The aim of the paper is to shed a light on the social norms that dictate the discourses on dating and sex amongst young people today and how these norms shape or get shaped by normative gender roles as experienced by high school students. To clarify this, it is our intention to answer the following research question: How does one become a sexual subject and how does gender influence the formation of the sexual self?

This research is conducted from a feminist standpoint with emphasis on power in relation to the shaping of gender roles, and how they are constituted by the dominant discourses on dating and sex. This perspective helps to shed a light on young people’s everyday experiences and compare and contrast them with hegemonic discourses on masculinity and femininity. In other words, by focusing on the power imbalances in relationships amongst young people, we want to draw attention to the patriarchy’s impacts on our social realities, and how it as an institution and ideology, reproduces particular gender roles and inequalities within the intimate sphere of doing sex and dating. The aim is to draw attention to gender roles at play in young people’s dating life’s and consequently gain a better understanding of how they position themselves on the discourses of sex and dating, as well how they “do boy and girl” in these intimate practices (Paechter, 2012). This also draws attention to the discourse on sexual consent, and how high school students understand and work with the term before and during sex. Moreover, in order to get a complete picture, we need to focus on sex education in schools. Thus, we argue in this paper how a different kind of sex education can contribute to changes in terms of sexual encounters and interactions between young people within the sphere of intimacy.

One in three women worldwide are exposed to gender-based violence (abbr. GBV) in their lifetime (UN Women, 2018). In Iceland, 70% of victims of GBV report being exposed to it for the first time before the age of 18 (Stígamót, 2017). In this context there has been much discussion on sex education in Iceland and its emphasis on the biological side of sex leaving factors such as communication, feelings and consent out (Guðjónsdóttir & Pétursdóttir, 2018. Stígamót, 2018). This is coherent with other findings. For example, J.S. Hirsch et al. ethnographic research shows that college students have naïve ideas about sex, they don’t have real understanding of the concept of consent and don´t know how to set boundaries within sex. Thus, in order to stop GBV we must change the social norms that preside over the discourse on dating and sex (J.S. Hirsch et al., 2018). But what are these gendered norms and what shapes them? Can we change them through sex education or socialization within the education system?

The feminist standpoint draws our attention to power and gender as previously stated. We will draw on Connell’s ideas on masculinity and femininity, and how these roles are created and manifested by the society that creates them. Hegemonic masculinity implies that some masculinities are dominant, and others marginalized. Men incorporate discourses on manly behavior and become active agents in the making of their own self. Masculinity can only thrive in opposition to femininity, therefore femininity plays a vital part in the creation of masculinity and the hierarchy of patriarchy (Connell, 1995. Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005). How do these power dynamics uncover amongst young people today in terms of sexual practices and dating, and how do they influence particular gender roles during intimacy and sex?

Focus group interviews were conducted with four friendship groups, a total of 12 participants. Each group consisting of 3-4 persons, two girls and 1-2 boys, all of whom were 18 years old. Field notes were taken while on site as part of the data set. The interviews were semi-structured. The aim was to understand the point of view of the participants, to gain insight in to their experiences as they lived them and meet them on their own terms to try to understand them better. Focus group interviews were chosen due to the sensitive nature of the topic at hand. Researchers felt it more likely that subjects would feel comfortable partaking in the discussion with someone they trusted, both each other and the researcher who had worked in the field with the subjects for some time before the interviews. All subjects were informed of the purpose of the research and assured full confidentiality. Also, they were informed that their anonimity would be protected and that they could withdraw from the research at any time with out any questions asked. The dataset was transcribed, coded and analyzed thematically following the practices of Braun and Clark (Terry, Hayfield, Clark & Braun, 2015). In accordance with the feminist perspective the concept of hegemonic masculinity and emphasized femininity served as heuristic tools in analyzing the data and the aspect of powerrelations as a leading principle through out the analysis. First, all data was thoroughly examined and coded in interpretative codes to be able to catch the underlying themes of the data. Next the codes were lined up in accordance with the research question and their content defined. After much reflection the themes were readjusted, results written down and examples found to complement the analyses.

Our findings indicate that high school students are constituted by the dominant discourses on dating and sex, which draw on rather toxic ideology and traditional gender roles, in which the women (girls) are depicted as submissive and sexually inactive. In other words, through objectification they are constituted as sexual objects for boys to explore and “use” for their own needs and pleasure. Thus, boys enjoy privileges through their gender, supported by girls who through emphasized femininity boost their masculine self-esteem. These discourses translate into sex where boys exercise control and are in the dominant position. They are supposed to initiate sex, but the issue of consent is often unclear, and not fully negotiated. Consent is supposed to be felt or expressed with body language, but as it is the boy’s role to take control, it is also their responsibility to interpret their partners will. In other words, when doing sex, many boys draw on the discourse of hegemonic masculinity, and for some of our participants, being sexually active is still considered to be an important factor in forming the masculine self. Sexual practices of high school students and how they position themselves on the discourses of sex and dating also indicate the need for a different kind of sex education which not only focuses on biological factors, but also incorporates a feminist perspective and the emotional part of doing sex and dating.

Connell, R.W. (1995). Masculinities. Cambridge: Polity Press. Connell, R.W., Messerschmidt, J.W. (2005). Hegemonic Masculinity. Rethinking the Concept. Gender & society, 19(6), 829-859. Guðmundsdóttir, R. Á., Pétursdóttir, G.M. (2018). Kynferðiseinelti og mótun kvenleikans í íslenskri skólamenningu. Tímarit um uppeldi og menntun, 2018(27(1)). 43–64. Hirsch, J.S., Khan, S., Wamboldt, A., Mellins, C.A. (2018). Social Dimensions of Sexual Consent Among Cisgender Heterosexual College Students: Insights From Ethnographic Research. Journal of Adolescent Health. Paechter, Carrie. (2012). Bodies, identities and performances: reconfiguring the language of gender and schooling. Gender and Education, 2012(24(2)). 229-241. Stígamót. (2017). Annual report 2017. January 24th 2019 https://www.stigamot.is/static/files/arsskyrsla2017.pdf Stígamót. (2018). January 24th 2019 https://www.stigamot.is/is/um-stigamot/sjuk-ast-undirskriftasofnun Terry, G., Hayfield, N., Clarke, V., Braun, V. (2015). Thematic Analysis. In Smith, Jonathan A. (editor) Qualitavite Psychology: A Practical Guide to Research Methods (3d edition). London: SAGE Publications, Inc. UN Women. (2018). January 24th 2019 http://www.unwomen.org/en/news/in-focus/end-violence-against-women