Young Men’s Experiences and Views of Sex Education in Bangladesh: A Foucauldian Discourse Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study has sought to shed light on the dearth of research on sex education in Bangladesh bringing forward young men’s experiences, views, narratives, recollections, and perceptions around sex education. Using social constructionism and poststructuralism, this study addresses the research questions: How did Bangladeshi young men receive sex education during adolescence? How did they interpret their experiences? How did their narratives reproduce and/or disrupt dominant discourses related to sex education, including discourses around sexuality, teenagerhood, masculinity, and manhood? Based on the qualitative data collected from nine in-depth Skype interviews with young men in Bangladesh, nine themes emerged. These themes illustrate - how participants received sex education with the help of peers, pornography, the Internet, media, parents, schools, and religion. This study also reveals that what they learned about sex and sexuality from these sources was often gendered (e.g., reproduced hegemonic masculinity), sexist (e.g., undermined the need for girls’ consent), and naturalized the idea of sex and sexuality as dangerous (e.g., through a focus on sexually infected disease prevention). This study identified dominant discourses around sex education, which are intertwined with social institutions, such as the school; it also illustrates instances which reproduced and disrupted these dominant discourses. Some participants embraced dominant discourses while others disrupted them, and some contradicted themselves. Participants also proposed mixed ways of improving sex education in Bangladesh, especially through designing sex education curriculum. The study draws the attention of the parents, curriculum designers, teachers, policymakers, service providers to young people, and scholars from the Global South to consider these innovations as food for thought to ensure young people’s right to sex education
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".