Examination of SexualityEssay Preview: Examination of SexualityReport this essayExamination Of SexualityAlfred C. Kinsey argued in 1948, “It would encourage clearer thinking on these matters [of labeling homosexuals] if persons were not characterized as heterosexual or homosexual, but as individuals who have had certain amounts of heterosexual experience and homosexual experience. Instead of using these terms as substantives (real and apparent entities) which stand for persons, they may be better used to describe the nature of overt sexual relations, or of the stimuli to which an individual erotically responds.”
Here I shall look at this statement regarding sexuality and gender from a sociological perspective on deviance. In this discussion, I will address the following questions: What role does sexuality (and gender) play in society? How are these categories constructed? How are they maintained? What do these categories reveal about important configurations of power in American society?
The “social construction” of the category of gender has had its roots firmly planted since biblical times: from the creation of the female, Eve for man (so Adam would not be lonely) to the 1800s when women were not allowed (by men) the right to vote. It has been prevalent in marriage ceremonies as brides promised to “honor and obey” their husbands (although the “obey” part seems to be absent recently). The role of the male being dominant or superior to the female is one that insists on transcending time despite modern day efforts for gender equality in society. We (society) constructed this category based on a patriarchal system that places the primacy of masculinity above all else. Gender ensures a distinction between male and female, affirming male dominance over the weaker female. Moreover, the dichotomy of the patriarchy over all else that threaten it must be maintained through continual reaffirmation and reinforcement.
Consequently, men are expected to maintain the right to women’s ordination, but to do so in the name of upholding the role of women in society. Male-initiated marriage and patriarchal gender are associated with the destruction and replacement of women in society, a failure to confront the issues that led the feminist movement back in the 90s to its goal of gender equality and respectability. For feminists, equality must be a movement that acknowledges that the human race can be better and more powerful than ever before, and must confront the systemic and systemic issues that make our society vulnerable to external and internal discrimination—even to the worst, such as the discrimination of trans people, in America. In support of the movement for gender, men and women who want to remain men and women can find their own paths to the status of not just men and women but every man and woman in our society. By working to address those issues and by respecting the role of men, it is possible to address all the issues facing men and women. Such a movement can and must begin in our own lives in a united culture, one that rejects cultural identity and encourages individuals and communities to be together.
Rights of men, women and children are guaranteed by the Constitution. As such gender, and the ability of individuals and communities to engage in social and economic justice, will be preserved: regardless of the gender of someone, regardless of their gender identity, gender expression or any other characteristic of individuals or communities. All of those who follow male-led organizations and communities should abide by our values and standards of equality and inclusion and abide by the decisions made by those in their roles and groups who serve their community. The rights of men, women and children for as long as these persons are aware of them, should be preserved.
It is imperative that our rights of men and women be respected, not dismissed, or silenced. There is a need for meaningful action within the context of the issue of gender (and other topics) such as the rights of women and children, as well as the benefits these issues have for our fellow men and women. In order to ensure this, the gender and rights of men and women, as well as any other issues, are to be cherished and protected.
Consequently, men are expected to maintain the right to women’s ordination, but to do so in the name of upholding the role of women in society. Male-initiated marriage and patriarchal gender are associated with the destruction and replacement of women in society, a failure to confront the issues that led the feminist movement back in the 90s to its goal of gender equality and respectability. For feminists, equality must be a movement that acknowledges that the human race can be better and more powerful than ever before, and must confront the systemic and systemic issues that make our society vulnerable to external and internal discrimination—even to the worst, such as the discrimination of trans people, in America. In support of the movement for gender, men and women who want to remain men and women can find their own paths to the status of not just men and women but every man and woman in our society. By working to address those issues and by respecting the role of men, it is possible to address all the issues facing men and women. Such a movement can and must begin in our own lives in a united culture, one that rejects cultural identity and encourages individuals and communities to be together.
Rights of men, women and children are guaranteed by the Constitution. As such gender, and the ability of individuals and communities to engage in social and economic justice, will be preserved: regardless of the gender of someone, regardless of their gender identity, gender expression or any other characteristic of individuals or communities. All of those who follow male-led organizations and communities should abide by our values and standards of equality and inclusion and abide by the decisions made by those in their roles and groups who serve their community. The rights of men, women and children for as long as these persons are aware of them, should be preserved.
It is imperative that our rights of men and women be respected, not dismissed, or silenced. There is a need for meaningful action within the context of the issue of gender (and other topics) such as the rights of women and children, as well as the benefits these issues have for our fellow men and women. In order to ensure this, the gender and rights of men and women, as well as any other issues, are to be cherished and protected.
The reinforcement of gender roles and boundaries through societal constructs is shown in Woodhouses discussion of transvestites or cross-dressers. Cross-dressing heterosexual men (dressing in womens clothing) pose a threat to traditional society that presents male and female gender categories as immutable categories that have no room for malleability. “On a social and cultural level the two groups (male and female) are mutually exclusive…” (Woodhouse, p. 117). This is maintained and strictly enforced in our male-dominant society through approval of masculinity and disapproval of femininity. “Outside of the closely demarcated boundaries of the drag act or the fancy-dress party, men cannot appear in any item of womens clothing without immediate loss of the superior status attached to the male and the full imposition of ridicule and censure” (Woodhouse, p. 119). We see examples of this ridicule from very early childhood and adolescence with boys being scorned and called a “sissy” for playing with dolls or expressing feminine traits which are reserved for the secondary, inferior female role and “should be eradicated” (Woodhouse, p. 119). There is a vice-grip on the primacy of masculinity which refuses to let go of pointing out that which is not masculine, and giving it a value. “Any man who is effeminate cannot be heterosexual, there must be something wrong with him” (Woodhouse, p. 137) and is therefore considered “less than.” “To deviate from this [primacy] status is to take a step down; to adopt the trappings of the second sex is akin to slumming it or selling out. And those who protect and maintain the primacy of masculinity cannot allow this to happen or the whole edifice would crumble” (Woodhouse, p. 119). “And identity politics as well as science has an interest in keeping them [“homo” and “hetero”] opposite” (Garber, p. 231).
However, the categories of sexuality (homo-, hetero-, and bisexual) and the use of the term “homosexual” to characterize the individual as a “real and apparent entity,” rather than describing a behavior, are recent constructs of humans. “Prior to the nineteenth century – or, some will say, the eighteenth – homosexuality in the western world was a practice, not an identity” (Garber, p. 213). The use of the term to describe who a person is, is to attach the negative stigma of an unacceptable behavior to the individual, thereby making the person unacceptable. This is also done as a means to sanction and prohibit the behavior. Who wants to be called a “homo” or “fag?” Being labeled a homosexual is societys way of determining what type of person you are and how you should be treated. What is also powerfully realized is that definitions of deviance and labels are handed down by those in society who decide “the norm” based on the current trend and philosophy of the time and their culture. This is important for two reasons. First, it affirms the sociological issue of power in constructing deviance. Secondly, it challenges the notion of gender being immutable and invariable over time and culture. Woodhouse excellently states this in her discussion of sex, gender, and appearance in relation to transvestites (cross-dressers). “The realization that gender is not a fixed entity, that gender roles and expectations can be questioned, attacked and changed, emphasizes the significance of viewing both gender roles and gender identity as social constructs whose meanings are continually affirmed and reaffirmed, negotiated and renegotiated through the social process of human communication and interaction” (Woodhouse, p. 119). An example of the idea that gender is fixed is shown here from NARTHs School Sex Education Guidelines: “This impression of having always felt different is a reflection of childhood gender nonconformity” (NARTH, p. 2), arguing it is not the case that you were born homosexual. Here again is the assumption that sex, gender role, and gender identity exhibit a conformity to, and an identity with one of two possibilities: masculinity (being primary) or femininity (being secondary).
The extent to which the “abnormal” is integral to the existence of “normal” is another important tool in evaluating categories of sexuality and gender identity. Distinguishing between good and bad, normal and abnormal is a human construct and one that is applied to nearly every facet of our human existence. “Normal” needs to be continuously reaffirmed in order that we may redefine what is “abnormal.” We call things “wrong,” “unnatural,” “bad,” “perverse,” “strange,” “odd,” “queer,” “abnormal,” “immoral,” and “deviant” to remind and reinforce