Reviewed by: Teaching Moral Sex: A History of Religion and Sex Education in the United States by Kristy L. Slominski Courtney Ann Irby Kristy L. Slominski, Teaching Moral Sex: A History of Religion and Sex Education in the United States (New York: Oxford University Press, 2021) Motivated by a desire to complicate the standard narrative that positions sex versus religion, scholars in recent years have tried to illustrate that religious groups are not inherently sex negative. This binary thinking has been challenged by efforts to showcase the discursive shift in purity culture that presents sex as “great” and a “gift” as long as it occurs within heterosexual marriage. Yet the loudest voices continue to represent “religion” as a reactionary position. As Kristy Slominski’s Teaching Moral Sex: A History of Religion and Sex Education in the United States beautifully documents, long before conservative Protestants began to wage battles against sex, liberal Protestants had already formatively shaped public understandings of sex. By expanding the religious groups under investigation to include liberal Protestants, as well as their interfaith efforts with Jews and Catholics, she reminds readers that religion is not a unified concept, nor is it inherently a conservative force that seeks to restrict sex. Teaching Moral Sex weaves together the histories of two sex education movements that dominated the twentieth century—the first, initially called the American Social Hygiene Association (ASHA), played a critical role in the first part of the century until a group originally called the Sex Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS) picked up the mantle in the [End Page 159] 1960s. To situate the role of religion in these movements and explore how it shaped their motivations and strategies, the book is divided into five substantive chapters that delineate the “phases of the movement for public sex education” (7) and also provide an overarching chronological narrative for how we arrived at contemporary sex education disputes. To provide a context for the emergence of sex education, Slominski convincingly argues in chapter one that readers must first understand how late nineteenth-century liberal Protestant efforts to combat prostitution were bridged with moralized medical efforts to reduce venereal diseases. Rather than science and religion existing in tension, she illustrates how liberal Christian values served as the glue that held together these different social movements as they merged to become ASHA. After establishing their origins, chapter two turns to explain the type of sex education curricula that ASHA helped to create and their efforts to partner with colleges, YMCAs, and the military to provide these programs. Recognizing the limitations of scientific facts to change the sexual attitudes and behavior of young people sufficiently, ASHA relied on liberal Christian ideals and normative frameworks to craft a “moral education.” Again, illustrating the failure of overly simplistic binaries, Slominski reveals how medicine and religion worked collaboratively to shape cultural norms around sexuality that constrained it to marriage but also challenged what they saw as repressive tendencies to label all aspects of sex as negative. Chapter three chronicles how these redemptive efforts to conceptualize sexuality as a positive force were channeled into family life education programs. In addition to taming the taboo subject, she notes how family life became a common framework that facilitated interfaith conversations, since Catholics, Jews, and liberal Protestants all saw the family as the basic unit of society and feared that it was in need of support. While family life education dominated midcentury efforts, chapter four explains how SIECUS emerged once again to argue that sex education should be a public health concern and how their efforts to develop comprehensive education programs incited what we have come to know as the “sex education controversies” of the 1960s. Conservative Protestants’ negative responses to their situational ethics that promoted personal choice and responsibility over moral absolutes showcase how these debates were not an example of secularism versus religion but were at least partially structured by theological differences in moral decision-making. Slominski also illustrates that liberal Protestants’ “new morality” began to transform sexuality into a site of spiritual growth long before conservative Protestants would do so. Chapter five pulls these themes together to showcase how conservative Protestants’ engagement with SIECUS...
Read full abstract