The L-word in Sex Ed: should love be part of the lesson?

Are we okay with the blanket term "affection" — or should the nuances of romantic love be part of the lesson plan? A q debate.
What does healthy love look like? Should teachers invite students to work through the tender topic?

As an intense debate over sex education rages on in Ontario, we consider a topic (perhaps less obviously) missing from the curriculum: love. 

A recent Globe and Mail editorial posited that "affection", the textbook term to describe romantic feelings, is "too beige".

For insight and opposing views on adding love to the lesson plan, Shad checks in with two experts: 

  • Carrie Ichikawa JenkinsCanada Research Chair in philosophy at UBC, argues that schools should talk about love because it's something we value highly but don't understand properly.
  • Lyba Spring, an independent sexual health educator in Toronto, argues that, from a public health point of view, we need to make sure lessons are as inclusive as possible. People engage in sexual activity for all kinds of reasons and love is not always part of the equation. 

q:Listen to both perspectives and tell us: to what extent should educators talk to students about romantic love? 

What's love got to do with it? When it comes to Sex Ed, should schools stick to the mechanics? (Fabiola Carletti/CBC)


To encourage thoughtful and respectful conversations, first and last names will appear with each submission to CBC/Radio-Canada's online communities (except in children and youth-oriented communities). Pseudonyms will no longer be permitted.

By submitting a comment, you accept that CBC has the right to reproduce and publish that comment in whole or in part, in any manner CBC chooses. Please note that CBC does not endorse the opinions expressed in comments. Comments on this story are moderated according to our Submission Guidelines. Comments are welcome while open. We reserve the right to close comments at any time.