The allegations surrounding the so-called Cornell 7 have attracted growing public attention and political scrutiny around the world, exposing persistent misunderstandings about consent and sexual violence.
According to a civil lawsuit filed by a student identified as “Jane Doe,” seven fraternity members allegedly drugged and sexually assaulted her over several hours in October 2024.
Some media coverage of the case has fuelled rape myths about false reporting and contributed to victim blaming. An opinion piece in USA Today critiqued Jane Doe’s changing accounts of what happened and ended with the line: “Regretting one’s bad decisions is a far cry from rape.”
The case reflects broader problems of deeply ingrained misogyny, misunderstandings of consent and persistent myths about sexual violence.
It also raises questions beyond Cornell about what we’re doing as educators to ensure young people understand consent, bodily autonomy and healthy relationships before they reach university.
When governments permit opt-outs, they communicate that these lessons are elective and trivial. Yet understanding consent, bodily autonomy, healthy relationships and sexual health has consequences for individual and public health.
Sexual health education is also part of preventing gender-based sexual violence. Opt-out and opt-in policies can signal that this education is negotiable rather than a core component of public education.
The issue becomes more complicated when parents seek exemptions from curriculums on religious or other grounds. While public schools should do their best to accommodate freedom of religion and conscience, those freedoms exist alongside students’ rights to equality and freedom from discrimination.
This is particularly relevant to curriculums concerning gender and sexuality. Recognizing the rights of 2SLGBTQIA+ students does not, in itself, undermine the religious freedom of other students. Religious freedom does not give individuals or groups a general exemption from laws or policies that protect other people’s rights.
Where rights intersect, governments must balance competing interests rather than treating one group’s rights as automatically more important than another’s.
Human rights are neither optional nor debatable. Policies that allow students to opt out of education about gender and sexuality can inadvertently teach people that the human rights of 2SLGBTQIA+ people are not already settled and protected by legislation.
The right to education
Whether parents should be able to decide what their children learn about sex, gender and relationships in school is often framed as a question of parental rights.
Parents do have an important role in their children’s education, but their rights aren’t violated simply because sexual health education is taught in public schools — whereas children’s rights are violated when they are denied access to sexual health education. Children have rights, including rights to education and health information.
Permitting parental opt-outs can deny children access to information that supports their health and safety, making them more vulnerable to abuse, and creating risks for other children.
When governments invite students to opt out of particular lessons, they undermine the broader purpose of public education: to introduce students to the diversity of our society, foster understanding of human rights and values, and advance public health, safety and the public good.
Public schools have an obligation to uphold children’s rights, respect human rights and provide research-informed curriculums. The allegations surrounding the Cornell 7 reinforce the need to strengthen sexual health education across curriculums rather than treating it as an optional part of one school subject.
Consent, bodily autonomy, healthy relationships and boundaries should not be optional lessons.
This article was originally published in The Conversation 7 October 2026. It can be accessed here: https://theconversation.com/we-need-stronger-sexual-health-education-the-cornell-7-case-shows-why-293516
Shannon Mooreis currently an associate professor of social studies education in the Department of Curriculum, Teaching and Learning, at The University of Manitoba.
Before becoming a teacher educator and educational researcher,Jennifer Watttaught English Language Arts to middle and senior years students in Ontario and England. Jen’s personal, professional, and research experience lend themselves to supporting this feminist collaborative study of GBSV in schools.
The European Business Review uses cookies to improve site functionality, provide you with a better browsing experience, and to enable our partners to advertise to you. Detailed information on the use of cookies on this Site, and how you can decline them, is provided in our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions. By clicking on the accept button and using this Site, you consent to our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions. ACCEPT Reject
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
