Depending on where you go to school, or where you teach, you will face the topic of sexuality differently. However, regardless if you are a pupil or a teacher, there will be (or can be) a space in science education to learn more about sexuality, as reproduction is one of the core subjects (Reiss, 2018). At the same time, Gill (2016) point out that so-called controversial issues related to sexuality has impacted sexuality education negatively by limiting the professional development of teachers as well as restricted young people’s access to information and knowledge concerning sexuality. Limitations and restrictions regarding information and knowledge is especially prevalent in discourses concerning young children as some believe ‘sexuality education is irrelevant and inappropriate for children, as sexuality is viewed as “adult knowledge”’ (Robinson & Davies, 2017, p. 217). Assuring young people’s access to information is crucial for supporting sexual health (UNESCO, 2018), however sexuality education is more than preventing sexually transmitted diseases, unintended pregnancies, gender-based vulnerabilities. Advocating for comprehensive models of sexuality education which cut across, gender diversity, sexuality, and scientific knowledge is a matter of agency and accountability but also a matter of imagining a fulfilling sexual future for all genders since boys tend to associate sexuality with pleasure, while girls associate it with pain (Gill, 2016). 

Despite the “adult worlds” restrictive approach, young people are interest in learning more about bodies, health, sexuality and diversity. The eager to learn and longing to move society towards more inclusive and positive spaces is widespread among young people. For example, Wetzel and Sanchez (2024) found middle and high school students wanting more detailed and transparent information about pregnancy, STIs, and preventing these outcomes. Moreover, pupils are tired negative approach which emphasizes the risks of sex and sexuality and instead long for a positive approach with put issues of pleasure, intimacy, and desire in focus, or at least nuances the risks (such as violence in relationships) and deals with issues of gender and sexual diversity (Ollis et al., 2019). 

In creative workshops together with young people, Renold et al. (2023) found creativity and co-creation to be important aspects as well as not be too serious in sexuality education classes. Creative workshops with pupils aged 9-12 shows that crafting genitals (penises and vulvas) allow young people to interrogate stereotypical assumptions about their bodies and about gendered expectations but also showing it being acceptable to discuss sexuality (Antunes & Butler, 2023). These findings align with previous research in science education wich suggest that attempts of queering the subjects approach can ‘/…/ allow for a richer understanding of (human) sexuality and what it is to be a sexual person’ (Danielsson et al., 2023, pp. 280-281). 

Opening the space of science education and inviting queer ideas is important, however, as the subject of sexuality can bring forth provocation and discomfort (Ollis et al., 2019) is necessary to consider how science education can accommodate young people’s demands for a comprehensive and vibrant content while not stepping into ethical pitfalls of vulnerability in relation to sexuality. 

In the exploratory workshop we deal with the question of how science educators can invite students to engage with diversity and the potential of being a controversial issue without putting pupils in a vulnerable position in relation to the teaching content? 

Informed by the new materialist approaches to sexuality education (Antunes & Butler, 2023; Ollis et al., 2019; Renold et al., 2023) and affect theory and the phenomenology of objects (Ahmed, 2006; Gregg, 2010), we put a mysterious “(sex)box” in the center of attention. The purpose of the mysterious “box” it to re-imagine the role of objects and mysteries potential as a didactic tools for addressing bodily and sexual diversity in the science education classroom. 

The workshop is silly and invite giggles, laughter and blushing cheeks to engage with the seriousness of striving towards more inclusive societies. By engaging with the materials in the “sex box” we hope to produce a diverse space as the mystery of the objects in the box urge the “explorers” to imagine what sexuality is, involves and can be by finding and inventing new words to describe and re-associate sensation, experience, norms and expectations concerning sexuality. Through the “sex box” it also become possible to participate in an engaging activity without putting oneself in the limelight. While the box is a mystery for the “explorers”, the spectator is able to follow the exploration through the box’s shopping window. While the two explorers are busy building a story and figure out the object and how it relates to sexuality, the spectator can ask questions or simply follow the journey.

References 

Ahmed, S. (2006). Queer phenomenology : orientations, objects, others. Duke University Press. 

Antunes, A. C., & Butler, C. (2023). Pompomed Vulvas & Glittered Penises: Exploring Gender through Play [Journal Articles; Reports - Evaluative]. Sex Education: Sexuality, Society and Learning, 23(2), 194-202. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681811.2022.2082397 

Danielsson, A., Avraamidou, L., & Gonsalves, A. (2023). GENDER MATTERS Building on the Past, Recognizing the Present, and Looking Toward the Future. In D. L. Z. Norman G. Lederman, Judith S. Lederman (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Science Education Volume III (pp. 263-290). Routledge. 

Gill, P. (2016). Controversial Conversations in Science: Incorporating the Science "Sex Box". American Journal of Sexuality Education, 11(1), 18-26. 

Gregg, M. (2010). The Affect Theory Reader. In (1st ed.): Duke University Press.

Ollis, D., Coll, L., & Harrison, L. (2019). Negotiating Sexuality Education with Young People: Ethical Pitfalls and Provocations. American Journal of Sexuality Education, 14(2), 186-202. https://doi.org/10.1080/15546128.2018.1548317 

Reiss, M. (2018). Reproduction and sex education. Teaching biology in schools. Global research, issues, and trends. In K. Kampourakis & M. Reiss (Eds.), Teaching biology in schools: Global research, issues, and trends (pp. 87-98). Routledge. 

Renold, E. J., Bragg, S., Gill, C., Hollis, V., Margolis, R., McGeeney, E., Milne, B., Ringrose, J., Timperley, V., & Young, H. (2023). We have to educate ourselves”: how young people are learning about relationships, sex and sexuality. London: NSPCC. https://learning.nspcc.org.uk/research-resources/2023/how-young-people-are-learning-about-relationships-sex-sexuality 

Robinson, K. H., & Davies, C. (2017). Sexuality Education in Early Childhood. In L. Allen & M. L. Rasmussen (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Sexuality Education (pp. 217-242). Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-40033-8_11 

UNESCO. (2018). International technical guidance on sexuality education. An evidence-informed approach (Revised edition ed.). the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/9789231002595 

Wetzel, G. M., & Sanchez, D. T. (2024). "What's Something You've Heard About Sex, But Are Unsure If It's True?": Assessing Middle and High School Students' Sex Education Questions. Journal of Adolescent Health, 74(2), 327-339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2023.08.028