Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Sexualities
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Frankham, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Sexual Antimonies and Parent/Child Sex Education: Learning from Foreclosure

Jo Frankham

University of Manchester, UK, jo.frankham{at}man.ac.uk

In the journal Sexualities, Jackson and Scott (2004, ‘Sexual Antimonies in Late Modernity’, Sexualities 7[2]: 233-48) express scepticism that current mores in relation to sexuality are increasingly liberal and ‘open’; instead, they suggest there are a number of antimonies or contradictions evident. One of the themes they raise relates to parental intentions (and ‘failures’) to be ‘open’ about sex with their children. I explore this antimony via data collected from parents about the sex education of their young children. I first describe responses to young children’s verbal questions about sex; the second section considers parental responses to questions raised by ‘protosexual play’. As the negotiations that take place between parents and children reveal, many interventions in this area are actually interesting inversions of a straightforward educational endeavour. Instead of ‘openness’, the forms of parental disclosure and foreclosure of sexual information enact a series of closures or enclosures in relation to the exchange of sexual information in the family. The article goes on to consider possible explanations and effects of these antimonies.

Key Words: contradictions • openness and foreclosure • parent/child interactions • sex education

Sexualities, Vol. 9, No. 2, 236-254 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/1363460706063120


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social ScienceHome page
D. Moon
Culture and the Sociology of Sexuality: It's Only Natural?
The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, September 1, 2008; 619(1): 183 - 205.
[Abstract] [PDF]