Teachers' Discursive Constructions of Adolescent Sexting, Consent and Gender

Abstract

Sexting is the exchange of sexually suggestive content through technological means. Despite being tasked with addressing such incidents in schools, teachers are underrepresented in sexting research. The present study explores teachers' discursive constructions of sexting, consent and gender using Critical Discursive Psychology, analysing 30 interviews with educators and safeguarding staff. The first key finding uncovers the interpretative repertoire of ‘Sexting as a threat’. This repertoire showcases the gendered positions teachers assign adolescents to, positioning ‘Boys as oppressors; girls as victims of sexting’, with girls being simultaneously constructed as sexting to attract boys' attention through the ‘Girls as the validation-seeking Other’ position. Regarding consent, we explicate three repertoires: ‘Consent as an oxymoron in relation to non-consensual distribution’, ‘Consent as illegal’ and ‘Coercion as a power imbalance’. We contextualise and discuss these findings within the socio-political discursive terrain. We highlight their ideological implications and the need to initiate emancipatory positions and discussions regarding inclusive sexting education. Please refer to the Supplementary Material section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement.