LGBTI Sexualities and intersectional research

Rosanna Barros,Agustín Romero López,Alejandro Granero Andújar

doi:10.3384/rela.2000-7426.3316

Abstract

We examine testimonies pertaining to the integration of a gender perspective beyond the dichotomy man-woman into practices of affective-sexual adult learning and education (ALE). We are interested in inclusive practices able to expand voices from specific vulnerable groups against discriminations and multiple oppressions among the aged when belonging to LGBTI Communities. The framework is based on post-feminist contributions, to allow for a democratic understanding of gender equality as well as to integrate population sectors suffering from different types of gender-based violence, such as non-heterosexual, trans and intersex people. The narrative literature review method was chosen, and international scientific search engines and databases were consulted to find literature in Portuguese, Spanish and English. A total of 25 educational interventions were selected for analysis. To discuss the data, we resorted to Barragán’s (1996) theoretical models. The results show a small number of internationally documented experiences on affective-sexual education with the elderly and adults

Highlights

Trying to explore what is missing in a gender sensitive research agenda is an interesting challenge (Ostrouch-Kamińska & Vieira, 2016)
As pointed out by Jones (2011), sexuality education is a broad concept and the ways it is conceived and understood, as well as the idiosyncratic characteristics of the experiences undertaken are the subject of multiple debates. It can encompass the most varied experiences, such as workshops on reproduction, health initiatives against Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STD), talks with an underlying moral purpose based on a religioustraditional view, informal conversations, pornography and other online spaces, the media, etc
Based on this broad view of the ways of understanding how one learns about the diverse range of contents and perspectives that the field of sexuality comprises, in this paper we use the term affective-sexual education to refer to the experiences and approaches included within formal and non-formal education

Summary

Introduction

Trying to explore what is missing in a gender sensitive research agenda is an interesting challenge (Ostrouch-Kamińska & Vieira, 2016). It can encompass the most varied experiences, such as workshops on reproduction, health initiatives against Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STD), talks with an underlying moral purpose based on a religioustraditional view, informal conversations, pornography and other online spaces, the media, etc Based on this broad view of the ways of understanding how one learns about the diverse range of contents and perspectives that the field of sexuality comprises, in this paper we use the term affective-sexual education to refer to the experiences and approaches included within formal and non-formal education. Following the same grammatical intentionality as the concept of ciscentrism, heterocentrism makes reference to the socioculturally established mechanisms that exclude, overlook, or render invisible non-heterosexual individuals, assuming that all relationships consist of a man and a woman and that all people have desires and affective–sexual feelings towards the opposite gender In this context, the LGBTI community and equality between women and men are issues that a comprehensive, egalitarian and democratic affective-sexual education needs to address. The educational field constitutes a space within which greater attention can be given to the minorities that have been traditionally excluded and discriminated, as is the case of the LGBTI community and the gender inequalities, for three main reasons (Britzman, 1995; Epstein & Johnson, 2000): 1) the thematic proximity of the content; 2) the fact that it is the educational space where discriminatory behaviours and values are most often exposed; 3) the involuntary nature of transmitted values, whether inclusive or discriminatory

Methodology

Conclusion