Tory dinosaurs attack the science in sex education

Not satisfied with tripling university fees, cutting EMA and budget cuts to schools, college and universities, the Tories are coming for our right to free, quality sex education, writes Rachel Brooks

Nadine Dorries, Tory MP, has presented an ‘abstinence’ bill to reform sex-education. The main thrust of the proposal is to bin science and replace it by promoting a policy of abstinence. In other words, instead of teaching sexual awareness and responsibility, young women will  be taught that ‘its cool to say no to sex’.

The Bill, should it become law, would introduce abstinence into the British sex education system. The real purpose of it is making sure that young women know how to say no. Just women. Not men. In other words, resurrecting 15th century morals and attitudes which places the ‘blame’ for pregnancy solely with the woman.

Nadine Dorries thinks that women are over-sexualised in society (still not sure what that means but I certainly hear it a lot), and bemoans the fact that ‘seven year old girls are being taught to put condoms on bananas instead of learning how to say no.’ She complains that sex education in schools doesn’t teach girls how to say no to sex.

I wonder if Dorries has been into a school recently? Posters litter school corridors telling students to wait, wait, wait and sex education (whilst offering advice on contraception) has a huge emphasis on waiting.

As a young teacher, responsible for teaching sex education, I would find it very difficult to tell just my female students to say no. What about the boys? Well sex is different for them, right? Wrong. There is one thing we have to know about Dorries before we even think about the dangerous implications of her Bill – she’s a grade A sexist.

The problem with her Bill – aside from being conceived in a La-La Land where girls wear frilly socks whilst they are passively talked into sex by naughty boys – is that it treats the female body as the property of the state. Why should a Tory MP have the right to decide what information female students receive in school? Dorries, I might add, has appeared in other acts of parliamentary disaster such as voting to reduce the amount of time women get for an abortion, as well a totally bonkers act limiting the amount of time women can wear high heels at work. Apparently high heels make women walk funny. I think I’ll make that decision for myself Nadine.

Luckily neither of these acts have passed, but it tells us an awful lot about Dorries, doesn’t it? She thinks laws to do with womens’ bodies should be based on her own sense of morality.

If Dorries wants to abstain from sex I support her right to do so. If  she doesn’t want an abortion, absolutely fine. If she doesn’t want to wear high heels at work, good on her. But why does she think every single woman in the country should be legally bound by what she does and doesn’t want to do?

If Norris’ Bill passes it would drastically reduce the amount of advice offered to young women on using contraception. An interesting fact: since 1980 teen pregnancy has declined dramatically in Britain. This was the result of a curriculum based on contraception and safe sex rather than abstinence. And yes, safe sex includes choosing your partner carefully, but that is a decision we make individually. It is not up to Auntie Nadine to tell young women who they should sleep with and when.

It sets a disturbing precedent. Not only are the options of young people being stripped away through brutal budget cuts, but their right to decent sex advice is also threatened. But this time it truly is ideological: Dorries wants to live in a world where girls are girls and boys are boys, and they don’t have sex until they are married.

We say it is up to a woman to say who she is going to have sex with and when. We have won the right to free, quality contraception to facilitate the safest of sex, to enjoy with whomever we please – if we want to keep it we need to fight for it.

Coming just days after another episode of the Tories’ homophobia, with the proposal to ban same-sex kissing on TV before the watershed, the ‘compassionate conservatives’ mask has well and truly slipped.

The increasing anger as a result of public service cuts will see the Tories become more right-wing and reactionary as they try and obscure who’s really responsible for society’s problems – the bankers and bosses whose wealth has increased 18% since 2008. What economic crisis?