Abstinence-only sex education assumed that prohibiting young people from having sex would protect them. Except young people kept having sex; they just did it without contraception, without understanding consent, and without knowing how to recognize abuse. Age verification makes the same assumption about young people and the internet. Both are wrong for the same reason: young people, despite being told not to engage in something, are still going to do it.
When Australia’s under-16 social media ban took effect on December 10, 2025, free VPN provider Windscribe reported a 400% increase in Australian installations within 24 hours. Platforms not covered by the ban rose immediately to the top of app download charts. Photo-sharing app Yope reported 100,000 new Australian users. Not only have teenagers resorted to getting VPNs or diverting themselves to different platforms, they are also creatively hoodwinking webcam age checks by wearing makeup or false mustaches to look older.
Five months after the ban took effect, the Molly Rose Foundation surveyed 1,050 Australian 12-to-15-year-olds and found that three in five who had accounts before the ban still had access to at least one restricted platform. Seventy percent of those still accessing banned platforms said it had been easy to circumvent the restrictions. Fifty-one percent said the ban had made no difference to their online safety. These bans do little to actually keep young people away from social media.
This is the same pattern researchers documented with abstinence-only education. Young people who received comprehensive sex ed (CSE) were significantly less likely to experience unintended pregnancy. Those who received abstinence-only education were not.
Digital literacy is the comprehensive sex ed of 2026. Young people are online. What they need is what comprehensive sex ed gave young people about their bodies. The World Health Organization describes CSE as helping young people “understand their bodies, develop healthy relationships, build life skills, make informed and responsible decisions, and protect their health and well-being.” Comprehensive digital literacy programs do the same thing for the internet. A young person who knows that infinite scroll and autoplay are deliberate design choices to maximize screen time is better equipped to decide when to stop. One who understands that an adult asking to move a conversation to a private app is a recognized warning sign is more likely to recognize that as grooming.
Some will argue that age verification and digital literacy are not mutually exclusive and that we can have both. In theory, yes. In practice, current age verification legislation like California’s AB 1043, Colorado’s SB 26-051, and the federal Parents Decide Act lacks funding for digital literacy programs and fails to require them as a companion measure. Age verification is being passed while digital literacy is being skipped. Beyond the funding question, the two approaches send opposite signals: one treats the internet as a threat to be blocked, the other treats it as an environment young people are capable of navigating. You cannot build digital agency while simultaneously telling young people they cannot be trusted online.
When we choose to prohibit instead of prepare, young people navigate the risk anyway. They just do it without guidance to make informed decisions. Abstinence-only education showed us this. The evidence on age verification is already showing us the same thing. The only question is how long we wait to act.
Congress is currently moving to pass the Parents Decide Act. It contains no funding for digital literacy, requirement for education nor plan for equipping young people. Tell your representatives that isn’t good enough and fill out the form below!
If you want to follow this campaign as it develops (including upcoming pieces on the federal KIDS Act, new age verification legislation, and the corporate lobbying behind all of it), sign up for COSL updates here.