Abstract
Despite recommendations, education about consent and sexual violence is rare in K-12 sex education programs. Parents can play a highly meaningful role in communicating with their children lessons about consent and sexual assault. However, messaging about sexual violence from parents may reproduce gendered dynamics that promote and reinforce stereotypes. Parents may also have limited knowledge about sexual violence and potentially communicate inaccurate information due to their own lack of education about sexual violence. In the current study, data were collected from 122 mostly White and heterosexual college students. Participants answered open-ended questions about parent communication about consent and sexual violence as well as a parent–child sex communication scale. Results show that parent communication about consent and sexual violence is not common, although parents are communicating accurate, albeit limited, information about consent. No gender differences were found for messages about consent but women were more likely to receive messages about sexual assault prevention, monitoring of their behaviors, and what to do if they were sexually assaulted. These findings suggest that greater responsibility is placed on women to not be sexually assaulted, messaging that supports rape myths about women’s culpability as well as traditional sexual scripts. The lack of communication about sexual violence with men is also concerning given that individuals of all genders experience sexual violence. This work suggests that before encouraging parents to engage in more conversations about consent and sexual violence, there is a need for parents to receive more education themselves through public programming and educational initiatives. These findings also highlight the need for expansive sex education within schools to ensure dissemination of accurate information.
Introduction
In the United States, approximately 43.9% of women and 23.4% of men experience some type of sexual violence in their lifetimes, and much of this sexual violence occurs before age 18 (Breiding et al., 2014; Finkelhor et al., 2014). In the United States, issues surrounding sexual violence and consent are not consistently taught in schools, and only 12 states mandate that students receive information about consent in sex education courses (Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States, 2024). This lack of formal education comes despite recommendations to include information about consent, sexual violence, abuse, and healthy relationships in K-12 sex education programs (Future of Sex Education Initiative, 2020). Moreover, researchers find that young people who receive formal sexual assault prevention and consent education are less likely to perpetrate (Kernsmith & Hernandez-Jozefowicz, 2011; A. L. Stewart, 2014) and experience (Santelli et al., 2018; Senn et al., 2015) sexual violence. These findings suggest that education about consent and sexual violence is a protective factor against experiencing sexual assault, and it is unfortunate that U.S. public policies require little formal sexual assault prevention education. Much of this education about sexual violence then comes from other sources, and families may be a particularly important source of information about consent and sexual assault. Thus, it is important to understand the content, quality, and occurrence of parent–child communication about sexual violence.
Gendered Messages About Sexual Violence
In the current paper, we refer to sexual violence to mean a wide array of non-consensual behaviors that include sexual abuse, sexual battery, sexual assault, and rape, although legal definitions of these specific behaviors vary (Muehlenhard et al., 2016; National Institute of Justice, 2010). Consent, or lack thereof, is the essential ingredient as to whether a sexual interaction is considered to be sexual violence. Consent must be freely given by all parties without any manipulation, aggression, or coercion; all parties must understand the activities to which they are consenting; and consent can be revoked during a sexual interaction. Essentially, consent can be boiled down to three themes: (a) an internal state of willingness, (b) an act of explicitly agreeing to an action, and (c) behavior that someone else interprets as willingness (Muehlenhard et al., 2016). Research suggests that young adults tend to have fairly accurate definitions of consent; however, this knowledge is not necessarily reflected in individuals’ actions, as some men continue to use coercion, deception, and aggression to engage in sexual activities (Jozkowski & Peterson, 2013).
Many emerging adults cite mass media as a major source of information on sexual assault (Acquaviva et al., 2021). Unfortunately, mass media often perpetuates rape myths (i.e., seemingly true but actually false information about sexual violence), and mainstream media consumption is positively correlated with rape myth acceptance (RMA; Akram et al., 2025; Hedrick, 2021). Rape myths typically place culpability for sexual violence solely on female victims and provide rationalization and justification for men to engage in sexual violence (Gage & Lease, 2021; Lonsway & Fitzgerald, 1994; McMahon & Farmer, 2011). RMA may actually be promoted by uninformed and unnecessarily gendered sexual assault prevention messaging, which typically focuses on the responsibility of women to restrict their behavior in order to avoid being raped rather than the responsibility of men not to commit rape (Bedera & Nordmeyer, 2015). Most sexual assault prevention programs are either oriented toward women, focusing on self-defense and refusal tactics (Gidycz et al., 2011) whereas programs oriented to men often focus on bystander intervention (Coker et al., 2011). More integrated educational approaches are needed to address misinformation and myths about sexual violence as well as challenge heteropatriarchal sexual norms (Orchowski et al., 2020).
Unfortunately, many messages about sexual violence prevention reinforce, and are reinforced by, sexual double standards that exist between men’s and women’s sexuality (Bedera & Nordmeyer, 2015). Traditionally, women are seen as “sexual gatekeepers” (Jozkowski & Peterson, 2013, p. 522) in that it is seen as their responsibility to deflect male sexual advances. Implicit in this conceptualization of female sexuality is that women should be deflecting these advances, as “good girls do not have sex” (Jozkowski et al., 2017, p. 239). Somewhat paradoxically, this attitude also endorses the idea that “women owe men sex once they have worked for it” (Jozkowski et al., 2017, p. 237). The concept of men “working” for sex is a vital element of this sexual double standard. For men within this conceptualization, sex is seen as a conquest (Jozkowski & Peterson, 2013; Jozkowski et al., 2017; Wiederman, 2005). Victory in this conquest is claimed when men successfully obtain sex from women, regardless of the methods used; it is acceptable and even expected that this hunt for sexual success is often aggressive and/or deceptive (Jozkowski et al., 2014). While the studies cited above were largely carried out with college students, research has shown that women begin receiving messages normalizing men as sexual predators even in early adolescence (Tolman et al., 2003).
Sexual double standards are rooted in misogyny and lay the foundation for RMA. Men’s endorsement of both hostile sexism (punishing women who do not comply with these double standards) and benevolent sexism (rewarding women who do comply) predict RMA (Chapleau et al., 2007; Lonsway & Fitzgerald, 1994). Although men on average endorse RMA more strongly than women (Hinck & Thomas, 1999; Leon et al., 2025), women are not immune to these attitudes. Modern neoliberal values emphasize women’s sexual agency; while this sentiment initially seems like a departure from traditional sexual scripts that prioritize male need (Jozkowski et al., 2017), it only furthers the perceived importance of female responsibility in preventing women’s own sexual assault (Bay-Cheng, 2015; Bay-Cheng & Eliseo-Arras, 2008). Many women continue to believe that those who experience rape were “dumb enough” to put themselves in that situation in the first place (Gidycz et al., 2006, p. 443; J. Stewart et al., 2025). While explicit rape myths of this kind have become less acceptable over time (Hinck & Thomas, 1999), subtle rape myths and covert misogyny still remain ingrained in U.S. culture (Dawtry et al., 2019; McMahon & Farmer, 2011). As stated above, these myths become normalized at a young age; however, research shows that RMA decreases as school belonging and peer support increase (Kernsmith & Hernandez-Jozefowicz, 2011), suggesting that early adolescence may also be a potential point of intervention and education. A feminist lens highlights that heteropatriarchal ideals of sexuality are reified through socialization and communication. It is essential to understand the messages individuals receive about sexual violence as well as the gendered nature of these messages.
Parent Communication
Parents play an important role in teaching their adolescents about sex and sexuality, and most parents view themselves as responsible for educating their children about sex (Astle & Brasileiro, 2024; Flores & Barroso, 2017). Researchers find that the majority of parent communication about sex emphasizes avoiding the negative consequences of sex rather than having positive sexual experiences (Flores & Barroso, 2017). Parent messages about sex tend to focus on sexual morality, pregnancy, sexually transmitted infections, delaying sex, and using protection (Flores & Barroso, 2017; Grossman et al., 2016; Payne et al., 2024). This consequence-centered approach to sex communication is particularly salient for daughters, reinforcing gendered norms of sexual behavior as well as heternormativity (Payne et al., 2024; Tolman et al., 2003). Parent messages about sex often encourage abstinence and instill shame for daughters far more than for sons (Averett et al., 2008; Flores & Barroso, 2017; Kuhle et al., 2015; Morgan et al., 2010), although these patterns are not universal. Parents rarely discuss sexual pleasure or positive aspects of sexuality (Flores & Barroso, 2017). Overall, researchers find that parent–child sex communication is a protective factor against sexual risk-taking (i.e., sex without protection, sex at very young ages) and family environments which foster open communication about sex are linked with adolescents and young adults who are more comfortable communicating with parents and partners, have greater sexual self-efficacy, and endorse fewer sexual myths (Flores & Barroso, 2017; Quesada et al., 2026).
Compared to the topics discussed above, we know considerably less about what parents communicate to their children about consent and sexual violence. El-Shaieb and Wurtele (2009) found that parents of young children plan on discussing sexual assault and molestation at a far earlier age (M = 6.85) than consensual sex (M = 10.03). Parents who experienced sexual violence themselves are more likely to intend to discuss sexual violence with their children and to have these discussions at earlier ages (Astle et al., 2024; Davidson Mhonde et al., 2025). Akers et al. (2011) found that Black parents focus more on daughters’ self-esteem and sons’ respect for women in their sexual assault and intimate partner violence prevention messaging than White parents. Davidson Mhonde et al. (2025) found that Black parents who endorse rape myths were less likely to communicate about sexual violence with their children. Studies of Latinx families paint conflicting pictures of sex communication, with some studies finding Latinx families to heavily lean toward conservative and restrictive sexual values (Gilliam, 2007) and others finding that parent sex communication in Latinx families focuses more on protection than shame (González-López, 2004).
One thing we do know about consent and sexual violence communication is that girls and boys tend to receive different messages about consent and sexual violence from their parents. For late adolescents, it is common for parents to emphasize safe sex for sons and rape prevention for daughters (Morgan et al., 2010). Weiser et al. (2022) found that most college students reported some communication with their parents about consent and sexual violence, but the content of these messages was highly gendered. Women were more likely to receive messages about monitoring their own behaviors to prevent sexual violence, help-seeking following assault, and how to give consent. In contrast, men were more likely to report that parents communicated to them that sexual assault is wrong, that consent is important, and information about how to obtain consent. Thus, the parent messages reinforced problematic sexual scripts in which women are expected to be sexual gatekeepers and men are expected to be sexual initiators. These messages also reinforce heteronormativity. Other researchers find some support that fathers’ communications with daughters about how to resist sexual pressures enhances girls’ abilities to avoid sexual coercion (Flores & Barroso, 2017).
When sexual assault does occur, parent–child closeness is positively associated with adolescents’ disclosure to their parents (Fehler-Cabral & Campbell, 2013), although disclosure about sexual violence to parents seems to happen at lower rates than to friends (S. G. Smith & Cook, 2008). Among undergraduate women who experienced sexual violence, only 11% disclosed this experience to their mothers and 5% disclosed this experience to their fathers (Orchowski & Gidycz, 2012), and many adolescent victims report being fearful of telling their parents (Fehler-Cabral & Campbell, 2013). However, when adolescents and emerging adults did disclose their experience of sexual violence to parents, most reported receiving support from their parents, although negative reactions were also reported (Fehler-Cabral & Campbell, 2013; Orchowski & Gidycz, 2012).
Parents face several barriers to effective sex communication with their adolescent children. Mothers are more likely to engage in this communication than fathers (El-Shaieb & Wurtele, 2009; Kapungu et al., 2010; Quesada et al., 2026; Sneed et al., 2013), likely because of gendered expectations of parenting (Wilson & Koo, 2010), but perceive resistance from their adolescent children and experience personal discomfort when engaging in these conversations (Elliott, 2010). Parents also worry that engaging in sex communication will unintentionally signal to their adolescents approval of their sexual initiation (Flores & Barroso, 2017). When parents resort to scare tactics in order to prevent this, the majority of adolescents either ignore these messages (Flores & Barroso, 2017; Holman & Kellas, 2015) or experience a lasting sense of shame (Teitelman, 2004).
Ineffective sex communication is often attributed to a lack of positive sex communication with their own parents in the past (Byers et al., 2008). Parents’ own education and socialization about sex and sexuality certainly shape how they approach communication with their children. As Wesche et al. (2025) argue social structures, such as patriarchy and heteronormativity, shape parents’ willingness to communicate and the content of these messages. Many parents did not themselves receive any formal sex education, as inadequate sex education curricula are not a new phenomenon (Fine & McClelland, 2006); however, interventions intended to improve parent–adolescent sex communication are often limited in scope and rarely focus on parents and children of all genders (Wilson & Koo, 2010). Moreover, both parents and adolescents often fail to challenge the gendered stereotypes and power imbalances that lead to RMA and perpetration of sexual violence (Rossetto & Tollison, 2017; Teitelman et al., 2008). The parent–child sex communication literature highlights that parents are an important protective force but may also be socializing their children about sexuality in ways that reify sexual double standards and rape myths.
The Current Study
The purpose of the current study is to assess the frequency and scope of sexual violence topics that parents communicate to their adolescent children and how this compares to other domains of parental sex communication. The study also examines whether parents communicate differently about consent and sexual violence toward daughters and sons. We posed the following research questions:
It should be noted from the onset that data were collected from older adolescents, and all data reflect their perceptions and memories of what was communicated. Therefore, the current study offers only one perspective of parent–adolescent communication about consent and sexual assault.
Methods
Participants and Procedures
Participants were 122 students at a public university in the southwestern United States (56 men, 66 women, M age = 20.05 years of age). Most participants identified as heterosexual (110, 90.9%) although participants also identified as gay (7, 5.8%), bisexual (1, 0.8%), pansexual (2, 1.6%) and one individual was unsure of their sexual identity. Participants were White (69, 57.5%), Latino/Hispanic (27, 22.5%), Black/ African American (9, 7.5%), Asian/Asian American (5, 4.2%), multi-ethnic (6, 5.0%), and Native American (1, 0.8%).
To recruit participants, two undergraduate research assistants approached individuals in public areas of the university (e.g., the library, the student union building) and asked if they were willing to participate in a brief survey about parent communication about sex. Individuals interested in participating were given an envelope that contained a paper-and-pencil survey. The research assistants left participants to fill out the survey privately but remained in the area. No identifying information was collected, and all responses were anonymous. Once participants finished, the survey was placed in the envelope and returned to the research assistants. Upon returning the envelope, participants provided their contact information on a small postcard and were entered in a drawing to win 1 of 10 $25 prizes. All procedures were approved by the university IRB.
Measures
In the survey, participants completed a modified version of the Sex Communication Scale (SCS; O’Sullivan et al., 1999). Participants were asked to think back to their adolescence (defined as ages 10–18 for participants) and report about their communication with parents about sex. Participants responded to 18 statements about parent–adolescent communication about sex using a 5-point Likert scale with 1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree. See Table 1 for means, standard deviations, and Cronbach’s Alphas. The modified scale contained four subscales: (1) Discussion of Safe Sex, “My parent(s) talked to me about condom use”; (2) Openness of Communication, “I found it easy to discuss sex with my parent(s)”; (3) Discussion of Sexual Morality, “My parent(s) talked to me about their values regarding sex”; and (4) Discussion of Sexual Assault and Consent. The five questions focused on sexual assault and consent were specifically designed for the current study and were as follows, “My parent(s) talked to me about sexual assault prevention,” “My parent(s) talked to me about rape and sexual assault,” “My parent(s) talked to me about sexual consent and how to obtain it,” “My parent(s) talked to me about strategies to not be sexually assaulted,” and “My parent(s) talked to me about what to do if I was sexually assaulted.” Participants also responded to four open-ended questions, “What did your parent(s) tell you about obtaining sexual consent (i.e., affirmation that a partner is willing to engage in sexual activities?”, “What did your parent(s) tell you about sexual assault prevention?”, “What did your parent(s) tell you to do if you had been sexually assaulted?”, and “What did your parent(s) tell you to do if you have been accused of committing a sexual assault?”.
Means, Standard Deviations, and Cronbach’s Alphas for Subscales.
Data Analysis Plan
A content analysis was conducted by the first author and the two undergraduate research assistants who collected the data. The content analysis was done to categorize the responses to these four open-ended questions (Neuendorf, 2011; C. P. Smith, 2000). Undergraduate research assistants coded open-ended responses using a two-step process. First, the first author and research assistants independently read through all responses and generated possible categories. The research assistants then met with the first author, and we discussed categories for coding using an inductive approach. We generated categories through multiple, close readings of the data and feminist theorizing (Neuendorf, 2011). Collectively, the first author and the research assistants generated categories and finalized a coding guide through discussion. The research assistants then assigned each response a single code (agreed in 97.7% of cases) using the coding guide. After coding the data, the research assistants met again with the first author and through discussion assigned final codes.
To answer Research Question 1, descriptive statistics are provided for the four parent sex communication subscales (Discussion of Safe Sex, Openness of Communication, Discussion of Sexual Morality, and Discussion of Sexual Assault and Consent) as well as the categories for the four open-ended questions. Some exemplars are provided to define and describe categories identified in the content analysis. To answer Research Question 2, paired t-tests were run to examine whether parent communication about sexual assault and consent differs in frequency compared to the other three parent communication subscales. The paired t-tests allow us to examine mean differences between sexual communication topics. A post-hoc analysis to assess achieved power was conducted using G*Power; with an alpha level of .05, an effect size of .50, and a sample of 122 participants, the achieved power was .99 for paired t-tests. This observed power exceeds the commonly accepted .80 criteria for power (Cohen, 1992). Finally, to answer Research Question 3, a MANOVA was run to examine gender differences for the five parent communication items about sexual assault and consent while chi-square analyses were run to examine gender differences for the categories identified through the content analysis. The MANOVA explores whether there are mean differences between women’s and men’s scores on the parent communication items. To assess gender differences for the open-ended responses, chi-square analyses are necessary given the categorical nature of the coded responses. A post-hoc analysis was run with an alpha level of .05, an effect size of 0.22, and a sample of 122 participants, and the achieved power was .98 for the MANOVA. For the chi-square analyses; with df = 5, an alpha level of .05, and an effect size of 0.3, the estimated power was .73. This suggests that chi-square analyses were slightly underpowered and these results should be interpreted with caution.
Results
Content and Frequency of Sexual Assault and Content
To explore Research Question 1, means and frequencies were examined for the four parent sex communication subscales and open-ended responses. For the four parent sex communication subscales, including the five Likert-type items comprising the Discussion of Sexual Assault and Consent subscale, mean scores hovered approximately near the midpoint, suggesting that communication about sex did not occur for many participants (see Table 1). The open-ended questions also support the idea that most participants did not discuss sexual assault with their parents, given that less than half the participants indicated their parents discussed sexual assault, consent, and prevention strategies. Please see Table 2 for frequencies and percentages of the categories identified for the open-ended questions.
Frequencies and Percentages for Categories.
For the first open-ended question, “What did your parent(s) tell you about obtaining sexual consent (i.e., affirmation that a partner is willing to engage in sexual activities?”), six categories were identified and are presented in order from most common responses to least common responses: (1) nothing; (2) always get verbal consent/no means no; (3) wait until marriage; (4) learned from outside sources; (5) don’t have sex if you are not sober; and (6) other. About half of the participants indicated that their parents told them nothing about sexual assault and a handful of participants indicated they learned about consent from outside sources. Otherwise, about a quarter of participants indicate that parents told them to make sure the person is interested in sex and to respect a partner’s no. For example, a White, heterosexual man said, “Get an explicit yes or no” and a Latina, heterosexual woman said “both parties have to say yes.” Another White, heterosexual man said “make sure when obtaining consent that your partner has 100% agreed to it. Never pressure anyone into having sex.” These findings highlight that when parents are discussing consent with their children, they are giving good definitions of consent and emphasizing that consent cannot be obtained through coercion. Only a few participants noted that their parents told them not to have sex while drunk, advice which recognizes that alcohol impairs individuals’ abilities to give consent. Finally, 10 participants (~ 8% of the sample) indicated that their parents told them to not have sex outside of marriage as a way of educating about consent. This messaging does not recognize that sexual assault can occur in marriage and a plan for abstinence is not necessarily protective against experiencing sexual assault.
For the second open-ended question, “What did your parent(s) tell you about sexual assault prevention?”, seven categories were identified: (1) nothing; (2) be wary of strangers/risky situations; (3) don’t be alone; (4) be careful while drinking; (5) get help; (6) stated they were a man so do not need to know; and (7) other. Most participants indicated that their parents told them nothing about sexual assault prevention. To illustrate be wary of strangers/risky situations, one White, heterosexual woman stated their parents told them, “Do your best not to put yourself in a position that sexual assault could happen” and a Latina, heterosexual woman reported, “to always be vigilant and aware of my surroundings.” As an example of don’t be alone, a White, heterosexual woman stated, “don’t be stupid, never go anywhere alone.” For get help, one multi-racial, heterosexual man said, “not be afraid to run, shout, intervene, and call 911 if I or somebody else is in a possible sexual assault situation.” While only two men stated they did not need to know about sexual assault prevention, this sentiment is noteworthy given that individuals of all genders should be knowledgeable about sexual assault prevention.
For the third open-ended question, “What did your parent(s) tell you to do if you had been sexually assaulted?”, seven categories were identified: (1) nothing; (2) get help from someone; (3) nothing because I don’t think I’ll be raped; (4) learned about help from outside resources; (5) parents would be insensitive; (6) fight back/self-defense; and (7) other. Once again, the most common response from participants is that their parents told them nothing about what to do if they had been sexually assaulted, although 48 participants (38.7%) did say their parents communicated that they should get help from someone in this situation. To illustrate help, one Latina, heterosexual woman reported they were told, “to tell an adult I trust immediately after the incident occurred” and a White, heterosexual woman stated, “they told me I should never be afraid to tell them. Also to report it to the police.” Once again, there were a few men who stated they did not need this information because it was unlikely they would be assaulted, although sexual violence toward men certainly occurs.
For the final open-ended question, “What did your parent(s) tell you to do if you have been accused of committing a sexual assault?”, six categories emerged: (1) nothing; (2) tell the truth; (3) get help; (4) get a lawyer; (5) deny accusation; and (6) other. While the vast majority of our participants reported that their parents told them nothing about what to do if accused of sexual assault, it is notable that more men were provided information from their parents about what to do in this situation. Specifically, 55 women (83.3%) indicated that their parents told them nothing about what to do if accused of sexual assault compared to 33 men (60.0%). Of those who did receive messages about what to do if accused, the few participants reported that they were told to tell the truth (11 participants, 8.9%) and seek help from either parents (9 participants, 7.3%) or lawyers (6 participants, 4.8%).
Comparing Frequency of Parent Sex Communication Types
To examine Research Question 2, paired t-tests were run to test whether parent communication about sexual assault and consent is more or less prevalent compared to other more studied domains of parent sex communication. Results revealed that parents were less likely to talk about sexual assault and consent compared to discussions of sexual morality (2.82 vs. 3.43, p < .001). Discussion of sexual assault and consent did not significantly differ compared to discussion of safe sex (2.84 vs. 2.72, p = .157) or reported openness of communication (2.84 vs. 2.86, p = .830). It should also be noted that participants reported greater communication about sexual morality compared to discussions of safe sex (3.43 vs. 2.70, p < .001) and reported openness of communication (3.43 vs. 2.84, p < .001). No differences were observed among discussion of safe sex, discussion of sexual assault, and openness of sexual communication. In other words, according to participants, parents most often communicated about sexual morality and were less likely to report that parents discussed safe sex and sexual assault, or that they felt open to talking about sex with their parents.
Examining Women’s and Men’s Responses
To explore Research Question 3, a MANOVA was conducted to test gender differences for occurrence of communication about sexual assault and consent for the Likert-type questions. The multivariate test was significant (Wilks’ λ = .82, F[5,114] = 4.93, p < .001, partial η2 = .18). Women were more likely to report parents discussed sexual assault prevention (3.26 vs. 2.56, F[1,118] = 8.07, p = .005, partial η2 = .06), strategies to not be sexually assaulted (3.19 vs. 2.26, F[1,118] = 19.16, p < .001, partial η2 = .14), and what to do if they were sexually assaulted (2.85 vs. 2.39, F[1,118] = 4.42, p = .038, partial η2 = .04). Men and women did not differ with regards to whether parents talked to them about sexual assault and rape (3.24 vs. 2.80, F[1,118] = 3.22, p = .075, partial η2 = .03) or whether parents talked to them about consent (2.94 vs. 2.81, F[1,118] = 0.29, p = .590, partial η2 = .02).
Additionally, chi-square analyses were run to assess gender differences for the open-ended response categories. No significant gender differences were found for the content of messages about consent (χ2[5] = 9.13, p = .104, ϕc = .27) or messages about what to do if experienced sexual assault (χ2[6] = 10.51, p = .105, ϕc = .29). Significant gender differences were found with regards to the content of prevention messages (χ2[6] = 21.0, p = .002, ϕc = .42). Women were more likely to be told to be wary of strangers and “risky” situations, and were more likely to be told to never be alone as ways to prevent sexual assault. Additionally, men were more likely than expected to have been told nothing about sexual assault prevention. Finally, there was a trend toward significant gender differences for messages about what to do if accused of sexual assault (χ2[5] = 10.92, p = .053, ϕc = .30]. Results revealed that women were more likely to be told nothing about what to do if accused of sexual assault and men were more likely to be told to get help or get a lawyer.
Discussion
The current study represents a step in understanding the content of parent–adolescent communication about sexual violence. Foremost, these findings suggest that parents are not communicating with their adolescent children about sexual assault. Responses to our first open-ended question indicated that parent communication about consent is relatively infrequent, with only half of our participants reported having received any consent information from their parents. This finding is consistent with previous research, which finds that parent communication about consent and sexual violence is not common (Weiser et al., 2022). A quarter of participants did report receiving messages that were pro-consent and anti-coercion, including the assertion that “no means no.” While these messages are certainly helpful and appropriate, these definitions of consent are relatively narrow. Consent is multifaceted and more complex than simple utterances (Muehlenhard et al., 2016). While a few parents discussed substance use and consent, it seems parents overall did not discuss that consent must be informed, freely given, specific, mutual, and revokable. Researchers also find that there is a complicated relationship between consent and alcohol consumption (Jozkowski & Marcantonio, 2025). Merely telling adolescents to not have sex while drunk ignores the reality that alcohol-involved sex does occur and parents can help better equip their children with more nuanced understandings of consent and substance use.
Additionally, some participants reported receiving misinformed messages about consent, such as the idea that consent is not an aspect of marital sex; in reality, sexual assault can very much occur in the context of marriage (McMahon-Howard et al., 2009). Thus, while it seems parents were giving accurate information about consent, their messaging falls short of what adolescents need to know about consent throughout the lifespan. It is encouraging that when looking at responses to both the open-ended and Likert-item questions, no significant gender differences emerged regarding general discussions about sexual assault and consent. Weiser et al. (2022) also found no gender differences with regard to parental messages about consent. Together, these findings suggest that parental messages about consent and sexual violence are similar, regardless of their child’s gender, although the lack of gender differences may reflect the low levels of parental communication across genders.
Responses to our second open-ended question indicated that just over half of our participants received no communication about sexual assault prevention. When this communication does come up, parents emphasize personal responsibility in preventing one’s own victimization (rather than not committing sexual assault), which can be counterproductive and problematic. The women in our sample were significantly more likely to be told to monitor their own behaviors and not put themselves at risk, a pattern found for both the open-ended and Likert-type questions. The narrative that individuals, particularly women, must regulate and restrict their behavior in order to not be assaulted may lead to excessive fear (Bedera & Nordmeyer, 2015), less empathy for victims (Gidycz et al., 2006), and, if assaulted, shame following the incident (Orchowski & Gidycz, 2015). Additionally, much of the prevention advice provided may be considered rape myth-promoting, as many parents focused on “stranger danger” narratives rather than the fact that most rape victims know their perpetrators (Basile et al., 2022; Planty et al., 2013). It may be that parents themselves hold these misconceptions, as rape myths are deeply ingrained in U.S. culture (Hedrick, 2021) and rape myth endorsement is associated with parent communication about sexual violence (Davidson Mhonde et al., 2025). Parent interventions and broader sex education may help to disrupt the intergenerational transmission of such beliefs and challenge sexual double standards (Wesche et al., 2025). Moreover, the men in our sample were less likely to receive information about how to prevent sexual assault, a concern given that men are sexually assaulted (Breiding et al., 2014), and individuals of all genders must work collectively to combat sexual violence. These findings are not surprising given that parents are socialized in a heteropatriarchal society and they likely reify sexual double standards without critical analysis. Certainly, research highlights that women are at greater risk for experiencing sexual violence but education about sexual assault prevention is valuable to individuals of all genders.
Communication about what to do following sexual assault was also uncommon among participants. There may be several ways to interpret this discrepancy. First, parents may not want to face the reality that their children may be assaulted, and thus avoid such conversations. Second, many young people believe that they would never put themselves in a position to be assaulted (Gidycz et al., 2006), and parents may also hold these beliefs about their children. Finally, parents may perceive their communication as more effective than their children recall (Holman & Kellas, 2015). It is hopeful that participants whose parents communicated about help-seeking encouraged their children to seek out resources, come to them, and ask for help. These parental messages may encourage children to disclose if sexual assault did occur, and subsequently may be more likely to receive informal and formal supports. Research finds that disclosure about sexual violence to parents is rare but when disclosure does occur, parents are typically a source of emotional and instrumental support (Orchowski & Gidycz, 2012). Therefore, messages encouraging open communication and help-seeking can be highly beneficial.
There are some notable gender patterns about parent communication following sexual violence. In the Likert-type questions, women reported they were more likely to receive messages about what to do if they were sexually assaulted. For the open-ended questions, significant differences did not emerge although there is a trend in which men were more likely to have been told nothing about what to do following sexual assault. The open-ended questions suggest that women were more likely to be told to get help following sexual assault. A few men reported not receiving help-seeking information because it is assumed that they would not be assaulted. This likely reflects the greater rates at which women experience sexual violence (Breiding et al., 2014). These gendered messages are still concerning given that 1 out of 20 men is sexually assaulted by age 18 (Finkelhor et al., 2014). The realities of sexual violence necessitate parents to tell children and adolescents of all genders what to do if they are sexually assaulted. Additionally, sexual assault is highly underreported but men are even less likely than women to report sexual assault because experiencing sexual violence conflicts with traditional sexual scripts (McLean, 2013; Monk-Turner & Light, 2010).
Our final open-ended question similarly indicated that some parents perpetuate the myth that only men can commit sexual assault. While the majority of sexual violence perpetrators are men and most victims are women, approximately 20% of men who experience sexual violence report that their perpetrator was a woman, and that specific acts of sexual violence, such as being made to penetrate, are most commonly perpetrated by women (Breiding et al., 2014). Thus, it is imperative for parents to discuss with children of all genders their role in not committing sexual violence and what to do if sexual violence has occurred. A few men who reported that their parents told them to deny accusations also point to the fact that parents may be presuming their sons’ innocence, or worse, excusing their behavior. These responses are troubling given that false reports are rare, and false reports that specifically accuse an individual are even more rare (Weiser, 2017).
Regarding the frequency of consent and assault communication relative to other sex topics, this communication is less frequent than discussions of sexual morality, which is consistent with prior research (Flores & Barroso, 2017; Weiser et al., 2022). This finding is particularly interesting because, as discussed previously, parents discuss molestation at an earlier age with their children than consensual sex (El-Shaieb & Wurtele, 2009). This may indicate that parents hold a cognitive distinction between child sexual assault and sexual assault later in life, despite the two being interrelated (Desir & Karatekin, 2021). However, there were no significant differences with regard to communication about safe sex, sexual violence, and openness. All in all, parents seem most likely to discuss sexual morality with their children (Payne et al., 2024). For families that extend beyond morality messages, it is likely that they will receive communication about an array of topics which is associated with a reduction in sexual risk-taking (Flores & Barroso, 2017). However, our findings highlight that not all parent communication about sexual violence and consent is helpful and parents need further education about sexual assault themselves. Many provided messaging about sexual assault consistent with problematic gender narratives that are reified in a heteropatriarchal society. The current findings suggest outreach initiatives and parenting education courses may be beneficial so parents can be better empowered to share accurate and unbiased information with their adolescents regardless of gender.
Strengths, Limitations, and Implications
The primary strengths of the study are (a) its separation of communication content and frequency and (b) its exploration of sex topics that are studied less often compared to parent communication about safe sex. Prior research suggests that content and frequency of parent–child sex communication differentially predict sexual behaviors (Holman & Kellas, 2015; Hurst et al., 2022), so both are important to include in research moving forward. Research similarly suggests that discussions of different sex topics have different effects on behavior (Astle & Anders, 2022), and messages on consent and assault may be especially pertinent for adolescents (Hurst et al., 2022).
The primary limitation of the current study is that the sample was majority White and heterosexual and consisted only of college students in one geographic region. This is a notable limitation because past research suggests some significant differences between college and non-college emerging adult sexual assault victims (Muehlenhard et al., 2017). We also did not collect data about refusal rates, so it is difficult to further contextualize our convenience sample. While our sample reflects the racial composition of the population from which individuals were recruited, the lack of racial/ethnic diversity must be noted as a serious limitation. Additionally, while the study was open to individuals of all genders, only cisgender women and men completed the survey. The analyses with gender utilized a binary, which is ultimately limiting given the diversity of gender identities. A small number of individuals with LGBQ+ sexual identities participated in the study so we were unable to examine whether sexual identity was associated with parent communication about consent and sexual violence. Given that individuals with minoritized gender and sexual identities experience sexual violence at higher rates compared to cisgender, heterosexual individuals (Eisenberg et al., 2021; Martin-Storey et al., 2018) it is particularly important to further explore parent communication about sexual violence among LGBTQ+ people.
Our small sample size should be noted. It is also a limitation that some of our categories had a small number of participants (i.e., <3). We opted to include these categories as we found the responses to be unique and warranted discussion. However, between the sample size and these small categories, our chi-square analyses were a bit underpowered. Future quantitative research on this topic should strive for larger samples as well as non-college and diverse samples. Additionally, more expansive measures of communication are warranted. Qualitative research, such as interviews or focus groups, should be undertaken so participants are able to provide richer descriptions of parental communication about sexual violence. Another limitation is that we asked participants to reflect on conversations between the ages of 10 and 18, which is a broad age range. It is possible that some of our findings reflect participants recalling messaging from different ages. We would expect messages received from parents about consent and sexual assault would vary widely based on age and developmental stage. Finally, multiple reporters can be utilized in future research in order to examine both parents’ and children’s perceptions of sex communication as there may be discrepancies between what parents communicated and what adolescents think their parents communicated. Future research should capture more information about family environments that model consent, not merely direct communication. Individuals learn about sexuality through personal experience, observation, and direct communication (Wesche et al., 2025). Parents may create a culture of consent in their home (i.e., not requiring children to give hugs or respecting requests to stop touch) without having explicit conversations about consent.
In conclusion, parents have a great responsibility to educate their children about sexual violence given that sex education can be effective in reducing the likelihood of experiencing sexual violence (Santelli et al., 2018; Senn et al., 2015). Unfortunately, parents are not communicating about sexual violence, and in fact, may be spreading harmful gendered messages. Our findings highlight the need for sex education policies that mandate accurate information about consent, sexual violence, and healthy relationships. While such education should occur in schools (Future of Sex Education Initiative, 2020), this type of formal sex education is limited, and many parents are unprepared to fill this education gap.
Our findings also suggest that before widely encouraging parents to communicate with their children about consent and sexual violence, there is a need to further educate parents and develop programming to support parents in having these conversations (Wesche et al., 2025). Public programming, such as community workshops and public service announcements, could be key to better educating parents about sexual violence communications. In particular, education efforts grounded in feminist theorizing will help parents to critique problematic, gendered sexual scripts and engage in inclusive, fact-based communication with their children. Fostering awareness and equipping parents to have these conversations is an important complement to school-based sex education curricula as parents continue to be an influential source of information (Flores & Barroso, 2017). By educating both parents and children, there is hope that sexual violence could be greatly reduced.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank undergraduate research assistants Jules Pender and Maria Bennett for their outstanding work on this project.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interests with respect to the authorship and/or publication of this article.
Data Availability Statement
Availability of data and material (data transparency): Data and materials will be made available by contacting the corresponding author.*