🔍💡 Coordinated offensive against sexuality education: this report maps in detail the actors, funding streams and opposition strategies in Europe, to better equip frontline professionals.
🛡️📚 Central issue: defending comprehensive sexuality education, grounded in human rights, against a structured, transnational and influential anti‑gender movement.
#CSE #SexualRights
Source : 📒 L’offensive contre l’éducation complète à la sexualité – Cartographie des acteurs et analyse des stratégies du mouvement d’opposition en Europe
Synthèse : https://www.planning-familial.org/sites/default/files/2026-02/2_Synthe%CC%80se_FR%20V3.pdf
Rapport - https://www.planning-familial.org/sites/default/files/2026-02/Planning%20familial%20-%20Rapport%20-%20L%27offensive%20contre%20l%27%C3%A9ducation%20compl%C3%A8te%20%C3%A0%20la%20sexualit%C3%A9%20en%20Europe%20-%20vdef.pdf
1. Analytical summary
Context and stakes: a structured anti‑gender offensive
The report analyses the growing attack on comprehensive sexuality education (CSE) in six European countries: Germany, Spain, France, Hungary, Italy and Sweden. CSE is defined as a holistic approach to emotional, relational and sexual life, grounded in human rights and WHO/UNESCO standards, as opposed to a purely “biological” education focused on risks. Despite often favourable legal frameworks, implementation remains partial, uneven and sometimes regressive, particularly in Italy and Hungary. The study shows that CSE has become a priority target of a transnational anti‑gender movement built on the demonisation of “gender ideology”, the defence of the traditional family and the protection of children. This movement undermines sexual and reproductive rights, gender equality and, more broadly, the democratic foundations of Europe.
Operational contributions: interpretive tools and levers for action
The publication provides a detailed overview of CSE legislation and practice in the six countries, highlighting gaps between law and practice as well as internal disparities (regions, schools, local actors). It unpacks the profiles, funding and modes of action of anti‑CSE actors, together with their rhetorical strategies (family, parenthood, child protection, moral panic). Drawing on a methodology that combines documentary analysis, interviews and field observation, it sets out 22 strategic recommendations for European institutions, focusing on the political agenda, multisectoral coordination, monitoring and evaluation, and sustainable funding. The document thus serves as an advocacy and training tool for professionals in health, prevention, community education and the social and medico‑social sectors.
2. Key points of the document
The report clearly distinguishes between biology‑centred sex education and comprehensive sexuality education (CSE), defined as an integrated, rights‑based learning process covering the cognitive, emotional, physical and social dimensions of sexuality.
The situation analysis in six countries (Germany, Spain, France, Hungary, Italy, Sweden) shows marked discrepancies between legal frameworks, often favourable to CSE, and very uneven implementation in practice, with areas of regression or blockage (notably Italy and Hungary).
The report reveals a constellation of anti‑CSE actors – political parties, religious organisations, lobbies, parents’ associations, media – structured at national and transnational level, with significant funding, notably originating from Hungary and France at European level.
It provides a detailed description of discursive strategies of opposition (demonisation of “gender ideology”, defence of the “natural” family, child protection, parental rights) and mechanisms of moral panic that feed institutional self‑censorship, local pressure and legislative backsliding.
The document offers a set of recommendations to European institutions to anchor CSE in the EU’s social agenda, strengthen multisectoral coordination, secure dedicated funding and establish a European mechanism for monitoring and evaluating CSE.
3. Action points for local actors
Rely on the international definition of CSE (UNESCO, WHO) to clarify, in local interventions and materials, what CSE actually covers, and to counter narratives on “gender ideology” and “early sexualisation” with factual content.
Systematically document, at local level, the gaps between legal obligations and actual implementation (number of sessions, levels covered, actors involved) in order to feed advocacy, legal action or political engagement with educational authorities.
Strengthen local alliances between schools, health services, feminist organisations, youth and LGBTQIA+ groups, and parents supportive of CSE, drawing inspiration from the good practices of State–civil society cooperation described (MFPF, RFSU, Pro Familia, etc.).
Anticipate and respond to local offensives (parent campaigns, elected officials, religious groups) by developing tailored argumentation focusing on child protection, children’s rights and equality, deconstructing the main talking points identified in the report.
Contribute to the production and dissemination of inclusive pedagogical resources (multilingual materials, digital formats, artistic approaches) and their translation, in order to reduce linguistic isolation of practices and support uptake in diverse local contexts.
🔍➕ Pour plus d'informations, voir les articles référencés par "Pratiques en Santé" sur le thème des politiques nationales ➡️🔗