Affiliation:
1. St. Thomas University, Canada
2. University of British Columbia, Canada
Abstract
This study examined the ways in which the meaning of ‘sexual problems’ is constructed and defined in undergraduate human sexuality textbooks. Drawing on feminist and critical discourse frameworks, the dominant as well as the absent/marginalized discourses were identified using critical discourse analysis. Sexual difficulties were largely framed by the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Thus, medical discourse was privileged. Alternative conceptualizations and frameworks, such as the New View of Women’s Sexual Problems, were included marginally and peripherally. We argue that current constructions of sexuality knowledge reinforce, rather than challenge, existing hegemonic discourses of sexuality.
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献