Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Gender Studies and Sexuality
Year: 2024
DOI:
[PDF]
Drawing Genitals: An Investigation of Anatomical Knowledge and Terminology Among Pre-Service Teachers and Medical Students
Valentin Helmut Kleinpeter, Lissy Jäkel
ABSTRACT:
Comprehensive sexual education should not be reduced to anatomy. However, wording and the terms used to describe anatomical structures may influence attitudes toward sexuality. This study investigated the anatomical knowledge of reproductive organs among pre-service teacher students (N = 130) and medical students (N = 56), based on drawings created by the participants. The aim was to understand participants’ knowledge of reproductive organs, identify common misconceptions, and analyze the terminology used to describe anatomical structures, with a particular focus on the implications for sexual education. A clear link emerged between participants’ familiarity with specific terms, the number of terms used and the ability to correctly label and represent the corresponding anatomical structures. The term vulva was notably rarely used, with only 26% of pre-service teacher students and 20% of medical students having used it to label their drawings. Similarly, the clitoris was correctly drawn by just 13% of pre-service teachers and 18% of medical students. Semantic analyzes show that sometimes shame-associated terms were used. The term labia is an example of this (labia minora and majora): 82% of pre service teachers included them in their drawings, but 77% of those who included them labeled them as “lips of shame,” 2.8% as labia, and 19% as vulval lips. Among medical students, 87% drew labia, with 24% of them using the German term Schamlippen “lips of shame” for them, 73% labeling them as labia minora or majora, and only 2% referring to them as vulval lips. Female participants demonstrated better anatomical knowledge, especially of their own genitals, than male participants. Medical students outperformed pre-service teacher students in anatomical accuracy and were more likely to use technical terms. Common misconceptions persisted across both groups, such as confusion of the terms vulva and vagina, incorrect positioning of the urethral outlet, and errors in illustrating the course of anatomical passages like the vas deferens. Some pre-service teachers displayed very limited anatomical knowledge. For instance, 54% of pre-service teacher students misrepresented the ovaries as stuck onto the fallopian tubes, compared to 7% of medical students. The findings highlight gaps in anatomical knowledge and terminology, with important implications for improving sexual education and medical training.
keywords: sex education, anatomy knowledge, Clitoris, pre-service teacher students, science