Over the course of weeks in Gender and Sexuality in Hispanic Studies, I have come to understand what gender and sexuality define. To people in Hispanic world, it may define differently because of their beliefs and attitudes. Based on my understanding of gender’s meaning, the term means characteristics and behaviors associated with a woman or man. The term denotes the behaviors and characteristics came from how society believe how a woman or man should behave in the society. The psychologist, Rhoda Unger suggested this explanation when she wanted to categorize both gender and sex (Brannon, 2011). History has shaped how people’s attitude are formed based on the society in which they live. Some topics regarding gender and sexuality can be very
…show more content…
After three days of transformation, she had to learn how to act like a man in her era in order to have a sense of freedom as a gentleman. The writing of Erauso showed acceptable and accurate actions of men included killing people and playing with women. It didn’t matter if Erauso was biologically a woman and came out as a man. I believe if she felt comfortable being a man which was her choice to be one. Erauso actually wrote a letter to the pope to request permission to maintain her gender. Along the way, she was able to resist against gender oppression by proving that she was still pure and was able to preserve her innocence. It was very significant for her to do so in her era where gender segregation was very rigid. Erauso was somehow able to receive support from the political system of Roman Catholic Church because Catholic Church was a power in the world at time where it can dictate how people behave.
Recently, I watched My Life in Pink for entertainment with my friends. I believe it was a finest example of gender rigidness in society. My Life in Pink (2000) was a fascinating movie where seven years old Ludovic Fabre 's family and he went through when Ludovic coming out as transgender person. One thing I noticed in the My Life in Pink movie was how family struggled to accept what their child wanted to be. Everybody in …show more content…
All descriptions matched perfectly in most advanced countries society because of some loopholes in restrictions especially for royal gay. The explanation of royal gay is to have a higher power in government office, to afford to be openly gay and being wealthy. These men can get away with any arrest or restrictions over them while dog-collar gay and common gay are easy to spot. The closet gay man who has a family and is very difficult to recognize. With the explanations from Arenas, I believe Arenas may be somewhat both dog-collar gay and common gay because of his openness of being gay which came with the description of dog-collar gay. Arenas can be a common gay because his job included some validations of being a writer and workplace at a library. Arenas can be difficult to recognize as a gay man by not acting like a stereotypical feminine gay man. He defied all stereotypes of gay men by fighting against the stereotypes. When Arenas wanted to leave Cuba, he had to act like a stereotypical gay man to prove that he was
After three days of transformation, she had to learn how to act like a man in her era in order to have a sense of freedom as a gentleman. The writing of Erauso showed acceptable and accurate actions of men included killing people and playing with women. It didn’t matter if Erauso was biologically a woman and came out as a man. I believe if she felt comfortable being a man which was her choice to be one. Erauso actually wrote a letter to the pope to request permission to maintain her gender. Along the way, she was able to resist against gender oppression by proving that she was still pure and was able to preserve her innocence. It was very significant for her to do so in her era where gender segregation was very rigid. Erauso was somehow able to receive support from the political system of Roman Catholic Church because Catholic Church was a power in the world at time where it can dictate how people behave.
Recently, I watched My Life in Pink for entertainment with my friends. I believe it was a finest example of gender rigidness in society. My Life in Pink (2000) was a fascinating movie where seven years old Ludovic Fabre 's family and he went through when Ludovic coming out as transgender person. One thing I noticed in the My Life in Pink movie was how family struggled to accept what their child wanted to be. Everybody in …show more content…
All descriptions matched perfectly in most advanced countries society because of some loopholes in restrictions especially for royal gay. The explanation of royal gay is to have a higher power in government office, to afford to be openly gay and being wealthy. These men can get away with any arrest or restrictions over them while dog-collar gay and common gay are easy to spot. The closet gay man who has a family and is very difficult to recognize. With the explanations from Arenas, I believe Arenas may be somewhat both dog-collar gay and common gay because of his openness of being gay which came with the description of dog-collar gay. Arenas can be a common gay because his job included some validations of being a writer and workplace at a library. Arenas can be difficult to recognize as a gay man by not acting like a stereotypical feminine gay man. He defied all stereotypes of gay men by fighting against the stereotypes. When Arenas wanted to leave Cuba, he had to act like a stereotypical gay man to prove that he was