importantly ensure young people's views constantly drive government thinking and policy proposals. We know at Brook they have a lot of ideas and thoughts about online pornography – some similar and some more nuanced because they are living their lives now. The quote below from a young person involved with Brook shows just how much they have to offer:
 
“…I think instead of stopping young people watching porn, it is an inevtiabilty which will occur. I think the focus of the debate should be around teachig young people, the differences between porn and reality, so that this doesn't give off unrealistic images to younger people about how they should look or act sexually, there should be emphasis on teaching the rights and wrongs of vewing different types of porn.”

Let’s banish Section 28 forever

A week or so ago I tweeted about the dreadful Section 28. I fully understand why Section 28 is being talked about so much in the wake of Lady Thatcher's death and like most sensible people I want it to RIP. This year, even before Thatcher’s' death, the Equal Marriage legislation had brought Section 28 back into the public conscience – with some absurd parliamentarians remarkably wanting a new version for the 21st Century. Unthinkable and despicable.

Section 28 was homophobic, evil, pernicious and unworkable poor legislation – it was unworkable because it never applied to schools who were and continue to be responsible for sex education. But it had an enormous impact nonetheless. And those who introduced, supported and tried to uphold it should be ashamed. I was 13 in 1987, and I was growing up gay in North Cornwall. Like many others in my school I could have done with someone saying 'being gay is alright, you're not the only one, you are safe here and you can lead a happy, fulfilling life.'

The silence in the classroom and the relentless taunting and bullying of those perceived to be gay in the playground (including one or two teachers perceived to be gay) taught me quite the opposite. That said, I don't think Section 28 made any substantive difference to our sex education. It consisted of a video about 'intercourse' that is probably the source of some of my squeamishness now. I can only remember one sentence of any use – 'don't worry boys you can't come when you are going and you can't go when you are coming.' Not one of us – gay, straight or otherwise – could have left our sex ed armed with the useful information required ready to enjoy the trials and tribulations of our young desires reassured and happy.

But that appalling, but at least equitable, standard of sex education doesn't make me any less angry that politicians, the media and many people in society thought Section 28 was acceptable – not least in the face of AIDS which was just taking its ugly, devastating foothold within the gay community. (It would be too easy here to overlook the single good thing that did come out of Section 28 – Stonewall who have succeeded in positively influencing so much legislation, policy and practise in all areas of gay life – I am grateful to the brave individuals who set up the group, and the continuing work they do now in the UK and overseas).

Over the last fifteen years or so the UK has made terrific progress in tackling homophobia in schools and wider society. First we recognised the problem existed and started to face up to it. Then we equalised the age of consent and repealed Section 28. At the same time government took decisive action to address bullying of all sorts which eventually came to explicitly include homophobic bullying.

But sex and relationships education remains patchy, and sexuality is still too often invisible within schools. For some, Section 28 still creates confusion and concern. In the worst of cases Section 28 still legitimises homophobia and allows school leaders and teachers to be silent about sexuality and perpetuate their own unwelcome prejudice. In reality the number of teachers and school leaders who genuinely think Section 28 applies to schools is reducing rapidly. It was repealed a long time ago and many newer teachers haven't even heard of it.

But some still have and that’s the tricky problem. Like all myths and misinformation you do sometimes have to talk about them openly to correct them: and then by talking about them you help keep the myth and its possible impact alive. As an aside it is interesting that I cannot remember in recent times hearing anyone say the age of consent used to be unequal. Rarely do I see much information about the age of consent as it was prior to 2000 (when it was finally equalised at 16 in Great Britain).

Up until a few years ago I trained teachers regularly. When talking about sex education and the law I used to include reference to Section 28 to be clear it was ok to talk about homosexuality. Ironically many newer teachers would hear about Section 28 for the first time on that course and it would create fear. Despite all my words of reassurance that it didn't and had never applied to schools, and that it was no longer statute anyway I know from feedback that it frightened some.

So I decided to stop talking about Section 28 unless specifically asked what it was and I stopped referring to it in any guidance I was writing. Instead I made sure I only included the positive and helpful statements that affirmed the importance of teaching about sexuality – such as the very helpful and positive equal opportunities statement at the beginning of the national curriculum, and the sections of the SRE guidance which are clear prejudice is unacceptable and gay children must be supported. That seemed to work and instil confidence rather than fear.

So Section 28 is officially dead and has been for over ten years. Sadly we know from our work at Brook, and that of Diversity Role Models, Stonewall and others that homophobic bullying is alive, well, and in some cases thriving in our schools. There was however some good news last year in Stonewall's school report showing that some progress is being made in tackling homophobia in schools. There is of course so much more to do to support teachers, change cultures and ensure all children and young people regardless of gender and sexuality are safe and nurtured in all schools, including those 'with religious character.'

Only last week Brook and FPA had feedback from qualitative research commissioned in Further Education settings where young LGBT people said that their sex and relationships education can seem irrelevant and only targeted at heterosexual young people – their message was clear – unless we are actively and explicitly inclusive of different sexualities and identities they will often feel excluded and disengaged. Evidence has shown the same is true of resources and services – unless they say they are for people with all different identities there is an implicit assumption that the service, leaflet or website is not for diverse groups of young people. Almost 20 years ago in Sheffield they produced wallet sized cards advertising services that said Young Gay People welcome, and they found an increase in the numbers of young people identifying as gay attended the services.

So my conclusion is it's time to stop talking about Section 28 as much as possible so its legacy does not destroy the confidence of another generation of teachers to talk about different sexualities in the classroom with confidence, and hijack another generation of children and young people's education and ultimately their safety and happiness.

Successive governments have shamefully ignored expert advice, the consensus and evidence about PSHE and wasted the opportunity to ensure PSHE makes a positive contribution to reducing homophobia and celebrating equality and diversity. And after the publication of the PSHE review we now know there isn't going to be new sex and relationships education guidance from government so it's down to schools, charities, experts, unions and determined individuals. Despite all the challenges there is much wider support for the work to promote positive sexual identities and reduce homophobia – there is a consensus that we need to make schools safe for all children even if there isn't always the skill, expertise and priority afforded to the issue.

Stonewall have some excellent resources for use in the classroom and support for schools which you can find out more about at www.stonewall.org.uk.

Diversity Role Models takes LGBT role models into school and provides workshops. For more information visit www.diversityrolemodels.org.
Finally last year a group of young volunteers at Brook developed a leaflet called Learn your LGBT ABC because they wanted a resource that could help young people understand that sexuality is diverse, life affirming and individual, not a label, a problem or a veritable political football. It’s a useful positive and affirming resource to trigger discussions. You can find out more about how to order the leaflet at www.brook.org.uk.

I have also just finished reading Maggie and Me by Damian Barr. I recommend it to you.

Follow on Twitter: @simonablake @BrookCharity @BeSexPositive

Responding to the Publication of the Government's PSHE Education Review

Personal, Social Health and Economic (PSHE) education is vital for children and young people. It is as important as reading, writing and arithmetic (and IT) yet it continues to be the 'Cinderella subject' of the school curriculum; neglected and ignored. Last month, the Government announced it would not be making PSHE education statutory in primary or secondary schools. Brook, like many organisations, believes this undermines children's rights, their health and their safety.

Young people are talented, resourceful, resilient and creative and even though many of them navigate life's path with few serious problems, everyone; parents, politicians, professionals and young people themselves, worry about them. We see the headlines: teenage pregnancy, smoking, obesity, substance misuse, sexual exploitation, female genital mutilation, HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, domestic violence and violence against girls and women, bullying including homophobic and sexual bullying and gangs. These are real and valid health and social concerns that require public and political attention, particularly in the context of the unprecedented economic and social change we are facing.

When they get excellent PSHE education, children and young people can learn about many of the issues that might affect their health and happiness. Things like relationships, sex, alcohol and other drugs, eating and fitness. Good PSHE education helps to develop vital personal and social skills, positive values, an understanding of equality and diversity and the importance of individual rights and responsibilities. PSHE education is not a magic bullet but where it is done well in primary and secondary schools it is proven to make a difference to young lives.

Last month, the Government had the chance to make sure all young people got good quality PSHE education with the publication of their long overdue PSHE education review. They could have made a simple, cost effective, workable change. Instead the Department for Education (DfE) chose the status quo.

The decision not to make PSHE education statutory flies in the face of children's rights as set out in the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child, ratified in the UK in 1989 and works against other government departments' aspirations to improve PSHE education. The Department of Health (DH) thinks children and young people should have good Sex and Relationships Education (SRE), so does the Home office. DfE itself has stressed the importance of PSHE education and said it wanted young people to have good SRE (though obviously not enough to make sure that actually happens).

And it gets worse. Not only has the Government ruled out statutory PSHE education, its consultation on the national curriculum proposes watering down the minimal (but important) content in the science curriculum that contributes to good PSHE education. The review proposes;

• At key stage one, the names of genitals are not included in the requirements to teach 'basic parts of the body'. This matters because children need a language to describe their bodies if they need to ask for help.
• An unnecessary note tells teachers that pupils in key stage 2 'should not be expected to understand how human reproduction occurs' and there is no mention of puberty for children who need support and preparation for a huge change in their lives.
• The specific reference to 'sexual health' has been removed from the proposed new Key Stage 3 science curriculum and there is advice in the new Key Stage 3 content that learning about the structure and function of the male and female reproductive system should not include hormones.

The new proposals make a fudge of teaching children essential aspects of the science of their bodies, simply because some people feel a bit icky about sex and relationships.

We know that some schools take their responsibilities to young people seriously. Some schools deliver all of PSHE education well and some schools deliver parts of it well. But it's not required in law that every school teaches a minimum content or to a required standard. Teachers cannot train to be PSHE education specialists in their initial teacher training. As a result some children get very good PSHE education, and others get the absolute bare minimum required by law - the science of reproduction and infections (now under threat).

It is clear then why so many parents, professionals and organisations, including teaching unions, are deeply concerned that the Government has opted for more of the same rather than facilitate systemic changes in teacher training, curriculum planning and delivery.

Introducing PSHE education as a statutory subject in schools would be relatively low cost and high impact. It would reach the majority of children and young people with the core information and skills to help them manage their lives now and in the future. It would provide teachers with the essential training and skills they need to teach the subject well and it would make a proper difference to many of the problems that young people face today.

To refuse to take this opportunity and to propose the watering down of the science curriculum at a time when other sources of information and advice in the youth and community are being cut is short sighted and ill considered.

This decision fails children and young people. It ignores the consensus in this country in support of PSHE education and it ignores the evidence. It also overlooks the fact that the status quo does not work. Now it's time to work with schools and their community partners to support them to do the right and moral thing by children and ensure that PSHE education gets the time, attention and position it requires in school life.

Sex Appeal: More sex please, we're British!

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Radio 4 Woman's Hour yesterday

I was interviewed yesterday morning on BBC Radio 4 Woman’s Hour about abstinence/sex and relationships education and the ten minute rule motion by Nadine Dorries MP last week.

I highlighted how important it was that we listen to what young people tell us. For well over a decade young people (both boys and girls) have been saying that they want to learn more about emotions, and more about relationships and real life situations.

The evidence about what works supports their view, it’s time to stop the circular debate and for government to provide a clear mandate and ensure the mechanisms are in place so that teachers can get on with the delivery of high quality sex and relationships education.

Any debate that polarises views about SRE is unhelpful when there is a broad consensus amongst children, parents and professionals about what needs to be delivered. It’s time to recognise that abstinence education has been so discredited by the evidence that it’s hardly worthy of debate.

The link to listen to the interview again is: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b010xw4x and the piece starts about 12 and a half minutes in.

Scout Association - new sex and relationships programme and resource

Today the Scout Association launched a national relationships and sexual health programme, My body, my choice, and published a resource for Scout Leaders plus a handout for young people.

Local leaders will run the programme aimed at Explorer Scouts (aged between 14-18). Brook really welcomes the initiative and the introduction of this type of no nonsense material, and commend the Chief Scout Bear Grylls for being so supportive of this important area.

The resource provides guidance for leaders on how to approach sex and relationships issues, as well as activities and games to help young people to think about various issues.

The material is clear and simple and is exactly the type of information young people tell us they need to help them understand how their bodies work and to help them make informed decisions about these matters.

You can find out more about the resource here.

-------------------------------------------------- Help us create a sex:positive society - pledge your support (free, quick and very easy) at http://www.sexpositive.org.uk/. Follow us on twitter @simonablake @brookcharity @BeSexPositive. Facebook - BrookCharity

Vote now - all schools required to teach sex and relationships education?

Speaking to BBC Radio 1’s Newsbeat today I called for all UK governments to ensure that all children receive sex and relationships education in both primary and secondary schools. Like many other organisations, including FPA (http://www.fpa.org.uk/), we believe that all schools from primary age upwards should be required to teach about relationships, puberty, sex and sexuality.

If we get high quality sex and relationships education in every primary and secondary school across the UK all the evidence shows teenage pregnancy rates will continue to fall and will improve young people’s sexual health. If sex and relationships education continues to be patchy, another generation of children and young people do not get the education they need. Brook wants every primary and secondary school to be legally required to provide sex and relationships education and secondary schools to ensure young people have access to free confidential contraceptive and sexual health services.

Do you agree that Government must ensure that all children and young people get education about puberty, relationships and sex at primary and secondary school? To register your vote please see http://www.brook.org.uk/.

Wet dreams, pornography, pleasure and shame

Earlier this week I attended a debate about pornography run by fpa (www.fpa.org.uk) in conjunction with the Women's Library. There were different views on whether pornography is good or bad (and whether some is good and some is bad - soft = good/hard = bad; heterosexual = bad because of gender inequality, gay and lesbian porn = not so bad because it might be educational). These arguments are perennial and the opinions endless. There was also lots of discussion about sex education, and the importance of improving sex education so young people do not have to rely on pornography to find out about sex. Of course it is important to improve sex education, to be more explicit about sex with young people so they understand how it works. Little room for argument there.

But that is only half of the story because beyond educational purposes many people watch pornography because they get pleasure from it and yet it can also make people embarrassed and ashamed.

When I worked with young men on a fpa project over a decade ago, one young man said, 'pornography is good for a wank, but I hide it.' Another said 'my mum had been washing my sheets when I had wet dreams and not saying anything, then she found my mags and left me a note saying I was dirty - how confusing is that?'

In an age of ever increasing access to pornography and a growing number of the You Tubers making their own porn, how do we as practitioners bring together the different perspectives of pleasure, pain, inequality and education in a way that makes sense for young people and help them think about pornography in interesting ways, and reflect on the distance between the sexual prowess, stamina and low level communication in porn, and the realities of everyday relationships and everyday lives.

The Kiterunner

I went to see the film Kiterunner last night. It raises all sorts of issues relevant to personal, emotional and moral development. If I was still working with young people on a day to day basis I would be getting it on DVD as soon as possible, using it as a stimulus for discussing (boys) friendships, trust, loyalty, power, rape and consent.

Helping turn the tide on STI rise amongst young people

Today the Health Protection Agency confirmed again that rates of sexually transmitted infection are still rising amongst young people. In all my conversations today i have reminded people that if we encourage more people to test, we will find out about more infections that were previously undiagnosed. Doubtless for a small minority this will be confirmation of the sexual immorality amongst the young. I do not agree - I think it is confirmation that we are not doing enough to support young people to make good decisions and choices that enable them to protect their physical and emotional health. As a country we have a collective responsibility to;

Work to change our unhelpful culture where sex is viewed negatively and sexually active young people are seen as out of control. We need to help young people feel confident about relationships and sex, and equip them with the skills to make good decisions so they can enjoy and take responsibility for their sexual health

Ensure sexual health services do not see continued disinvestment in ongoing efforts to balance the books. If this continues, we will see the consequences in increased teenage pregnancy and STI rates in a very short time

Commit to make Personal, Social and Health Education statutory in schools so every child learns about sex, relationships and sexuality wherever they live.
Currently too many receive little if any good sex education.

Invest in innovative community outreach programmes that reach out to the most vulnerable, building bridges between them and services and helping them take control of their sexual lives.

Human Papilloma Virus - the case for a vaccination programme

Yesterday the Health Protection Agency announced new findings that at least 10% of young women have the human papillomavirus by the age of 16. HPV leads to increased risk of cervical cancer in women. We now have a vaccination for HPV which saves lives.

We urge government must urgently implement a vaccination programme for girls and boys before they become sexually active and ensure suffficient resource is available to do so. A key human resource is of course the school nurse, part of our workforce so badly affected by the NHS deficit and a service seriously underfunded.

Most times I speak to school nurses, they are compassionate, passionate about public health and desperate to do more, to have more opportunities to build genuine relationships with children and young people, rather than a snatched moment here and there as they rush from duty to duty, school to school. Dialogue about implementing a HPV vaccination programme will necessarily involve dialogue about how to ensure there are enough school nurses, with enough resource to do the job. And I sincerely hope the opportunity will be taken to ensure serious conversation about the wider role of the school nurse in promoting children and young people's public health as well.

Finally, a vaccination programme is not a universal panacea, it is only part of the solution. It must be backed up with proper education about sex and relationships, opportunties for children and young people to develop skills, hopes and aspirations and a change in culture so young people expect much from the relationships and sex they choose to have.