What are we talking about when we talk about Sex Education? Part I (ideas) | Amalthea Blog

new interview of CLARA FRAGO DAZA a


«Sex education for all audiences is possible (Santiago FRAGO)

CFD. Where do we come from and where are we in Sex Education?

Santiago Frago: Three major changes have taken place in the last 30 years:

  • The substitution of a “voluntary” and “social” Sex Education for a Sex Education with an academic, professional and sexological tone.
  • The transition from objectives based on preventive criteria to objectives based on positive criteria and the promotion of values.
  • An evolution of discourses: in the 1980s, the convenience or not of sexual education was questioned; in the 90s the debate revolved around the objectives that should preside over it and who should teach it; and already in the 21st century, the culture of “unanimity” is installed where there is no longer any debate and where anyone can speak or say something about the idea of ​​”sexuality”, even if it is their own experience.

CFD. But it’s good that everyone already considers its need, right?

SF: I would like to believe so, but I suspect that after unanimity there is often a trap; there is unanimity due to a lack of professionalism: “we will do the sex education we want”, and of course, not everything goes when it comes to Sex Education.

CFD. But at present it does seem that we know what we are talking about when we talk about sexual education, or is it not?

SF: My feeling is that we are at the beginning of a slowdown in relation to the idea of ​​Sexual Education, in the sense that the idea of ​​prevention is being reissued over the idea of ​​promotion, insisting on the idea of ​​developing resources without thinking about the objectives and I perceive the temptation to contaminate the scientific reasons for Sex Education with ideology. And without neglecting the wave of “porn-education” that invades us, which forces new educational challenges around the fact of the Sexes and their interactions.

CFD. Education for health, for equality, for diversity, affective, emotional… many names and adjectives and they seem different. Or are they all the same?

SF: Sexual Education, that is, of the Sexes, has a single articulation and source: Sexology as a discipline. And the objectives of a Sexual Education with sexological criteria have always contemplated diversity, equality, health, love, the management of emotions, inclusive language and sexual well-being as inherent to it; it is not necessary, because it is repetitive, to implement parallel programs when it comes to dealing with the Fact of the Sexes.

CFD. In May 1994 you held the First State Seminar on School Sex Education in Zaragoza, what was left of that?

SF: I think it would be necessary to reread some of the conclusions of those historic round tables to understand certain keys and shortcomings about the current situation. I rescue some of them:

  1. Sexual Education presented in a progressive and transversal way was suggestive as an idea but it became a curricular dissolution: “everyone had to do it and nobody did anything”.
  2. Models of Sex Education with a sexological core, personalized and appropriate to the uniqueness of the students, families and the Teaching Center are necessary.
  3. The triple level of intervention: students, families and teachers should become systematic.
  4. It is education professionals with training in Sexology or Sexology professionals with pedagogical training who are qualified to teach it.
  5. The evaluation and self-evaluation of interventions is essential: “what is not evaluated is devalued”.
  6. Sexual Education must not be compulsory or optional, it must be understood; the criterion of optionality is exclusive and the idea of ​​obligation is unfeasible.

CFD. What essential objectives should, in the 21st century, preside over sexual education programs?

SF: The objectives of Sex Education have logically been updated because the social reality is different, families are diverse, sexual meanings are varied and human interactions are changing.

The ultimate goal is to facilitate the process of building ourselves as men and women in dialogue with other men and women. And for this reason I consider essential:

  • Talk about sexual identity or feeling of belonging to one or another Sex, to avoid that the genitals prevent seeing the Sex.
  • Promote erotic versatility to avoid making erotic expectation an unavoidable genital expectation.
  • Avoid working from the heterosexual expectation, to avoid painful uniformity.
  • Make desire a personal and non-transferable aspect.
  • Promote feelings of appreciation and respect for oneself and for life: that self-esteem allows you to BE and not depend.
  • Facilitate the construction of relationships based on equality, so that from difference we advance towards “sexual bilingualism”: understand each other speaking different languages ​​and knowing that we are unique.
  • Reflect on the value of conflict around the art of loving and address the issue of jealousy as the best way to minimize violence.
  • Question everyday sexism, sexist labels, benevolent machismo and micro-machismo.
  • Promote criticism of the iconographic content and content of the media.
  • Address contraceptive issues and STIs from a sexological perspective.
  • Value: pleasure, coexistence, desire, the sense of erotic play, vulnerability, love, the body and uniqueness.

CFD. You always talk about the Amaltea Institute doing “another sex education”, is sex education not always sex education?

SF: When I refer to “other” I say it in opposition to that minuscule and preconceived idea of ​​sexual education. I speak of a Sex Education with capital letters, a “deconstruction”[1] that tries to dismantle certain concepts and a priori in relation to human sexuality, with the idea of ​​surprising, clarifying and placing ideas in an articulated sexological framework. In short, offer a different approach where emotions, feelings, desires, care and critical spirit are the protagonists of our biography.

[1] Ferrán Adriá uses the term deconstruction in a literal sense (deconstruct or decompose as an alternative to manufacturing, building), rather than in its primitive philosophical or artistic meaning (Jacques Derrida)

We wish to give thanks to the writer of this post for this amazing content

What are we talking about when we talk about Sex Education? Part I (ideas) | Amalthea Blog

You can find our social media profiles , as well as other pages that are related to them.https://catherinecoaches.com/related-pages/

Catherine Coaches