Predatory Schools and Student Non-Lives: A Discourse Analysis of the Safe Schools Coalition Australia Controversy

Autor/in	Thompson, Jay Daniel
Titel	Predatory Schools and Student Non-Lives: A Discourse Analysis of the Safe Schools Coalition Australia Controversy
Quelle	In: Sex Education: Sexuality, Society and Learning, 19 (2019) 1, S.41-53 (13 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Thompson, Jay Daniel)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1468-1811
DOI	10.1080/14681811.2018.1475284
Schlagwörter	Stellungnahme; Discourse Analysis; School Safety; Disadvantaged; Sexuality; Foreign Countries; Program Descriptions; Homosexuality; Fear; Criticism; Sexual Abuse; Student Behavior; Victims; Parent Child Relationship; Gender Differences; Sexual Orientation; Sexual Identity; Educational Environment; Prevention; Australia + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Diskursanalyse; Sexualität; Ausland; Homosexualität; Furcht; Kritik; Sexueller Missbrauch; Student behaviour; Schülerverhalten; Victim; Opfer; Parents-child relationship; Parent-child-relation; Parent-child relationship; Eltern-Kind-Beziehung; Geschlechterkonflikt; Sexuelle Orientierung; Geschlechtsidentität; Sexuelle Identität; Lernumgebung; Pädagogische Umwelt; Schulumwelt; Prävention; Vorbeugung; Australien
Abstract	This article addresses the controversy surrounding the Safe Schools Coalition Australia. Certain politicians and media commentators have accused the initiative of harming the students it ostensibly aims to benefit. Those accusations have, in turn, been labelled 'homophobic' by supporters of the Coalition. This article suggests that the term homophobic does not adequately describe or explain the visceral hostility of anti-Safe Schools discourses. Drawing on discourse analysis, I demonstrate how Safe Schools has been represented by its critics as being a sexual predator, while students have been represented as innocent, asexual, and requiring protection by their parents. These parents are the ones who can and should regulate their child's access to sexual knowledge -- and who can and should oppose Safe Schools. I conclude by arguing that the Safe Schools controversy is useful in that it provides an opportunity to recognise gender and sexually diverse student lives as being 'lives'; and to consider how programmes such as Safe Schools can help create safer educational environments for these and other disadvantaged students. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01