Dialogue over discipline: Parents as sexually explicit media literacy educators

Abstract

Parents are important sexuality educators for their children; however, report challenges navigating contemporary sexually explicit media (SEM). Age appropriateness of discussions about SEM is a common concern. Twenty parents/carers of secondary school-aged children were interviewed to explore their experiences discussing SEM with their children, with data analysed within a social constructionist framework. SEM denotes all media containing representations of sex, including pornography. Parents perceived newer SEM where they lacked familiarity as threatening, but were comfortable discussing SEM with their children to establish open dialogue, rather than imposing consequences. Genuine occurrences of open-dialogue discussions were rare. Parents supported some SEM for adolescent sexual exploration, provided critical thinking and values were applied. Findings suggest willingness to view their adolescent children as emerging adults, ready for information about sexuality and relationships. Parents could be supported with education helping them conduct open, sex-positive discussions centring their children's values and experiences with SEM.

Keywords

Parent perspectives adolescents sexually explicit media sexuality education pornography pornography literacy

Background

Adolescent access to sexually explicit media (SEM) can be concerning for Australian parents as they raise their children through these important developmental years. Parents are frequently recognised as key providers of education about various sexuality topics (Connor et al., 2023; Padilla-Walker et al., 2020), including SEM (Burke et al., 2023; Davis et al., 2021; Zen et al., 2024). The need for parents to act as sexuality educators is often framed in academic literature (and broader society) as an issue of risk and mitigation. SEM is positioned as a negative influence on young people, who are considered innocent, meaning they lack awareness of sexuality (Buckingham & Chronaki, 2014). SEM is subsequently framed as a corrupting external influence, leading to the sexualisation of children. Scholars argue that such a discourse results from adult's anxieties around the loss of childhood innocence, namely the process of becoming sexually aware (Chronaki et al., 2025). Therefore, there are often calls for the protection of children from the dangers of new media in discussions about young people engaging with SEM, including viewing pornography or sexuality representations in broader media, or facilitating relationships on social media or other communication methods (Chronaki et al., 2025). We adopt this broad definition in this research, using the term SEM to include representations of sex in broader media, on and offline. This includes, but is not limited to pornography. This approach recognises that all media potentially influences sexuality attitudes (Pinkleton et al., 2012). Furthermore, this terminology reflects the lack of a standard definition of pornography (McKee et al., 2020). Literature discussed henceforth may use specific terms in line with their respective studies.

Much of the research pertaining to children and young people's engagements with SEM occurs within this communication-risk discourse. This discourse explores whether engagements with SEM influence young people's actions, potentially causing harm (Chronaki et al., 2025). An international study exploring barriers to discussing pornography found parents felt they lack the capability to discuss pornography in a manner they deemed age appropriate (Dawson et al., 2024). Here, the concept of age appropriateness reflects the idea that such content is inappropriate for children and adolescents. The discourse extends to published literature which often explores correlations between SEM engagement, including pornography use, and harmful attitudes towards sexuality, gender and relationships (Burnay et al., 2022; Peter & Valkenburg, 2016). Some research posits that such influence may result in young people sometimes mimicking activities viewed in pornography (Davis et al., 2020; Rothman et al., 2015). More recently, adult concern has turned to young people's attitudes towards sexuality and gender roles being influenced by social media, with 95% of Australian adolescents aged 13 to 15 using the most common apps: YouTube, Snapchat, TikTok and Instagram (eSafety Commissioner, 2025). There are concerns about social media influencers creating content promoting masculinity as traditionally dominant. A recent survey conducted by Fisher et al. (2025) of 3000 males aged 16 to 25 in the United Kingdom, United States and Australia found 63% had engaged with masculinity influencers, with 43% finding such content motivating and inspiring, potentially influencing attitudes supportive of male dominance in relationships.

Consequently, governments, community organisations and families are calling for policy solutions such as restricting social media access until the age of 16 (Prime Minister of Australia, 2024) and age verification measures for pornography websites (eSafety Commissioner, 2023c). Beyond a sole reliance on restrictions, education has also been recommended to build young people's literacy skills regarding the SEM they consume, with guidance for parents to support this skill development at home (Our Watch, 2020, 2024). Pornography and SEM literacy education is attracting more public attention, though discussion about what such education should entail remains ambiguous (Albury, 2014; Healy-Cullen et al., 2024). Generally, SEM literacy approaches are grounded in building young people's skills to analyse portrayals of gender and relationship dynamics in SEM, as a harm reduction strategy to mitigate potential negative influence (Crabbe & Flood, 2021; Rothman et al., 2018). Several frameworks and resources exist though few have been rigorously evaluated (Zen et al., 2024). While both school-based curricula and home-based resources and frameworks exist (Crabbe & Flood, 2021; Zen et al., 2024), some contend that schools may not be best suited to implementing SEM literacy (Byron, 2024), placing further importance on the role of parents as educators and warranting robust exploration of their views.

Australian parents report lacking the confidence to execute conversations about SEM and pornography with their children (Burke et al., 2023). Research states fathers are less comfortable discussing pornography, meaning that dysfunctional communication about pornography with their children was more likely, leaving mediation strategies to mothers (Boniel-Nissim et al., 2020; Dawson et al., 2024). Research indicates Australian parents underestimate young people's pornography access (Davis et al., 2021) which can occur weekly or more frequently and can commence prior to adolescence (Crabbe et al., 2024; Quadara et al., 2017). Purposeful seeking and habitual pornography use are likely throughout adolescence (eSafety Commissioner, 2023a). Furthermore, Australian sexuality educators and experts who engage parents on the topics of SEM and pornography report parents often have received no comprehensive relationships and sexuality education, and lack familiarity with contemporary online environments due to the recent advent of streaming, social media, and the ubiquity of devices enabling prolonged engagement (Zen et al., 2025). Australian parents also report fatigue and feelings of shame and self-stigma when monitoring their children's use of devices (Humphry et al., 2023; Milford et al., 2025).

The vastly different and changing media landscape arguably affects the way parents perform their roles as sexuality educators for their children. This study provides recent data on the perspectives of parents in Melbourne, Australia towards adolescent engagement with SEM and their experiences executing discussions with their adolescent children. We use the term parent to signify all parents and carers of young people. This knowledge is particularly salient amongst public discussion about adolescents’ SEM engagements and how parents can be supported as educators.

Method

This data is drawn from a broader study exploring perceptions and experiences of Australian parents towards SEM education provision in home and education settings. This article discusses how parents perceive and perform their role as educators.

Recruitment

Participants resided in metropolitan Melbourne and had at least one child currently attending secondary school. In Australia, students attend secondary school from grade seven to 12 and are usually aged between 11 and 18 years. Participants were recruited via social media (parenting pages on Facebook, Instagram and LinkedIn) and via snowball sampling. Interested participants were provided an online participant information sheet, consent form and survey. The survey confirmed eligibility by gathering demographic information about parents and their children. Parents were provided an AUD$50 gift voucher to thank them for participating. Eligible participants were emailed to confirm an interview time. This study was approved by the Curtin University Human Research Ethics Committee (HRE2022-0191).

Interviews

Semi-structured interviews were conducted online using Microsoft Teams. An interview schedule was developed to guide the interviews. Qualitative interviews enabled the gathering of rich data to discern how parents frame SEM with respect to their children's engagements. Questions explored how parents felt about SEM and any experiences having discussions about SEM with their adolescent children. Perceived concerns and benefits to adolescent SEM engagement were explored. Their own experiences in adolescence discussing sexuality topics with their parent's also helped garner insights into how these experiences influenced their own parenting practices.

Twenty parents (11 mothers and nine fathers) participated. Parents were aged from 29 to 58 years. All had at least one child currently attending secondary school, aged between 12 and 18. Two parents were foster-carers. The majority (n = 14) identified as Australian with English heritage. Three participants cited Polish heritage and one parent each reported Indian, American and Maori heritage. English was the main language spoken at home for all participants.

The first author conducted the interviews, making specific effort to ensure participants were comfortable discussing their views openly. This helped limit the potential impacts of power imbalances inherent in interviews. The interviewer acknowledged how the topic of their children's sexuality might be potentially uncomfortable, encouraging participants to only include as much detail as they felt comfortable. Participants were reminded they could choose not to respond to any questions. The interviewer disclosed not being a parent to help participants discuss their experiences as though they were talking to an interested observer, rather than a fellow parent for assessment or comparison. Furthermore, participants were informed that the researchers were experienced sexuality researchers and/or accredited sexologists and therefore comfortable discussing topics likely to arise. Interviews lasted 45–60 minutes and were recorded and transcribed using Microsoft Teams’ secure automatic transcription functionality. The first author de-identified and provided the transcripts to parents to optionally correct any details within seven days. Knowing they had the opportunity to view de-identified transcripts prior to analysis also helped parents speak freely. One participant responded with a clarification, which was included in the transcript.

Analysis

Interview data was entered into NVivo software (release 1.7.2) where a thematic analysis was conducted following the formalised six-step process outlined by Braun et al. (2019). The first author conducted familiarisation with the data (step one) and an initial inductive coding process (step two) (Liamputtong, 2019). Codes were grouped into themes and reviewed (steps three and four) through discussion and review with the second and third authors to ensure parent statements were being interpreted rigorously (Braun et al., 2019; Connelly & Peltzer, 2016). The first author also kept a reflexive field journal throughout data collection and analysis (Byrne, 2022). The journal documented how parents reacted to certain questions, their tone of voice and inflection when responding and any other notable reflections, to add depth to analysis. This also helped determine which themes were most significant (step five) for the reporting of findings (step six).

Data were interpreted via a social constructionist framework. This theory posits that there is not one single truth, rather cultural norms are constructed by individuals through their interactions within social settings (Burr, 2015). This theory is relevant when considering the provision of sexuality education to young people, who are constructing their own norms around sex and sexuality through interactions in broader social settings, including with parents, educators and media. Parents’ perspectives are similarly informed by their own experiences of sex, relationships and sexuality education, their own engagements with SEM and current media discourse. Semantic and latent coding allowed for analysis of statements at face-value, and for deeper meanings interpreted by the researchers (Byrne, 2022).

Findings

We developed five themes outlining how parents construct and perform their roles as sexuality educators for their adolescent children. These were as follows:

The perceived threat of new, unfamiliar media

Being approachable to support growing independence

Dialogue over discipline

SEM for sexual exploration

Critical thinking and clear values

The perceived threat of new, unfamiliar media

Parents commonly cited their lack of familiarity with contemporary media as increasing their anxiety towards what SEM their children viewed and how this may influence their attitudes towards sexuality and relationships. This concern was raised frequently regarding social media, due to the lack of control social media users have over the content being shared and seen. Parents specifically mentioned concerns around Snapchat, as they were sceptical that shared images were deleted, and TikTok, for unintended exposure to SEM.

‘there's not much control we have over social media. So what the TikTok algorithm's going to feed through’ Blanche (39)

The rapidly changing nature of social media made it difficult for parents to keep up with new apps and how they were used. Rachelle (44) who deems herself competent with social media articulated her struggles trying to set up a parent account on Snapchat.

I downloaded Snapchat to try and be a parent on the account… (so) that I could control his account. Could not use it. And I use Instagram and X and Facebook… I'm not totally social media non-savvy.

Parents of children of all genders believed social media encouraged people to appreciate and value a person's physical appearance more than their character. Lara (51), for example, stated that her 12-year-old daughter had ‘more expensive makeup and skincare than I do, and all she wants to buy is skincare and makeup, and it's all come from socials’. Two fathers believed following male athletes and gym influencers on social media had negatively impacted their respective sons’ body image. Charlie (44) discussed these impacts on his son, noting his belief that social media personalities may make unrealistic body types appear more common than they are.

Maybe .5% of the population has that perfect body that's worthy of being promoted and put on things… but it's becoming so mainstream that everyone wants to be the influencer… doing the weights or the food stuff.

Lara and Charlie's comments reflect parental anxiety towards premature sexualisation. This fear was also evident in parental concern about the participatory nature of social media and its role in relationships. There were major concerns about their children making, sharing and receiving SEM. This could be either from overt pressure from a romantic interest or a personal desire to fit a perception that all adolescents made and shared explicit images. Rachelle (44) discussed this while reviewing her son's social media accounts and finding many of his peers posing in what she felt were sexually suggestive poses. Parents also discussed legal implications.

‘One of the things I'm really concerned about is that their peers will take images involving nudity… and that would be technically child pornography. So viewing, possession, all of that freaks me out’ Blanche (39)

Parents discussed their concerns for generating and sharing explicit images of peers via artificial intelligence (AI). Such concerns stemmed from recent news reports of such occurrences in Melbourne secondary schools. Some parents recounted being contacted by their child's schools to inform them of instances of explicit photos being shared on social media, stoking their concerns.

A few parents were concerned about their children falling victim to criminal behaviour through contact via online games or social media. These parents were extremely comfortable discussing ‘stranger danger’ and online safety with their children and were therefore confident their adolescent child would block such attempts to contact them online.

Being approachable to support growing independence

Most parents stated they were very comfortable discussing SEM with their children. Many emphasised their comfort discussing sex and relationships broadly and when prompted, reaffirmed their comfort discussing SEM specifically. Parents made a conscious effort to normalise discussions about sex and relationships to ensure their children felt comfortable approaching them about such topics.

‘We really tried to destigmatise it so that they felt comfortable in approaching us when they were ready to be sexually active’ Trent (49)

Trent elaborated on his views, providing a broader, intergenerational lens to his perspective.

They need to be able to talk about sex and not treat it as a big taboo because if you do, then they're going to be another generation of people who don't talk about it with their kids.

Many parents similarly framed their responses in comparison to their own experiences in adolescence. Discussions about sex with their own parents were awkward and uncomfortable, with some claiming no such discussions occurred.

‘I never talked about this stuff with my mom. It just never happened.’ Julia (49)

Lara (51) reflected on how her and her husband's lack of communication about sex with their parents influenced how they chose to raise their children with more open communication.

I grew up in a very loving family, even though it was closed-communication…. (husband) grew up in a very different type of family and I think we've come together and developed our parenting style around the things that we missed out on.

Despite reporting comfort with and efforts to normalise discussions about sex, parents also reported various challenges, particularly with instigating conversations. Some claimed they held proactive discussions with their children; however, further prompting revealed the conversations resulted from their child asking a question about something they had overheard, announcing they had commenced a romantic relationship or being given a mobile device. Small, reactive conversations commonly occurred in response to unintended encounters with SEM, such as sex scenes in films. Parents preferred their children to approach them with questions, as they were unsure about what age to discuss SEM with their child, and in what detail. Fear of introducing sexuality topics too soon was common, reflecting constructions of childhood innocence.

‘I'm always mindful too that I don't want to give them ideas… it's kind of like that treading that balancing act of… meeting with them where they're at versus… taking them somewhere that they are not there yet’ Jennifer (47)

The childhood innocence framing meant Jennifer was concerned about potential harm through conversations or ideas influencing her children. Whereas the same framing led Owen (49) to discussing a more personal difficulty starting conversations with his eldest teenage daughter, being the need to acknowledge she was growing up. Therefore, he preferred if she instigated the conversation.

You still see her as that little girl… I just want to… have fun with her sort of thing, you know?… It's up to me to get the courage to go through with it. I'd be more comfortable with her asking me and then we just go straight to a conversation.

Parents discussed perceptions of their children's discomfort during conversations about SEM. Regardless, they persevered with the approach to establish open dialogue. Sarah (53) recounted successfully using humour to lighten conversations.

We touch on masturbation occasionally, to their horror. My daughter had a lot of trouble getting to sleep so I suggested that if she tried masturbating that might help and she thought that was hysterical and went to school and told all her friends

While parents were willing to act as supports for their children discovering sexuality, they also discussed adolescence as a time of growing independence that may diminish their capacity as educators. Rachelle (44) acknowledged she may not be her son's preferred source of information about sexuality and discussed the importance of providing him alternatives.

I try and encourage that conversation… and let him know that it's OK not to want to talk to me about it and that if he wants, I can connect him to another adult in his life

Multiple parents believed adolescents lacked interest in such discussions and naturally do not want to listen to their parents.

‘the other natural tension with parenting is that… mum can be talking in the background, but they zone out’ Serena (50)

Some felt their children were private people and did not want to make them feel uncomfortable. Sarah (53) noted differences between her 16-year-old male and female twins.

He’ll talk about the issues generally, but he doesn’t really like to talk about his own experiences or his growth development… so that is definitely a challenge. I haven’t seen him naked in years, he's quite private in that respect. My daughter less so, she's more open to discussing herself and the changes in her body.

Parents also cited the pressures of everyday life meant emerging responsibilities like supporting their children's sexual development and independence were sometimes neglected. Rachelle (44) has three sons and discussed the ‘mental energy’ required of parents.

the paediatrician appointment today or you know (son) got suspended on Friday and Monday, and for the two weeks before that they were sick, and the two weeks before that it was school holidays and it's hard. We don't ever get a break in life to be the best parents that we would love to be.

Some parents discussed their unique experiences supporting the independence of neurodivergent children. Rachelle has a child with autism and discussed difficulty following screentime guidelines, as he required time alone in his room, far from communal spaces in the home.

Because he has Autism, he needs some time out. Sometimes he needs the dark space where the other kids aren't around and so it's hard to balance the needs for him and his neurodiversity with the needs to monitor it (screentime).

Parents of neurodivergent children frequently reported difficulties having discussions encouraging the critique of messages conveyed within SEM. They cited the need to ensure communication was consistent and clear with their children.

Dialogue over discipline

Parents overwhelmingly expressed the benefit of creating a safe environment for open conversations about SEM with their children. They felt this would increase the likelihood of their children approaching them for support if they viewed something they found distressing. Parents felt strict discipline would prevent this. Many parents discussed the benefit of remaining calm and if possible, having the time to prepare for conversations as they can ‘escalate quickly, so you need to be in the right headspace as well’. (Jennifer, 47)

As the stepmother of two teenage girls, Blanche (39) described an intentional choice for her to be an adult available for support, stability and guidance, over strict discipline. Discussions with her eldest stepdaughter suggest this approach was successful.

She's reflected to me that she feels that I've provided a safe space for discussion and she doesn't feel judged. So that gives her an opportunity to have a space that she can air this out and get a different perspective. I'm not here to punish her. I'm not here to restrict her, because that's never been my role… And that was a very intentional part of our dynamic.

Scott (29) provides a unique perspective as a foster-father of an adolescent male, whose previous foster parent was reportedly strict with social media use and pornography access. This allowed Scott to take a different approach to encourage skill building.

I've tried to let him make mistakes and learn from them, but then also have discussions about those mistakes, rather than consequences and yelling and screaming like his previous carer did.

Multiple parents took a similar approach to help their children develop their own critical awareness skills, which they felt were essential. Encouraging two-way conversations and inviting their child's point of view on any rules or expectations was deemed effective, over imposing restrictions without consultation. Regarding her children watching pornography, Serena (50) held the view that this meant her children were ready for a conversation, regardless of any discomfort.

I have this view that if you think that you're mature enough to watch something like that, then you're mature enough to have a conversation about it.

Fiona (58) provided a rare example of genuine open dialogue, making concerted effort to include her daughter's perspectives and invite discussion about differing views. This is notable as the only example of open dialogue provided.

I always invited her point of view. I would say ‘what are they telling you at school to do? What are their concerns? What do you think about that? Did you like that?’…[so I] tell them my point of view, but in the context of a whole lot of others. Sometimes she used to go off and check what her mates thought about what I said.

While Fiona encouraged her daughter to critically reflect on her and other's perspectives, she emphasised the importance of being firm in her own view, acknowledging this sometimes led to arguments. Fiona felt her firm opinions, while more confrontational than her husbands ‘Switzerland’ or neutral approach, resulted in her daughter instigating more conversations about various topics ‘because she knows I’ll give her an honest answer’.

In two-parent families, having both talk with their child simultaneously was discussed, though there was no consensus on if this was beneficial. Some defaulted to having fathers discuss SEM with their sons and mothers with their daughters. Charlie (44) for example discussed pornography with his son after discovering it on the family iPad.

It was… father/son, let's not get everyone involved… and don't want him to feel like we're ganging up.

Conversely, others found it beneficial to have the discussion together so they could rely on each other for preparation and to present a united position.

Parents were hesitant to punish children with restrictions on social media use, as this was their main communication method with their friends. They also found it difficult balancing concerns about SEM available online with a desire to trust their children by not over-monitoring screentime.

‘I realised that we were stopping him from communicating with his friends, which is certainly not something we want.’ Charlie (44)

‘I don't want to be checking his social media all the time to make sure that there's nothing explicit there. I'm sure there's going to be at some point, but I just don't want to be like “show me your phone every week”’ Francesca (42)

Sexually explicit media for sexual exploration

Parents believed strongly in the need for adolescents to explore their sexuality, framing some SEM as a useful aid for this. Many recounted experiences from their own adolescence with positive nostalgia, discussing how no communication with their parents meant they turned various media and peer groups to explore and find information about sex. Such exploration was deemed a natural part of adolescence. This included engaging with pornography, as reflected by Scott (29).

Being classic adolescent, it was always pornography. So that was kind of the gateway into it all. And then like discussions with friends and things in high school

Parents recalled turning to magazines, books and being given resources to read in their own time by parents, with no follow-up conversations. Parents often recounted finding other sources of information about sex in secrecy.

‘Sneaking into the back of the video library, finding our mates dad's Playboy or Penthouse or Hustler’ Gregory (57)

‘This is sad, but my dad was a fan of the late night SBS movies’ Blanche (39)

Parents felt that non-pornographic media depicting sex and sexuality could be useful in helping curious adolescents explore their sexuality. Sarah (53) suggested certain films and books as alternatives. She discussed watching the film, Deadpool with her children.

the couple has a really great, positive, joyful sex life… that could be an example of some media where they could watch it and go, ‘ok, I get that this can be playful and fun, positive, joyful.

She also remembered how reading the Australian novel, Holding the Man gave her greater insights into how gay men have sex.

‘there are definitely books that I think just give great insights into people's experiences with sex, particularly for them as young people who are not yet sexually active.’ Sarah, (53)

Blanche (39) recalled watching Married at First Sight (MAFS) with her stepdaughter where sex toys were discussed.

On MAFS, they’re using sex toys. There would be benefits in normalising the concepts of pleasure and safety and consent and what are measures of good healthy relationships, because it's not something I was exposed to.

Parents acknowledged the benefits of magazine sealed sections as sources of detailed information about sex. Many mothers cited gaining sexual knowledge from Dolly Doctor, a section of Dolly magazine where adolescent sexual health questions were answered by a general practitioner.

‘A lot of the real education came from… Cleo and Dolly Doctor… A lot of it came from… teen magazines’ Blanche (39)

‘No Internet back in the day, so it was all through peer chit chat… (and) the old sealed sections in Cosmopolitan and Cleo and Dolly magazine.’ Julia (49)

Critical thinking and clear values

Parents felt it was important their children develop the ability to discern the material they wanted to view and how to critique it through their own values lens. Parents already confident in their children's ability to do this were less concerned about potential negative media influence. Many parents discussed this while making comparisons with media messaging from their own adolescence, finding it inappropriate in retrospect. Blanche (39) recalled feeling inundated with media messages conveying ‘pick me energy’, where females vie for male attention. Julia (49) made similar comments while discussing female-targeted magazines, which she felt were all about pleasing male partners.

It was it was all geared to how to please your partner… very much about women pleasing men, about beauty aesthetics.

Parents therefore felt children today were more literate about the media they consumed. For example, Blanche (39) was confident her 15-year-old stepdaughter is ‘very sure within herself and… based on discussions, I know that she's got a good idea of what healthy and respectful relationships are’.

Other parents based their confidence on comments their children made in response to news reports or sex scenes. Leo (47) for example discussed his daughter's recognition that female athletes gained less attention than male athletes in news media. This gave him confidence in her ability to critique sexist treatment of female athletes in the media. Cameron (46) noted his daughters being attuned to what they believed were more feminist messages in the Netflix series, Bridgerton.

Our girls are very sensitive to and aware of and responsive to misogyny and sexism… obviously I wouldn't want them being exposed to sexually violent imagery… But I'm also conscious that they've got the critical skills to be able to manage their own exposure to the sort of sexually explicit material that you're going to see in mainstream media.

This comment reflects Cameron's belief in the importance of young people developing their own critical thinking skills. He elaborated on his daughter's ability to ‘self-limit’ as his preferred outcome, reiterating adolescents need to be able to determine the content they want to view, with parents being there for support if required.

‘they're aware of where some of those traps are and they avoid them. From a parent's perspective, that's a really good place to be. You don't want them to be overly anxious, but at the same time, if they've got a concern and they feel they can come to you… that's much better than them going off and doing stuff without knowing about it.’ Cameron (46)

Notably, parents predominantly discussed the importance of critical thinking and clear values in regard to female children being protected from harmful relationship dynamics or sexist societal attitudes.

Discussion and implications

This research outlines how parents construct and perform their roles as sexuality educators for adolescent children with respect to SEM. The social constructionist framework allows for in-depth analysis of parents’ experiences which can help inform future policy and educative approaches. Parents here viewed their children's engagements with SEM with some trepidation due to their unfamiliarity with the vastly different media available than in their own adolescence. Concern most notably manifested towards social media and its potential role in facilitating relationships, more so than their children's consumption of SEM for entertainment. Parents made conscious effort to ensure their children felt comfortable to approach them to discuss sexuality topics and believed strict discipline would counteract this. While genuine occurrences of open dialogue were rare, such dialogue was deemed beneficial to developing critical thinking skills and the application of their own values towards sex and relationships.

Parental anxiety and childhood innocence

Parents frequently framed their responses through comparisons with the SEM available in their own adolescence. This illustrates positive nostalgia for the familiar past and their inherent anxiety towards the unfamiliar present. For example, they did not facilitate relationships online in adolescence, prompting concern for their own children doing so. Social media being used to conduct relationships garnered greater concern from parents. Young people have many uses for social media, including communication, relationship facilitation and exploring information about sex and sexuality; however, such activities are often innately positioned as harmful (Chronaki et al., 2025). Parents in this research adopted this lens, with a propensity to frame discussions in alignment with literature exploring common characteristics of ‘media panics’ centring fear of children becoming sexual (Chronaki et al., 2025; Tsaliki, 2015). Concern towards media-facilitated relationships conveys discomfort towards broader social changes in how people conduct relationships. Rapid social changes are a recurring catalyst across media panics, in which concerns about the corruption of childhood are recycled as newer media forms appear (Buckingham & Strandgaard Jensen, 2012). This can also be argued in relation to the sample's concerns about generative AI stemming from recent media reports regarding image-based abuse involving such technology in Melbourne secondary schools. Potential harms of generative AI include the creation of sexually explicit imagery using the image of a real person, or manipulation or abuse via artificial responses appearing to be from real people (eSafety Commissioner, 2023b).

Parents held gendered concerns for their children. There was anxiety towards female children experiencing harm from unequal power dynamics in relationships or being victimised through online abuse. Conversely, there were concerns for male children perpetrating abuse. These concerns reflect a broader discourse of children and SEM tending to focus on the sexualisation of girls, framing them as more likely to come to harm (Chronaki et al., 2025). Arguably, this heteronormative concern has historically underpinned the risk-mitigation focus of many approaches to sexuality education (Tsaliki, 2015).

While the media panic concept may provide a useful framework for considering adolescent media engagement, some caution against using the term to dismiss parental concern (Buckingham & Strandgaard Jensen, 2012). Even parents in this research who were more comfortable with their children becoming sexually active still held concerns. If the loss of childhood innocence and gendered harm are perennial anxieties, recurring with newer media forms, then consideration is best given to how parents can be supported as sexuality educators.

Education and open dialogue

This research confirms existing literature that Australian parents prefer open dialogue and education with adolescents rather than relying on restrictive measures for SEM access (Burke et al., 2023; Davis et al., 2021). Parents expressed comfort in discussing sex and relationships with their children. However, reflexive examination of their stories revealed greater comfort with less detailed discussions about relationships and sex, than the explicit and detailed conversations they felt were required when discussing SEM, and persistent uncertainty about when to instigate conversations. Fear was mitigated for many parents who reported confidence in their children's ability to critically think, echoing support for SEM and pornography literacy education found in other studies (Zen et al., 2024). Specifically, parents were comforted knowing their children could discern for themselves the SEM they consume, apply their own values to such material and translate these into their own relationships. This educative approach was preferred for adolescents purposely seeking pornography, consistent with other research with Australian parents and adolescents (Burke et al., 2023; eSafety Commissioner, 2023a; Green et al., 2024). Parents preferred educative discussion to develop and apply their child's values, over restrictions, citing hesitation towards monitoring screen-use and limiting their child's ability to socialise. This finding is crucial as Australia trials social media age restrictions for those under 16 (Prime Minister of Australia, 2024).

While parents preferred open dialogue over discipline, genuine occurrences of open discussions inviting their children's perspectives and experiences were rare. Rather, parents described discussions characterised by a calm demeanour and absence of punishment, while retaining a focus on SEM's potential harms. Recent Australian research has similarly found parents appear most comfortable discussing SEM's potential harms, rather than listening to their children's values and experiences (Page Jeffery et al., 2025). Only Fiona discussed experiences inviting her daughter's opinions about SEM, which is at odds with other published literature (Page Jeffery et al., 2025). In their own adolescence, parents discussed accessing SEM for pleasure and information about sex in secrecy due to fear of retribution and insufficient parent communication. This suggests SEM as a proxy sexuality educator for young people is not new. More importantly, it inspired many parents to construct themselves as trusted supports for their children to discuss sexuality topics. Arguably, supporting parents to conduct conversations with genuine open-dialogue focusing on values and relationship skills with respect to SEM would better allay parent concerns articulated in this research.

Implications for education

Parents in this study were supportive in fostering their child's sexual development. Data indicated parents were willing and able to see their adolescent children as sexualised individuals as they progress into adulthood. This was evident in parental support for some SEM as sources of explicit sexual information. Sarah, for example, even suggested masturbation to her daughter to help her sleep. Such findings highlight the need for education for parents to help them support young people's sexual exploration and discovery. Research with adolescents consistently finds they want detailed, evidence-based, shame-free education about sex and relationships (eSafety Commissioner, 2023a; Ezer et al., 2019; Pound et al., 2016). Such education is well-supported by Australian parents (Hendriks et al., 2023). SEM and pornography literacy education would benefit from the same approach, particularly when delivered by parents.

Scholars argue however that efforts thus far have positioned SEM as distinct from real sex and relationships and is to be disapproved of and avoided (Albury, 2014; Byron et al., 2021). Such an approach risks alienating young people who actively seek SEM for pleasure and education. Furthermore, it does not reflect parental desires for their children to discern the media they engage with for themselves. It also neglects growing evidence finding young people are already critical of the SEM they engage with and are aware it may not provide accurate information (eSafety Commissioner, 2023a; Green et al., 2024; Litsou et al., 2021; Woodley et al., 2025; Woodley et al., 2024). Rather, there may be benefit in parent-led educative approaches supporting open discussion about personal values and feelings in relation to SEM. Such an approach positions young people as conscious consumers, rather than innately susceptible to SEM's potential influence (Healy-Cullen et al., 2024).

While this research suggests parental support for such an approach, these findings must be seen within the context of the limited sample. While the strong number of participating fathers is beneficial due to limited Australian literature exploring fathers as sexuality education providers (Connor et al., 2023), the sample lacks broader diversity. No Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander participants were able to be recruited. While two fathers strongly identified as Christian, other religious groups are not represented. Similarly, although some parents had children with disabilities, further exploration of these experiences is required. The study was conducted in one metropolitan city, with rural and remote perspectives not included. The views of these sub-populations warrant further exploration. Interviews took place during a period in which various incidents of students sharing SEM occurred in Australian secondary schools, which many parents raised, potentially piquing their concerns. Perhaps unsurprisingly, many available resources and programs for parents combine information about SEM viewing with online safety and making/sharing SEM (Zen et al., 2024), reflecting current harm discourses. Future research examining parents and importantly, young people's perspectives and experiences would benefit from going beyond the communication-risk discourse. Effort should be made to avoid positioning SEM as something innately harmful, and young people as innately susceptible. Such research could offer a broader and more inclusive exploration of how young people engage with SEM as the adults they are becoming.

Future interventions targeting parents should focus on supporting them to proactively engage in open conversations with their children about their experiences with SEM and the resulting feelings and values represented. This would be more beneficial than reactive discussions about sexuality topics without preparation, potentially defaulting to a sole focus on harms. It is recommended to frame parent-targeted education as helping adolescents develop skills for healthy, respectful sexual relationships, rather than solely protecting them from harm, which may not resonate with young people (Spišák, 2016). Parents in this study had faith in their children's safety, as they had instilled a core set of values, decision making skills and help seeking behaviours. Parent-targeted education should seek to build these skills in the context of SEM, in a strength-based, sex-positive way, helping adolescents progress towards independent, sexual beings.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the parents who generously volunteered their time to participate in this research.

ORCID iDs

Marc Zen

Jacqueline Hendriks

Sharyn Burns

Ethical approval and informed consent statements

This study was approved by the Curtin University Human Research Ethics Committee (HRE2022-0191). All participants provided consent via an online survey to participate, be recorded and have deidentified results reported. All study protocols were outlined in a participant information sheet.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The first author is in receipt of a Commonwealth Research Training Partnership (RTP) stipend. No additional funding was received for this study.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author (Marc Zen), upon reasonable request.

References

Albury

(2014) Porn and sex education, porn as sex education. Porn Studies 1(1–2): 172–181.

Boniel-Nissim

Efrati

Dolev-Cohen

(2020) Parental mediation regarding children's pornography exposure: the role of parenting style, protection motivation and gender. The Journal of Sex Research 57(1): 42–51.

Braun

Clarke

Hayfield

, et al. (2019) Thematic analysis. In: P

Liamputtong

(ed.) Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences . Singapore: Springer Singapore10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_103.

Buckingham

Chronaki

(2014) Saving the children? In: S

Wagg

Pilcher

(eds) Thatcher's Grandchildren? Politics and Childhood in the Twenty-First Century . London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan UK. 10.1057/9781137281555_16.

Buckingham

Strandgaard Jensen

(2012) Beyond “Media Panics”. Journal of Children and Media 6(4): 413–429.

Burke

Purvis

Sandiford

, et al. (2023) “It’s Not a One-Time Conversation”: Australian parental views on supporting young people in relation to pornography exposure. Psych 5(2): 508–525. https://www.mdpi.com/2624-8611/5/2/34

Burnay

Kepes

Bushman

(2022) Effects of violent and nonviolent sexualized media on aggression-related thoughts, feelings, attitudes, and behaviors: a meta-analytic review. Aggressive Behaviour 48(1): 111–136.

Burr

, (2015) Social Constructionism . 3rd ed. London, UK: Routledge.. 10.4324/9781315715421.

Byrne

(2022) A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis. Quality & Quantity 56(3): 1391–1412.

10.

Byron

(2024) Porn literacy and young people’s digital cultures. Porn Studies 11(1): 32–39.

11.

Byron

McKee

Watson

, et al. (2021) Reading for realness: porn literacies, digital media, and young people. Sexuality & Culture 25(3): 786–805.

12.

Chronaki

Dudek

Woodley

(2025) Young people’s perceptions of harm from accessing online sexual content. New Media & Society 27(5): 2457–2472.

13.

Connelly

Peltzer

(2016) Underdeveloped themes in qualitative research: relationship with interviews and analysis. Clinical Nurse Specialist 30(1): 52–57.

14.

Connor

Fisher

Kauer

, et al. (2023) Father-son sex communication in Australian adolescent males. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth 28(1): 2282130.

15.

Crabbe

Flood

(2021) School-based education to address pornography’s influence on young people: a proposed practice framework. American Journal of Sexuality Education 16(1): 1–37.

16.

Crabbe

Flood

Adams

(2024) Pornography exposure and access among young Australians: a cross-sectional study. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 48(3): 100135. 10.1016/j.anzjph.2024.100135.

17.

Davis

Temple-Smith

Carrotte

, et al. (2020) A descriptive analysis of young women’s pornography use: a tale of exploration and harm. Sexual Health (Online) 17(1): 69–76.

18.

Davis

Wright

Curtis

, et al. (2021) ‘Not my child’: parenting, pornography, and views on education. Journal of Family Studies 27(4): 573–588.

19.

Dawson

Gabhainn

Friday

, et al. (2024) Barriers and recommendations for parent-child conversations about pornography. Frontiers in Sociology 9: 1349549.

20.

eSafety Commissioner (2023a) Accidental, unsolicited and in your face. Young people’s encounters with online pornography: a matter of platform responsibility, education and choice. Canberra: Australian Government https://www.esafety.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-08/Accidental-unsolicited-and-in-your-face.pdf?v=1715474150479

21.

eSafety Commissioner (2023b) Generative AI – position statement. Generative AI – position statement. https://www.esafety.gov.au/industry/tech-trends-and-challenges/generative-ai

22.

eSafety Commissioner (2023c) Roadmap for age verification and complementary measures to prevent and mitigate harms to children from online pornography. Canberra: Australian Government https://www.esafety.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-08/Roadmap-for-age-verification_2.pdf

23.

eSafety Commissioner (2025) Behind the screen: The reality of age assurance and social media access for young Australians. Canberra: Australian Government https://www.esafety.gov.au/sites/default/files/2025-02/Behind-the-screen-transparency-report-Feb2025.pdf?v=1748252565718

24.

Ezer

Kerr

Fisher

, et al. (2019) Australian Students’ experiences of sexuality education at school. Sex Education: Sexuality, Society and Learning 19(5): 597–613.

25.

Fisher

Rice

Seidler

(2025) Young men's health in a digital world. Melbourne: Movember Institute of Men's Health. https://cdn.sanity.io/files/d6 × 1mtv1/mo-com-production/e1054b901ac235e16f177a2bca8ee760fb8e6a19.pdf

26.

Green

Ringrose

Dudek

(2024) Australian Teens Talk about Nudes and Dick Pics: It’s not Pornography to Them. M/C Journal 27(4) https://www.journal.media-culture.org.au/index.php/mcjournal/article/view/3083

27.

Healy-Cullen

Morison

Taylor

, et al. (2024) What does it mean to be ‘porn literate’: perspectives of young people, parents and teachers in Aotearoa New Zealand. Culture, Health & Sexuality 26(2): 174–190.

28.

Hendriks

Marson

Walsh

, et al. (2023) Support for school-based relationships and sexual health education: a national survey of Australian parents. Sex Education 24(2): 208–224.

29.

Humphry

Boichak

Hutchinson

(2023) Emerging online safety issues: co-creating social media education with young people - research report. Sydney: University of Sydney https://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/bitstream/handle/2123/31689/USyd_Emerging%20Online%20Safety%20Issues_Report_WEB.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y

30.

Liamputtong

(2019) Qualitative Research Methods. 5th ed. Australia: Oxford University Press.

31.

Litsou

Byron

McKee

, et al. (2021) Learning from pornography: results of a mixed methods systematic review. Sex Education 21(2): 236–252.

32.

McKee

Byron

Litsou

, et al. (2020) An interdisciplinary definition of pornography: results from a global Delphi panel. Archives of Sexual Behavior 49(3): 1085–1091.

33.

Milford

Vernon

Scott

, et al. (2025) Exploring parent self-efficacy in children's digital device use: understanding shame and self-stigma through a mixed-methods approach. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction 43: 100718.

34.

Our Watch (2020) Pornography, young people, and preventing violence against women. Melbourne: Our Watch https://media-cdn.ourwatch.org.au/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/11/20022415/Pornography-young-people-preventing-violence.pdf

35.

Our Watch (2024) Impact of pornography on young people survey report summary. Melbourne: Our Watch https://assets.ourwatch.org.au/assets/About-us-documents/Impacts-of-pornography-on-young-people-Summary.pdf

36.

Padilla-Walker

Rogers

McLean

(2020) Is there more than one way to talk about sex? A longitudinal growth mixture model of parent-adolescent sex communication. Journal of Adolescent Health 67(6): 851–858.

37.

Page Jeffery

McKee

Lumby

(2025) Young people and sexually explicit content online: exploring Australian parents’ concerns. New Media & Society 27(5): 2620–2637.

38.

Peter

Valkenburg

(2016) Adolescents and pornography: a review of 20 years of research. The Journal of Sex Research 53(4-5): 509–531.

39.

Pinkleton

Austin

Chen

, et al. (2012) The role of media literacy in shaping adolescents’ understanding of and responses to sexual portrayals in mass media. Journal of Health Communication 17(4): 460–476.

40.

Pound

Langford

Campbell

(2016) What do young people think about their school-based sex and relationship education? A qualitative synthesis of young people's views and experiences. BMJ Open 6(9) 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011329

41.

Prime Minister of Australia (2024) Minimum age for social media access to protect Australian kids. https://www.pm.gov.au/media/minimum-age-social-media-access-protect-australian-kids

42.

Quadara

El-Murr

Latham

(2017) The effects of pornography on children and young people: An evidence scan. Research Report 2017. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies. https://aifs.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/rr_the_effects_of_pornography_on_children_and_young_people_1_0.pdf

43.

Rothman

Adhia

Christensen

, et al. (2018) A pornography literacy class for youth: results of a feasibility and efficacy pilot study. American Journal of Sexuality Education 13(1): 1–17.

44.

Rothman

Kaczmarsky

Burke

, et al. (2015) Without porn … I wouldn't know half the things I know now”: a qualitative study of pornography use among a sample of urban, low-income, black and Hispanic youth. The Journal of Sex Research 52(7): 736–746.

45.

Spišák

(2016) Everywhere they say that it’s harmful but they don’t say how, so I’m asking here’: young people, pornography and negotiations with notions of risk and harm. Sex Education 16(2): 130–142.

46.

Tsaliki

(2015) Popular culture and moral panics about ‘children at risk’: revisiting the sexualisation-of-young-girls debate. Sex Education 15(5): 500–514.

47.

Woodley

Zen

See

, et al. (2025) Critical young consumers: what types of porn do teens watch, and why? Media International Australia 197(1): 102–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878 × 251381395 .

48.

Woodley

Green

Jacques

(2024) Send Nudes?’: Teens’ perspectives of education around sexting, an argument for a balanced approach. Sexualities 28((5–6)): 1891–1909. 10.1177/13634607241237675.

49.

Zen

Hendriks

Burns

(2024) Sexually explicit media literacy education: a scoping review of parental perspectives and relevant resources. Sex Education 25(3): 359–375. 10.1080/14681811.2024.2338275.

50.

Zen

Hendriks

Burns

(2025) Engaging parents in sexually explicit Media literacy education: expert perspectives from Australia and New Zealand. Health Promotion Journal of Australia 36(2): e70026.