1990 年代台灣的性教育論述呈現兩股潮流，一是強調異性戀婚姻與兩性社會秩序的衛教性論述，二為挑戰既有性別秩序與權力結構的女性主義性／別論述。透過社會文化與教育資源的支持，衛教性論述成為學校性教育課堂實踐的主流論述。在此性教育發展脈絡下，2009年某校的保險套事件如何開啟校方與學生的對話空間成為本研究關注的焦點。校園中主流的性教育論述決定了如何談論「性」的框架，發放保險套的通行證也取決於其行為是否符合主流論述的價值。本文擬針對此放與不放的論述競逐，來重現「性」在某一特定場域是如何被形塑、定義與傳達，並藉此事件探討保險套在校方詮釋的過程中究竟被賦予了何種形式的象徵意義。其次，在性別二元論述、真理知識體制與父權集體記憶三者的糾葛關係中，學生與校方又透過何種論述機制來擁固自身的論述場域。最後，則透過兩方的論述競逐來了解為反抗主流論述的少數論述如何進一步逆轉他者在知識與權力間被支配的位置。

In 1990s, the sexuality education discourse in Taiwan was divided into two streams. One was the discourse of health education for maintaining heterosexual marriage and social order; the other was the discourse of feminism for challenging the existing gender order and power structure. Being supported by social value and educational resources, the discourse of health education inevitably dominated the pedagogical praxis in sexuality education. In this social context, exploring how the condom event taking place in 2009 opened the dialogue between the school authority and students was the main starting point of this study.The dominant discourse of sexuality often built clear boundaries of talking about sex in schools, and the permission of providing condoms are also deter-mined whether it fits the dominant discourse or not. The main purpose of this study was to represent how the sexuality was being shaped, defined, and con-veyed in the discourse competition between the school authority and students. The research questions guiding this study were: (1) What kind of symbolic meanings were given to condoms during the interpretation process by the school authority? (2) How did the school authority and students consolidate their discourse fields in the entanglement among the binary discourse on sexuality, regime of truth, and collective memory of patriarchy? (3) How could the minority discourse twist the ruling position controlled by the dominant discourse?