The present paper concerns the use of film, in the current case Lilya 4-ever (Moodysson, 2002) ,in education in upper secondary school in Sweden. Theoretically, the paper departs from discursive psychology (Edwards & Potter, 1992). To analytically include the discursive interaction in the film, I-m drawing on Billig-s (1997) work to add the use of psychoanalysis to analyse conversations about film and the film itself, like Walkerdine (1997). Hence, the viewer position becomes as important as the discussions. The data was collected in two Swedish towns, in six classrooms in grades 1-3, i.e. pupils aged 15-19 years. Overall, the pupils- discussions of the film were sensible and serious (Sparrman, 2006). However, in one class, I found a group that at a first glance just fooled around. It interested me firstly since it was quite rare in the data corpus, secondly since it offended me that they could behave, what I considered insensitive, after seeing a movie about such a serious problem, namely trafficking of young women their own age. A closer look at the extract show that the pupils in the group are balancing between doing the school task, i.e. discuss the questions on the sheet the teacher provided, and working on their private identities, i.e. the social play, that among teenagers involves refusing a swat identity (Benwell & Stokoe, 2002, 2004; Stokoe, 2000). Specifically the use of sexualised positioning in that balancing act interested me. The aim of the present paper is to examine gender and sexuality through what can and what can not be said in the group discussions and through how the pupils take up certain subject positions. This is partly displayed via the participant-s orientation towards the recording device (Speer & Hutchby, 2003).