Dr Satang Nabaneh
Satang Nabaneh, PhD is an award-winning legal scholar, educator, researcher, and human rights practitioner. She is the Director of Programs at the University of Dayton Human Rights Center and a Global Fellow at the Chr. Michelsen Institute (CMI) and the University of Bergen (UiB)’s Centre on Law & Social Transformation. She was a post-doctoral fellow at the Centre for Human Rights, University of Pretoria. Her research interests cover the fields of human rights, sexual and reproductive health and rights, democratisation and autocratisation. She is the author of Choice and Conscience: Lessons from South Africa for a Global Debate (PULP, 2023). She was named one of 10 exceptionally talented African scholars to watch in 2024 by The Africa Report.
Introduction
Global debates over comprehensive sexuality education (CSE) are intensifying, with a particular focus on issues like LGBTQ+ rights, abortion, and contraception. This ‘glocal’ phenomenon, characterised by the interplay of international trends and local realities, shapes policies and practices in various regions, including Africa and Latin America.
According to the World Health Organization (WHO), CSE encompasses a holistic approach to teaching and learning about sexuality, aiming to equip children and young people with the knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values necessary for their health, well-being, dignity, and rights protection.
Scholarship has been shown to have long-term benefits for individuals, including improved health behaviours, social and emotional skills, and tolerance for diversity. It can also help address inequality and poverty. Increasingly, CSE programs have thus long been an important part of the global health agenda.
Given the simultaneous CSE politicisation at the international level and domestically across the world, this blog focuses on the form and force of gender politicisation concerning CSE in Africa and Latin America, particularly how local dynamics are interconnected at the transnational level.
Human Rights Standards
One of the main pillars of sexual and reproductive health and rights is access to CSE. International human rights bodies have recognised CSE as a fundamental right. The Human Rights Committee called upon States to “ensure access for women and men, and especially girls and boys, to quality and evidence-based information and education on sexual and reproductive health” as part of the right to life. The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW Committee) emphasised the importance of sex education as a crucial component of education that promotes gender equality and challenges harmful gender stereotypes. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) in General Comment No. 22 urges states to adopt legal and policy measures to guarantee access to such information. The Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) has advocated for comprehensive sexuality education as a mandatory component of the school curriculum and has called for reaching out-of-school adolescents. The Committee has urged States to adopt comprehensive gender- and sexuality-sensitive sexual and reproductive health policies for youth, emphasising that unequal access to information, resources, and services constitutes discrimination. Several of the Special Procedures have also stressed the need for such education, including the Working Group on discrimination against women and girls, the Special Rapporteurs on the right of health and special rapporteur on persons with disabilities.
At the regional level, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, in the Guzmán Albarracín v. Ecuador case has also held that CSE is a fundamental right. In addition, article 14(2)(a) of the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa (Maputo Protocol) also provides that State parties shall take all appropriate measures to ‘provide adequate, affordable and accessible health services, including information, education and communication programmes to women, especially those in rural areas’. The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) in General Comment No. 1 ‘recognises that an enabling legal and policy framework [for implementing access to sexual and reproductive health information protected under article 14(1)(d) and (e)] is intrinsically linked to women’s right to equality, non-discrimination and self-protection’.
In Legal and Human Rights Centre and Centre for Reproductive Rights (on behalf of Tanzanian girls) v United Republic of Tanzania, the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (ACERWC) found that Tanzania had violated the rights of Tanzanian girls by failing to provide adequate access to sexual and reproductive health information and services. This led to unwanted pregnancies and forced pregnancy testing, which further violated the girls’ rights to equality, non-discrimination, education, and health. The respondent argued that their actions were necessary to promote African morality and punish immoral behaviour. However, the ACRWC rejected this argument, stating that the absence of appropriate sexuality education and youth-friendly services was a violation of the girls’ rights under the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (ACRWC).
The ECOWAS Court of Justice in Women Against Violence and Exploitation in Society (WAVES) & Child Welfare Society, Sierra Leone (CWS SL) (On Behalf of Pregnant Adolescent School Girls in Sierra Leone) v. Sierra Leone also held that that the Sierra Leonean government should integrate SRH education into school curricula.
This reflects a growing recognition of the importance of a human rights-based approach to sex education.
Global Trends
While sex education in schools has historically faced challenges due to patriarchal and religious norms, the past decade has witnessed a significant shift in the nature of this contestation. CSE has become a focal point for transnational political and social movements opposing "gender ideology." It is often used to dismiss or discredit individuals who advocate for gender equality and challenge traditional binary gender roles. By labelling these individuals as promoting an ‘ideology,’ rather than presenting factual evidence, opponents seek to undermine the legitimacy of their arguments and delegitimize their concerns about gender inequality. Conservative religious groups warned that the inclusion of ‘gender’ in intergovernmental outcome documents and discussions of social and political issues would undermine traditional family structures, promote abortion rights, challenge traditional gender roles, and legitimise same-sex relationships.
Throughout its history and across countries, sex education in schools has been contested, with teachers and policymakers navigating a complex terrain of patriarchal and religious norms. In the past decade, however, the contest has shifted to a radically new level as CSE has moved to the centre of the transnational political and social mobilisation against “gender ideology.” The concept of “gender ideology” has been widely used since the 1990s, often described as a vague or ambiguous term that can encompass a variety of interpretations. It has garnered support from diverse groups, including conservative religious factions, right-wing populists and nationalists, and occasionally left-wing populists in regions such as the United States, Europe, Latin America, and beyond.
Gender ideology has now become a central issue for illiberal and autocratic politicians, often intertwined with debates over abortion, sexual orientation, and gender identity and expression. As noted elsewhere, religious institutions and populist ‘anti-gender’ movements have joined forces to oppose CSE in schools, framing their concerns as a defence of traditional values, family structures, and religious beliefs. The absence of CSE in SRHR-related resolutions of the Human Rights Council and resolutions related to youth and girls’ education highlights this omission.
The politicisation of CSE and Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (SRHR) has led to changes in laws and policies in some countries. Even without formal changes, it can hamper the provision and access to SRHR services for vulnerable populations, increase social exclusion, gendered inequalities, ostracism and violence, and negatively impact mental and physical health
Gender Issues in Illiberal Contexts – Regional Perspectives
CSE policies in Latin America have progressed unevenly over the past decade. Landmark decisions by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in 2020 sparked significant opposition from conservative groups. Movements like Con mis hijos no te metas (Don’t Mess With My Children) and Escola sem Partido (School without a political party) have emerged in several countries, including Colombia, Peru, and Brazil. These movements have successfully blocked CSE implementation in some countries and have spread to other regions. For instance, the #ConMisHijosNoTeMetas movement successfully blocked the inclusion of CSE and gender aspects in the new National System of School Coexistence in Colombia and the new National Curriculum for Basic Education in Peru. Its influence has also spread to other countries, including Argentina, Chile, Bolivia, Costa Rica, Paraguay, Ecuador, France, and Spain. These movements have had a significant impact on educational policies in Latin America and beyond.
Recent examples in Africa include anti-CSE petitions championed by the Spanish-founded group CitizenGO, targeting politicians across Latin America and Africa. The STOPCSE! campaign initiated by the US Christian-right organisation Family Watch International has mobilised to halt the South African Department of Education’s delivery of CSE in schools and is also taken up by groups in Kenya and elsewhere. It emerged in response to plans to extend and expand the Eastern and Southern African (ESA) ministerial commitment and described CSE as “a harmful Western and UN Agenda seeking to change SA gender and sexual norms”. Kenya, despite being a signatory to the ESA Commitments in 2013, has made limited progress in delivering CSE in schools. This is due in part to strong resistance from religious actors, and Kenya Catholic Doctors Association has campaigned against CSE on several platforms, echoing very closely messages shared by Sharon Slater from FWI, describing CSE as “an agenda to introduce children to sex so that organisations manufacturing contraceptives can have a bigger market for their products.” The East African Community Sexual and Reproductive Health bill, which aims to include SRH information and services as part of universal health coverage in the seven East African Community partner states, has also not moved forward. The opposition to the bill gained momentum in 2022, particularly in Uganda. Moreover, the US-based World Congress of Family co-organized a conference in Ghana on ‘family values’ in 2019, which was used to spread hatred against sexual and gender minorities and pressure the government to halt initiatives aimed at delivering sex education in schools.
It is argued that the rise of anti-SRHR movements in these two regions can be traced back to historical colonial and post-colonial interventions in matters of sexuality and reproduction by actors from the global North. This includes a long history of Western powers exerting control over the sexuality and reproduction of marginalised populations. During the era of slavery, for instance, Black people’s sexuality and reproductive rights were brutally suppressed. Subsequently, colonial administrations sought to impose Victorian norms of family, sexuality, and morality, criminalising same-sex and inter-racial relationships and enforcing restrictive gender roles. Even in the 20th century, Western interventions, such as population control initiatives in the Global South and the exportation of unsafe contraceptives, continued to undermine the SRHR of local communities. These past interventions have created a favourable environment for the emergence and growth of such movements on the continent.
Conversely, local actors are actively engaging with and adapting the appeal of charges of neo-colonialism and within the African context, a ‘Western agenda.’ According to the #StopCSE petition, opposition to the CSE curriculum includes amongst other things that it is contrary to South African cultural values and that:
CSE is a harmful Western- and UN-driven agenda that seeks to change South African gender and sexual norms under the guise of HIV and teen pregnancy prevention. It also promotes harmful gender identity ideology, sexual promiscuity and abortion.
This means they are using these accusations to their advantage, often framing the opposition to SRHR as a defence against foreign interference.
Conclusion
Despite existing scholarship, our knowledge of the nature, causes, and consequences of CSE politicisation remains limited. This calls for a more cross-regional, interdisciplinary and integrative approach that examines CSE at the global, regional, national, and local levels. Such an approach should centre sexuality education as a key component of policy goals such as promoting sexual and reproductive health, gender equality, and human rights.
Funding
This blog is a product of the LawTransform/WUN project “Gender Trouble: Glocalization of gender politics - challenges for democracy & health.”
The Human Rights in Context Blog is a platform which provides an academic space for discussion for those interested in human rights, democracy, and the rule of law. We are always interested in well-written and thoughtful comments and analyses on topical events or developments. Scholars from all disciplines, students, researchers, international and national civil servants, legislators and politicians, legal practitioners and judges are welcome to participate in the discussions. We warmly invite those interested in writing a post to send us an e-mail explaining briefly the relevance of the topic and your background as an expert. We will get back to you as quickly as we can. All contributors post in their individual capacity, and their opinions do not necessarily reflect the official position of Human Rights in Context, or any organisation with which the author is affiliated.
Comments