Gender Representation in Illustrations, Text, and Topic Areas in Sexuality Education Curricula

Abstract

A content analysis instrument was developed to examine differences in gender representation in sexuality education curricula. Fourteen middle school and high school curricula, published between 1985 and 1995, were examined. Variables included illustrations, noun/pronoun usage, and specific topics within the two categories of biological function and mutual interest. The study examined differences in gender representation in illustrations, photographs, cartoons, drawings, and text. Omission of sexuality topics related to gender also was examined. Little difference occurred within the text of the curricula in noun and pronoun usage. Illustrations were few in number, but showed greater female representation. Greater male representation occurred in topics related to drug use, sexual exploitation, sexual desire, and homosexuality. Topics with greater female representation included body image, diseases of the reproductive organs, and hygiene.

Content analysis of school textbooks on health topics: A systematic review

“…Evaluation of the extent to which textbooks on sexuality and human social ideology on the content of HIV/AIDS education (10), another identified gender representation and examined gender inequity in textbook descriptions (14).…”

“…The main health topics in 12 studies were sexuality, sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), and nutrition. Of the included studies, 4 focused on sexuality, including reproductive health, gender representation, and STDs (7,(13)(14)(15), 3 focused on nutrition or diet, including excessive intake of sugar-rich food (12,16,17), and 1 each focused on HIV/AIDS (10), mental health (18), hearing health (19), oral cancer (20), and vaccination (11). Two other Spanish studies identified the priorities of health topics covered.…”

Sexuality, sexual and reproductive health: an exploration of the knowledge, attitudes and beliefs of the Greek-Cypriot adolescents

“…swollen testicles), (Alt, 2001). Beyer et al (1996), argued that in middle and high school sexuality curricula that they had examined, males were represented as perpetrators of sexual exploitation, while females were portrayed as the victims of exploitation, abuse, assault and rape. Beyer et al (1996) researched fourteen United…”

“…It is of particular concern that gender inequalities and inequities may exist in school curricula that suppose to broaden knowledge and promote health. Further, gender role stereotyping in sexuality education curricula was noted by Beyer et al (1996), in relation to parenting which had a pro-feminine slant. The male role in parenting was omitted.…”

Picturing Sex Education: Notes on the politics of visual stratification

“…As curricular imperatives, both the overarching domain of ''the sexual'' and the niche of ''the sex education illustration'' are recognized zones of ideological rough-andtumble. However, pictures in sex education books are rarely examined (see, for example, Beyer, Ogletree, Ritzel, Drolet, Gilbert, & Brown, 1996;Hartlaub & Dreznick, 2001;Jackson & Gee, 2005;Low & Sherrard, 1999;Pollis, 1986;Salas, 2004;Whatley, 1988Whatley, , 1992. This is unfortunate, given the wealth of research opportunities for pictorial semioticians, visual historians, visual anthropologists, ethnologists, curriculum theorists, pedagogues, culture critics, gender activists, and discourse analysts working in the domains of law, pedagogy, and sexualities.…”