Search

Sexuality education is one of the most disputable health education programs as far as its inclusion in Early Childhood Education is concerned. This study was conducted in order to investigate early childhood future educators' attitudes and considerations about introducing sexuality education to their future pupils. We used a qualitative research method: semi-structured interviews for two groups of students in the Department of Educational Studies in Early Childhood, University of Northern Greece. The results revealed that the students who had chosen and successfully completed a course about early childhood sexuality education were the ones who indicated the subject as one of the basic ones to be taught in the kindergarten. Furthermore, they expressed their considerations about Greek bibliography's lag in this field. Finally, they exhibited more readiness to introduce sexuality education to their future pupils than the rest of the students did. Students who had not attended a relative course referred to developmentally inappropriate subject areas, showing their inability or even riskiness to introduce sexuality to their pupils. The results suggested the students' need for relevant theoretical as well as practical education.

It is often argued that the rise of psychological sciences has offered a new way of constructing subjectivity. Although this framework was used by institutions for regulatory and administrative purposes, soon it became part of common sense and psychological language and notions began to constitute an interpretative resource for social actors. Researchers argue that often discourses of psychologization have been used both by theorists and lay people to account for intergroup conflict, relegating intergroup processes to interpersonal or intrapersonal issues. In this paper, we examine how parents mobilize psychological notions to account for the behavior of children of immigrants within Greek schools. It is argued that psychological discourse was often used to frame "problematic" behavior as the result of interpersonal or intrapersonal processes. These constructions allowed participants to account for the children of immigrants' behaviour avoiding accusations of prejudice, while at the same time the role of the Greek dominant group (both as a school institution and as the majority of the school population) in shaping intergroup relations within schools was omitted.

Conspiracy theories have recently come under the scrutiny of social psychology. While some theorists have treated them as a deficient way of thinking, others have considered them as a form of political rhetoric with important social implications. We focus on conspiracy theories in the context of online public deliberation on legislation allowing registration of self-defined gender in Greece. Employing the tools of Critical Discursive Psychology, we analyse comments posted on the Ministry of Justice's website created for public consultation about the law change. We focus on the mobilization of conspiracy theories by people who oppose Law 4491/2017 ("Legal Recognition of Gender Identity – National Mechanism for the Development, Monitoring and Evaluation of Action Plans on Children's Rights and Other Provisions"). These commentators often argued that powerful groups are behind the proposed legislation, aiming at decreasing Earth's population, disrupting moral order, and violating humanness. We demonstrate how these constructions helped participants to perform various tasks, such as delegitimizing the legislation while at the same time avoiding the stigma of prejudice, promoting far-right political practices, and rebutting accusations of political partisanship. The results are discussed in relation to conspiracy theories' role in countering "gender ideology" and in promoting cisgenderism and heteronormativity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT Prejudice reduction has been an important concern within social psychology both in theory and applied research. According to the premises of Social Identity Theory, redrawing of the category boundaries is often considered a necessary step in order to battle prejudice, because in-group favouritism when the category boundaries change is diffused to the previously distinct identities. The present paper offers a review of the relevant research, and following a discourse analytic perspective argues that recategorisation can also be viewed as a rhetorical resource that people use in verbal interaction in order to achieve certain rhetorical ends. This point is exemplified using interview data from Greece with Greek participants who mobilise common in-groups between themselves and the immigrants in Greece. Different common in-groups were mobilised on the basis of common human nature, common ethnic descent and through the use of the common experience of migration that many Greek people have because Greece has been an emigrant sending country for the biggest part of the 20th century. Occasionally, these category constructions were used to differentiate between immigrants of different ethnic descent claiming that only certain immigrant groups can integrate to Greek society, whereas on other instances, these common in-groups were used in order to inoculate speakers of accusations of prejudice. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]