Understandings of genders and sexualities are rapidly changing in most Western countries due to increasingly mobile and diverse populations, new digital technologies and a growing acceptance of, and backlash to, multiple and diverse sexualities and genders. In this changing context, the delivery of quality relationship and sexuality education is important. Within Aotearoa New Zealand, sexuality education is a key learning area within the Health and Physical Education (HPE) Curriculum (Ministry of Education, 2007). The broad aims within this learning area are to help students develop a healthy range of relationships, promote positive self-understandings, encourage support for diversity and respect for others, and critically examine sexualities and genders. Ellis and Bentham (2021) revealed, however, that sexuality education is not taught at all schools and when taught, the broad focus remains narrowly on heterosexuality, biological function, pregnancy and STIs. Topics such as consent, respect for others, sexual pleasure, diverse sexualities/genders and online pornography are rarely discussed. Moreover, sexuality education was almost exclusively located within the classroom-based ‘health education’ part of HPE (Ellis & Bentham, 2021). In other words, sexuality education does not often form part of the ‘formal' learning within the more practical ‘physical education’ (PE) classes. Yet this does not mean that students are not learning about sexualities in PE. Indeed, the visibility of the body in PE, combined with close bodily interactions, and the requirement to get changed in locker rooms results in students learning about sexualities and genders. Yet this learning is not structured in a coordinated manner or with concern about promoting respect, wellbeing and healthy relationships. So what do students learn about gender and sexuality in school PE?This entry presents an overview of current understandings of boys, masculinities, sexualities and school PE. In particular, it highlights PE as a prime space where heteronormativity and heterosexual masculinities are (re)produced as the norm. The entry is informed by research drawing on Connell’s (1987; 1995) concept of hegemonic masculinity and the poststructural works of Foucault (1980; 1995) and Butler (1990; 1993) that demonstrates how power and the workings of discourse through boys’ bodies and the spaces of PE shape performances of masculinities and sexualities. The entry concludes with a discussion of what the implications are for schooling boys, masculinities and sexualities and offers some suggestions for how PE can become a site of transformation that destabilises dominant understandings of masculinities and sexualities.