Sexuality is an important component of life and is a natural part of human growth. Understanding our sexuality contributes to one’s discernment in taking the rights choices regarding sex. However, our society still is tormented by the fear imposed by Christianity that sex is the corrupting source of one’s soul. Thus, sexuality is not a topic that parents and educators feel comfortable discussing with children. The youth is either getting wrong sex information from venues such as friends and the internet or getting no information at all. It is primordial that we demand changes and seriously address this issue of misinformation and provide our future generation with all the knowledge necessary for them to make responsible decisions about their bodies.
It is discouraging to see the recent statistics regarding sexual health of the American Youth. Teenagers are at great risk of contracting sexual transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancies due to ignorance of their own sexuality. Most teenagers look for information about sexuality from their close friends. Pressure from friends contributes to engagement in unprotected sexual activities putting their health at risk. Parents are not proactive in starting conversations about sexual health with their children due to taboos, ignorance and the false belief that they have no influence on their children’s behavior. Children feel embarrassed to ask for information from parents and educators in fear of rejection. This cycle of shame only exacerbate bad sexual decisions. The media has also part of the blame in contributing to provoke children in engaging in early sexual activity due massive use of sex images to sell their products. With their higher part of the brain not fully developed, teenagers do not understand the risk they are putting themselves into when they have unprotected sex because of the idea that “it won’t happen to them”.
Informing our children about safe sex practices will contribute to their general health. Understanding sexuality as a whole should be part of the United Nations human’s right. Kids with the proper information can make responsible decision whether they choose to abstain or engage in sexual activity. Safe sex education should be part of every school curriculum so kids can comprehend the importance of protected sex and the contraceptive options available to them. Our society cannot blindly assume that all of our teenagers will not engage in sexual activities even when they were told that abstinence is the best option in preventing sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancies. Abstinence only sex educational programs supported by conservative views in our government do not effectively reduce early sexual initiation, STDs and unwanted pregnancies. Only with a comprehensive sexual education program we will be able to see changes risky behaviors and better the quality of life of teens and prevent long term health consequences.
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Sexuality: Constructivists vs. Essentialists
Defining homosexuality, bisexuality and trans persons is a source of polarized battles between social constructivists and essentialists (biological and religious). People in same sex relationships are trying to gain social acceptance to enhance their quality of life. The gays right movement, longing for empathy and understanding, have gain great support by our society in the past decades. Better understanding of our inherent free will should help those who are against homosexuality to appreciate the fact that love sees no boundaries as age, race, religion and gender.
Constructivists understand sexuality as a social constructed reality. It takes into consideration the history and culture of a certain society. Sexual orientation and gender identity is an occurrence external to the person. There are several factors that influence sexuality as biology, culture, religion, politics, family values and individual choices. Sexual identity, orientation and behaviors are influenced by limits set by the society and therefore impact ones choices. Within a society there is a pattern of behavior demonstrating the power that the society plays over its people in conforming with the social norms. Thus, different cultures have different norms on sexuality. Gender roles, regulations of the institution of marriage, employment opportunities are relevant factors in the formation of homosexual behaviors. Homosexuality is defined not universally or innate but in a cultural context and in a given time. Constructivists believe that the person makes a conscious choice about their sexual preference and partners after hearing discourses made by different institutions within the society.
Religious essentialism has its focus on creation and naturalism. Human sexuality is given to us and it is universal and unchangeable over historical time. When one is born, one is either homosexual or heterosexual and there are no variations in one’s lifetime. Therefore, sexual orientation and gender dwell within the individual and it is not a conscious choice. All deviations are morally wrong because they go against God will. Homosexuality is a natural occurrence though abnormal. Homosexual relations are sinful because they are imperfect manifestations of the essences.
Non religious essentialists are very secular. They are also called biological essentialists. The norms are based on human biology. They use social biological explanation to justify several occurrences in sexuality such as male innate tendency to promiscuity due to natural instinct in the preservation of the specie. Sexual desire is biologic driven. Genetics influence sexual orientation in both men and women.
In my view, the constructivists have the broadest understanding of free will. They acknowledge the individual ability in making their choices regarding sexuality. Even if they are confronted with social norms, they still are free to make the choice. This is very contradictory if we are talking about free will which is given to us by our Creator. That implies a religious connotation to it and it would make sense to assign the religious essentialists as the group who better understands free will. To me, it is even more disturbing to think that the religious essentialists who are the ones who claim that homosexuality has a natural causality fervently oppose it.
Constructivists understand sexuality as a social constructed reality. It takes into consideration the history and culture of a certain society. Sexual orientation and gender identity is an occurrence external to the person. There are several factors that influence sexuality as biology, culture, religion, politics, family values and individual choices. Sexual identity, orientation and behaviors are influenced by limits set by the society and therefore impact ones choices. Within a society there is a pattern of behavior demonstrating the power that the society plays over its people in conforming with the social norms. Thus, different cultures have different norms on sexuality. Gender roles, regulations of the institution of marriage, employment opportunities are relevant factors in the formation of homosexual behaviors. Homosexuality is defined not universally or innate but in a cultural context and in a given time. Constructivists believe that the person makes a conscious choice about their sexual preference and partners after hearing discourses made by different institutions within the society.
Religious essentialism has its focus on creation and naturalism. Human sexuality is given to us and it is universal and unchangeable over historical time. When one is born, one is either homosexual or heterosexual and there are no variations in one’s lifetime. Therefore, sexual orientation and gender dwell within the individual and it is not a conscious choice. All deviations are morally wrong because they go against God will. Homosexuality is a natural occurrence though abnormal. Homosexual relations are sinful because they are imperfect manifestations of the essences.
Non religious essentialists are very secular. They are also called biological essentialists. The norms are based on human biology. They use social biological explanation to justify several occurrences in sexuality such as male innate tendency to promiscuity due to natural instinct in the preservation of the specie. Sexual desire is biologic driven. Genetics influence sexual orientation in both men and women.
In my view, the constructivists have the broadest understanding of free will. They acknowledge the individual ability in making their choices regarding sexuality. Even if they are confronted with social norms, they still are free to make the choice. This is very contradictory if we are talking about free will which is given to us by our Creator. That implies a religious connotation to it and it would make sense to assign the religious essentialists as the group who better understands free will. To me, it is even more disturbing to think that the religious essentialists who are the ones who claim that homosexuality has a natural causality fervently oppose it.
Sacred Sex vs. Secular Sex
Sexuality is an important component of life and is a natural part of human growth. Public interest in sexuality seems to be at high level. Media is bombarded with programs containing sexual material. The news coverage reflect our society attention to sexual debates such as celebrities’ relationships and affairs, same sex marriage, artificial reproduction, abortion, priest sex abuse scandals, etc. Views vary on how we, as a society, should define human sexuality either as sacred or secular. However, advocating for either extreme can cause problems and can promote discrimination. A careful ethical examination on how we should categorize human sexuality has to focus on finding a middle ground between sacred sex and secular sex to promote and reflect all people’s position.
Judeo-Christian and Muslim religions with patriarchal influences regard heterosexual sex within marriage as sacred. Sex is viewed as a manifestation of God’s gift to human beings first and foremost for procreation. In the last decades, churches have tried to change some of their old traditions where sexuality was understood a carnal sinful act of our body denigrating the purity of human soul. Sacred sex advocators emphasize the importance of identifying sacred nature of sex. The principle purpose of sexual relations should be the respect of each person involved in the activity. Both partners have to fully consent to engage in the sexual act. Sacred sex is also called consecrated sex which aims to bring both partners closer together in a “spiritual” bond. It is meant to enhance the relationship because it will provide a strong sense care for each other. In enhancing personal intimacy, couples will praise each other bodies as temple of their Creator. This sense of closeness will transcend their relationships and will transfer this positive connection to children, family and ultimately to the society as a whole. However, classifying sexual intimacy as sacred can imply a religious meaning to sex and can alienate views of non-religious individuals. This is particular important to individuals whose relationships are not recognized by traditional religious. Such groups are homosexual, bisexuals, non-married couples, etc. It is important to distinguish sacred sex from the puritanical moralist Judeo-Christian traditional values which preoccupied to in dishonor our innate sexual desires.
Non-sacred or secular sex is usually advocated by people who are against traditional religions’ views on sexuality and gender roles. They feel that religions should not be mandating what society accepts as morally right or wrong. Religions punitive sex agenda is viewed as hypocritical because it goes against of what they proclaim as fundamental values such as equality and love. Sacred sex is associated with judgment and blame. Apart from the connotation of religious tone to sacred sex, some sort of “sanctifying” term should be used to associate sexual relation and intimacy with trust and respect. When you trivialize sex as pure carnal activity, we give intimacy an individualist approach. Individual sexual pleasure stays above mutual trust and respect. There is no regarding for mutual enjoyment. It can be used to oppress and abuse the weaker person in the relationship. It has no moral parameter to protect the victims against sexual abuse. The media has take advantage of this secularization of sex. Millions have been made in ads promoting superficial views of relationships and casual sex. Women with “perfect” skinny body and wealthy good looking mid-age men sell everything. However, this non- sacred sex trend only contribute to people feeling ashamed of own body. We are undervaluing intimacy and giving priority they way we look.
To conclude, our society will only come to enjoy the fullness of our sexuality (whether one believe or not that it was given to us by a Creator) when we are able to create a environment where sex is understood as an opportunity to embrace each other with respect and appreciation and the desire to be mutually connected in physically, emotionally and spiritually way. Prejudice and discrimination in sexually does reflect social justice.
Judeo-Christian and Muslim religions with patriarchal influences regard heterosexual sex within marriage as sacred. Sex is viewed as a manifestation of God’s gift to human beings first and foremost for procreation. In the last decades, churches have tried to change some of their old traditions where sexuality was understood a carnal sinful act of our body denigrating the purity of human soul. Sacred sex advocators emphasize the importance of identifying sacred nature of sex. The principle purpose of sexual relations should be the respect of each person involved in the activity. Both partners have to fully consent to engage in the sexual act. Sacred sex is also called consecrated sex which aims to bring both partners closer together in a “spiritual” bond. It is meant to enhance the relationship because it will provide a strong sense care for each other. In enhancing personal intimacy, couples will praise each other bodies as temple of their Creator. This sense of closeness will transcend their relationships and will transfer this positive connection to children, family and ultimately to the society as a whole. However, classifying sexual intimacy as sacred can imply a religious meaning to sex and can alienate views of non-religious individuals. This is particular important to individuals whose relationships are not recognized by traditional religious. Such groups are homosexual, bisexuals, non-married couples, etc. It is important to distinguish sacred sex from the puritanical moralist Judeo-Christian traditional values which preoccupied to in dishonor our innate sexual desires.
Non-sacred or secular sex is usually advocated by people who are against traditional religions’ views on sexuality and gender roles. They feel that religions should not be mandating what society accepts as morally right or wrong. Religions punitive sex agenda is viewed as hypocritical because it goes against of what they proclaim as fundamental values such as equality and love. Sacred sex is associated with judgment and blame. Apart from the connotation of religious tone to sacred sex, some sort of “sanctifying” term should be used to associate sexual relation and intimacy with trust and respect. When you trivialize sex as pure carnal activity, we give intimacy an individualist approach. Individual sexual pleasure stays above mutual trust and respect. There is no regarding for mutual enjoyment. It can be used to oppress and abuse the weaker person in the relationship. It has no moral parameter to protect the victims against sexual abuse. The media has take advantage of this secularization of sex. Millions have been made in ads promoting superficial views of relationships and casual sex. Women with “perfect” skinny body and wealthy good looking mid-age men sell everything. However, this non- sacred sex trend only contribute to people feeling ashamed of own body. We are undervaluing intimacy and giving priority they way we look.
To conclude, our society will only come to enjoy the fullness of our sexuality (whether one believe or not that it was given to us by a Creator) when we are able to create a environment where sex is understood as an opportunity to embrace each other with respect and appreciation and the desire to be mutually connected in physically, emotionally and spiritually way. Prejudice and discrimination in sexually does reflect social justice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)