 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
Sexual Health Exchange, 1996 - no. 3 The Netherlands Findings from two different projects in The Netherlands have culminated in the development of a malespecific approach to sex education and publication of a Dutch handbook on male sex education called "Man in Focus". From 1990 to 1992 teachers, youth workers and researchers compared their experiences in working with boys from different backgrounds on the topics of sexuality, sexual relations and intimacy. The other project, begun in 1993 at the University of Utrecht Women's Studies Unit, was a qualitative study of boys' images about sexuality and how these images served as orientation in their first sexual encounters with girls. The study was based on biographical interviews with 15 boys aged 14-18 years. The findings of both projects were combined to develop the malespecific approach.
The boyspecific approach takes into account male socialization patterns and changing images and norms about male heterosexuality. Research showed that boys in The Netherlands in the mid-1990s wanted to please girls sexually and be perceived as good lovers. They did not mention their own desires or boundaries concerning sexuality. They had learned the technical aspects of sexuality from pornography, which reduced their uncertainty in initial sexual encounters, especially if they could not talk with their partners. Nevertheless, the lack of communication and uncertainty about their own desires allowed the boys to make assumptions about what the girls wanted. Even when both the boy and girl were inexperienced, boys saw their task as supervising the girl's sexuality.
Each boy regarded himself as the exception, viewing other boys as bad lovers who used girls for their own satisfaction. The boys had difficulty speaking openly with other boys about sexuality because they tended to show off, exaggerating or pretending to be selfassured, leading the researcher to characterize them as the "lonesome hero striving for autonomy". Lacking identification models, the boys need a positive image of male heterosexuality in order to break down their own isolation and to be able to communicate about their sexual experience and expectations with other boys and girls. To avoid the generalization of even worse (new) stereotypes of masculinity, sex education workers therefore need to recognize the boys' uncertainty, especially in initial sexual encounters, examine the boys' orientation patterns, and help the boys to communicate about these patterns. Informing boys about sexuality and intimacy should be done both in mixed-sex and boysonly groups. In both types of groups, educators need to take the boys seriously so that they feel safe enough to speak openly. The advantage of mixed groups is that they give boys information about how girls think about sexuality and make communication easier. But sex education should start in boys-only groups. This strategy may seem inappropriate, given the research observation concerning exaggeration behaviours in male peer groups, but in the sex education setting the educator can break through these behaviours. In single-sex groups, the boys do not need to hold up an image of the good lover in front of girls. When the educator speaks seriously with some participants, other boys will more easily give up their exaggeration behaviours because these come to have a new meaning, i.e., not being able to talk seriously about sex. The educators can integrate the boys' eagerness to become good lovers with technical aspects of sexuality and sexual health. Such integration could facilitate the boys' intention to use condoms. Using the research as a basis, a guide was prepared for educators working with boys aged 1418 years in neighbourhood centres, sports, schools and residential institutions. The first part of the book provides background information on working specifically with boys, touching on how boys get information, the role of intermediaries in working with boys and how boys think and act concerning sex. The second part is more practically oriented, discussing how boys are socialized concerning sex, the emotional meaning of changes in their bodies, their expectations regarding their role in relationships, etc. It concludes with a series of suggested activities. For example, as a result of findings that boys prefer exercises in which they are not asked to write, researchers developed a communication exercise called expression. Boys are asked to mime an emotion that is written on a card; the other members of the group try to guess the emotion. Another exercise measures the boys' ambivalence toward using condoms. A sixpage comic book has illustrations showing intercourse with a condom at different moments. The boys are asked to fill in the empty balloons of thinking that accompany the drawings. Stephan Cremer, Women's Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Utrecht, P.O. Box 80.140, 3508 TC Utrecht, The Netherlands; Tel: 31-30-253-1977; Fax: 31-30-253-5551; e-mail: scremer@fsw.ruu.nl |
In this exercise from "Man in Focus", boys are asked to fill in the balloons with the conversations they believe are taking place, so that they can discover whether they have stereotyped ideas about what men and women talk about among themselves
To initiate discussions about reproductive organs, boys are provided with two "connect-the-dots" exercises that will reveal drawings of the female and male genitalia |
|
