“…The official construction of national culture from a policy document is perhaps not the most authentic reflection of a country's socio-cultural context, but the construction of 'normal' sexual behaviour, 3 as well as the construction of problematic femininity and dominant masculinity, 4 in the PIASCY documents seem consistent with Muhanguzi's (2011, 722) recent description of the sexual landscape in Uganda as one characterised by, 'homophobia, misogyny, male domination, female marginalisation... [and] control of female sexuality'. Mirembe and Davies (2001) and Muhanguzi (2011) are among those who also argue that, as a result of the perpetuation of socio-cultural phenomena such as 'hegemonic masculinity, gendered discipline patterns, sexual harassment and "compulsory" heterosexuality ' (2001, 402), schools in Uganda cannot simply be viewed as agents of change which promote students' SRH, but can themselves constitute a risk factor in the lives of young people. Moralistically informed responses to SRH are inevitably gendered in Uganda, as they are all over the world (Stone and Ingham 2006, 201), with 'sexual double standards' and 'common strands of gender inequality rooted in patriarchal beliefs' characterising the norms relating to gender and sexuality in the country (Wolff, Blanc, and Gage 2000, 304;Mirembe and Davies 2001, 402).…”