Girl’s needs and experiences within a school environment
by Montana Ali and Mahrukh Malik (guest bloggers)
For many years, abstinence has been traditionally taught to young girls as a method of protection and self-discipline. However, some say that this method is worn out and unpractical in this day and age. As teenagers’ hormones increase and puberty kicks in, the average age that girls are beginning to have sex is decreasing. In 2012, a total of 5,131 girls under 16 (aged 13-15) got pregnant in England and out of those, 59.8% had abortions. This is proof of why contraception should be taught to young girls in schools, to firstly, prevent any unwanted babies being killed and also to give young girl’s the power to make the right decisions for their bodies.
It is ignorant for parents to still believe that their children are not participating in sexual relationships at young ages. The age of consent in the UK is 16; however, a NHS survey found that 27% of women are having sex before they reach the age of consent. Teenage parent and Doctor, David Rivera says that “teenaged sex has been around as long as there have been teenagers”, therefore, instead of parents trying to encourage their children to stay abstinent we should be educating young girls on the types of contraception available to them.
If we don’t educate girls about contraception they are likely to go behind their parents back and find out on their own. In 2012, parents were shocked to find out that school nurses had given birth-control implants and jabs to girls aged 13 and 16 more than 900 times in the past two years. By providing young girls with information on contraception we can be sure that they are being given the right information. However, it appears to be fair to educate young children from the age of 11 on the use of condoms and protective sex from the male’s side; yet neglecting female methods of protection. This reinforces patriarchal behaviour and influences males from a young age to believe they are superior to females as they have been educated with a choice on using protection or not. This is evident in schools as male students begin to take charge within classrooms and playgrounds and feel that sex is mainly their decision as well as whether or not to use protection. With this mind frame they go on to develop sexist view points, treat females differently both within and outside the school environment even to the point where they may feel as if domestic violence is acceptable.
There are many advantages of teaching girls about Contraception. For instance, contraception puts more power and control into females as they are able to make their own decision for their bodies. It also puts less dependence on the male to put on a condom which allows the female in the relationship to gain a sense of control that historically men would have regarding sex. By equally educating children once they enter secondary school on protected sex, it allows children to become well-informed regarding issues such as rape and the importance of such issues being tackled.
Contraception within the school curriculum however is not the only topic girls feel excluded around, the curriculum itself poses issues. I think it is fair to say that since the 1988 Education reform act girls have been more accepted in the education system. It showed clear indication of women being given more chances to achieve with the introduction of coursework for example. However, it can be believed by many feminists that education is reproducing gender inequality and widening the current gap that already exists throughout society. It’s evident that there was a clear increase in career ambitions by females. This could have been influenced by two things, educational success from coursework or more modern socialisation from parents and the media. So perhaps education is an agent of secondary socialisation that actually helps to enforce patriarchy.
It seems as though the education system is patriarchal and dominated by men, just like the work force is. The ‘hidden’ curriculum is a major source of gender socialisation; within education, various subjects are aimed at a certain gender group. Although concepts such as “GIST” exist, standing for: girls in science and technology, which was brought about to attract female students into subjects that have been historically dominated by men, the current gap in gender inequality still seems to exist. It’s been noticed that on events such as induction days and open days where students are to pick subjects, those that are stereotypically more ‘fitted’ for males are spoken about by male teachers which make females less likely to sign up.
Similarly, subjects like food technology and textiles open day sessions are headed my female teachers, making male students feel as though they would almost be judged as being far too ‘feminine’ if they were to sign up to such a subject. For example cooking would be aimed at girls doing house work. While most schools now title this course – ‘Food Technology’ the subject is still designed to ‘snare’ girls into adopting a mode of behaviour a patriarchal society accept and that the gap between girls and boys is still there in today’s society. The gap is fuelled by the fact subjects are seen as more masculine such as resistant materials and physics are valued significantly higher in the world of work than humanitarian based subjects which females are more guided towards. It can be argued that this underlying sense of gender labelled subjects should be changed in order for female students to achieve the highest they can and progress onto higher education with an equal position to males.
With both the introduction of female methods of contraception to sex education and a change to the education system regarding the labelling of subjects, schools can become more flexible in regards to meeting the needs of both genders.