As conversations around gender identity and sexual orientation become more prevalent, schools are increasingly incorporating lessons on these topics, often referred to as SOGI (Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity) curriculum. However, there is significant debate over whether these subjects should be discussed in elementary schools or if they should be reserved for older students, perhaps only being introduced around 16 or 17, as some parents and community members argue. Here, we explore some key concerns surrounding the age-appropriateness of SOGI lessons in schools.
Early SOGI Education: Too Much, Too Soon?
One of the main arguments against teaching young children about sexual orientation and gender identity is that it introduces complex concepts too early. Elementary-aged children are in formative stages of cognitive and emotional development. Teaching them about gender fluidity and sexual orientation could be confusing, especially if they’re not ready to understand such abstract topics. Rather than aiding personal development, introducing these ideas early may cause children to question their identities prematurely, creating unnecessary stress and confusion.
Author and speaker Laura Lynn Tyler Thompson, a vocal critic of SOGI curricula, voiced her concern:
“We are seeing the results of that now, because some kids are reacting very emotionally and saying, ‘Will I suddenly struggle with feeling like a different gender inside of my body?'”
Thompson highlights that some children experience fear and anxiety from these discussions, questioning if they, too, should be struggling with their gender identity. For these children, the introduction of SOGI subjects in early education can be more destabilizing than supportive.
Should SOGI Be a Priority in the Curriculum?
School time is limited, and many feel that every moment spent in the classroom should be dedicated to subjects that directly contribute to a child’s intellectual and practical skills, preparing them for higher education and eventual careers. Critics argue that subjects like math, science, reading, and history lay a foundation for critical thinking and personal productivity. They believe that diverting time and resources to discuss gender identity and sexual orientation takes away from core subjects that help students achieve academic success and become productive members of society.
From a resource standpoint, funding for education comes from taxpayers. Opponents of SOGI curricula argue that it is inappropriate to allocate taxpayer money to classes that they believe would be better spent on enhancing students’ skills in subjects that yield measurable benefits, like math or literacy. For these parents and educators, essential skills for success do not include knowledge of gender identity and sexual orientation, particularly for young children who are just beginning their educational journey.
Parental Concerns: Who Should Decide When and What is Taught?
For many parents, discussions around gender and sexual orientation are intensely personal and should be initiated within the family when the child is at an age that parents feel is appropriate. Introducing such topics in the classroom, often without parental input, can feel like an overreach. Parents worry that young children may feel pressured to identify with a specific gender or sexual orientation simply because the topic was brought up in class. Some children may feel they need to decide where they “fit” within a spectrum of gender identities, potentially leading to confusion that parents believe would not arise naturally at such a young age.
This issue of parental rights was touched on by Lorelin Tyler Thompson, who expressed frustration with the lack of community input into the decision to teach SOGI classes:
“I just thought, who decided that this was okay to teach our children?”
The Impact on Children’s Development and Well-being
The method and timing of SOGI education are hotly debated. For young children, knowledge about sexual orientation and gender identity does not necessarily contribute to mental health and may actually introduce new anxieties.
By focusing early education on age-appropriate, foundational subjects, schools may be better positioned to support all students in a way that promotes stability and clear thinking. This does not mean that issues of inclusion should be ignored; rather, many believe these should be discussed in ways that don’t impose concepts that children are not developmentally prepared to understand.
Ask for Better Education
In the end, whether SOGI classes belong in schools, and if so, at what age, remains a deeply personal issue with strong arguments on both sides. As society continues to debate the best approach to teaching children about gender and identity, it is essential to consider both the developmental needs of young children and the perspectives of parents and educators. There may be a more balanced approach that satisfies the need for inclusivity while preserving educational priorities that prepare students for success, leaving complex discussions of identity for an age when children are more equipped to process and engage with them.