Parental sense-making of adolescent ‘sexting’ in online forums: Competing repertoires and gendered negotiations

Adolescent ‘sexting’ has led to widespread concern framed by two competing discourses – the first argues that adolescent sexting is normative and possible to practice safely, the second argues that sexting is a risky practice that requires intervention. Limited attention has been paid to how parents make sense of adolescent ‘sexting’. The current study employs critical discursive psychology to analyse parents’ posts from two online forums. Three interpretative repertoires were evidenced: the normality of sexting which positions adolescents as driven by hormones and infantilised; the engagement of sexting as a shock positions adolescents as innocent, naïve and stupid; sexting equates to the non-consensual sharing of images constructs the constructs sexting as an ‘ever-present danger. Analysis highlighted an ideological dilemma about the gendered nature of ‘sexting’; parents contested the positioning of all girls as victims and all boys as predators.