Normal view MARC view ISBD view

Escaping oppositional thinking in the teaching of pleasure and danger in sexuality education Vanessa Cameron-Lewis

By: Cameron-Lewis, Cameron.
Material type: materialTypeLabelArticleSeries: Gender and Education.Publisher: Taylor & Francis, 2016Subject(s): SEXUAL VIOLENCE | ADOLESCENTS | EDUCATION | ETHICS | PREVENTION | SCHOOLS | SEX EDUCATION | SEXUALITY | SEXUALITY EDUCATION | YOUNG PEOPLE | NEW ZEALANDOnline resources: Read abstract In: Gender and Education, 2016, 28(4): 491-509Summary: Sexuality education and preventative sexual abuse education are often taught as separate subjects in secondary schools. This paper extends the argument against this separation by highlighting flaws in the logic that manifests this separation. Diffracting critical sexuality education theory with the monist logic of new materialism, I rethink sexuality as an array of intra-acting(1) bodies that are always in a process of becoming anew. Realising the belonging together of dualist terms [Bergson, Henri. 1896 [1911]. Matter and Memory. Translated and edited by Nancy Margaret Paul and W. Scott Palmer. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.] and how the reductive structure of dualist logic affirms an original ‘One’, I argue that the feminist push for pleasure-based, sexpositive education affirms sex-negative attitudes. Embracing Barad’s [Barad, Karen. 2007. Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham: Duke University Press.] notion of ethics as inescapable entanglement woven through all matter(ing), I suggest that rather than any particular ‘aspect’ of sexuality being emphasised in sexuality education it would be more useful to centre classroom discussions on ethics, as inescapable entanglement. (Author's abstract). Record #5921
No physical items for this record

Gender and Education, 2016, 28(4): 491-509

Sexuality education and preventative sexual abuse education are often taught as separate subjects in secondary schools. This paper extends the argument against this separation by highlighting flaws in the logic that manifests this separation. Diffracting critical sexuality education theory with the monist logic of new materialism, I rethink sexuality as an array of intra-acting(1) bodies that are always in a process of becoming anew. Realising the belonging together of dualist terms [Bergson, Henri. 1896 [1911]. Matter and Memory. Translated and edited by Nancy Margaret Paul and W. Scott Palmer. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.] and how the reductive structure of dualist logic affirms an original ‘One’, I argue that the feminist push for pleasure-based, sexpositive education affirms sex-negative attitudes. Embracing Barad’s [Barad, Karen. 2007. Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham: Duke University Press.] notion of ethics as inescapable entanglement woven through all matter(ing), I suggest that rather than any particular ‘aspect’ of sexuality being emphasised in sexuality education it would be more useful to centre classroom discussions on ethics, as inescapable entanglement. (Author's abstract). Record #5921