Carley Cockrum
Dr. Liang
Sociology
29 September 2015
The Invention of Heterosexuality The “Invention of Heterosexuality”, by Jonathan Katz, is an outline of his views on how heterosexuality and homosexuality are modern creations. His article traces the historical process by which these sexualities were created. The concept of “normal” and “natural” versus the “abnormal” and “unnatural” may seem self-explanatory and easy to define at first glance, but he offers a deeper insight into what he claims to be the ever-changing definitions of these four simple words. Were past centuries as sexually conservative as they have been perceived to be? Have there always been homosexual people or for a period of time were there only heterosexuals? How does …show more content…
He begins his argument in this era because it is where scholars have been told that the repression against sexuality first began. Love during this time was exclusive to marriage and procreation; it is fair to say that the family was the corner stone of Victorian society. From women, there was not any form of inappropriate attraction or lusting after a man. The ideal of a true women “was defined by her distance from lust” (Katz); but these same values were not held as the standard for men. As talked about it class, the obvious double standard for men and women, which still holds true today, was already beginning to form. The next era Katz breaks down is the Late Victorian Sex-Love era (1860-1892). He explains the changes in era due to the “growth of a consumer economy [that] fostered a new pleasure ethic” (Katz). This is where the modern idea of a sensual society took root. As more suggestive content began being published in books and movies, “normal” and “abnormal” roles among men and women began to take shape. Medical doctors were also encouraging the new idea of sex as natural and not something that women should be ashamed for partaking …show more content…
Gender identity can be separated into each of these categories starting with functionalism. Under the functionalist theory, “gender roles are learned though socialization” while “conflict theory focuses on social structures, not individual identities”. Meanwhile, symbolic interaction theory suggests that “identity is constructed through ongoing social interaction and ‘doing gender’” (Andersen, 274). On the other hand, sexual identity can be dissected under the same three theories. Starting with functional theory, sexual identity is “learned in the family and other social institutions, with deviant sexual identities contributing to social disorder”. Under conflict theory, individuals or specific institutions consider some forms of sexual behavior desirable therefore enforce heterosexism; while symbolic interaction theory views it as “socially constructed when people learn the sexual scripts produced in society” (Andersen,
Dr. Liang
Sociology
29 September 2015
The Invention of Heterosexuality The “Invention of Heterosexuality”, by Jonathan Katz, is an outline of his views on how heterosexuality and homosexuality are modern creations. His article traces the historical process by which these sexualities were created. The concept of “normal” and “natural” versus the “abnormal” and “unnatural” may seem self-explanatory and easy to define at first glance, but he offers a deeper insight into what he claims to be the ever-changing definitions of these four simple words. Were past centuries as sexually conservative as they have been perceived to be? Have there always been homosexual people or for a period of time were there only heterosexuals? How does …show more content…
He begins his argument in this era because it is where scholars have been told that the repression against sexuality first began. Love during this time was exclusive to marriage and procreation; it is fair to say that the family was the corner stone of Victorian society. From women, there was not any form of inappropriate attraction or lusting after a man. The ideal of a true women “was defined by her distance from lust” (Katz); but these same values were not held as the standard for men. As talked about it class, the obvious double standard for men and women, which still holds true today, was already beginning to form. The next era Katz breaks down is the Late Victorian Sex-Love era (1860-1892). He explains the changes in era due to the “growth of a consumer economy [that] fostered a new pleasure ethic” (Katz). This is where the modern idea of a sensual society took root. As more suggestive content began being published in books and movies, “normal” and “abnormal” roles among men and women began to take shape. Medical doctors were also encouraging the new idea of sex as natural and not something that women should be ashamed for partaking …show more content…
Gender identity can be separated into each of these categories starting with functionalism. Under the functionalist theory, “gender roles are learned though socialization” while “conflict theory focuses on social structures, not individual identities”. Meanwhile, symbolic interaction theory suggests that “identity is constructed through ongoing social interaction and ‘doing gender’” (Andersen, 274). On the other hand, sexual identity can be dissected under the same three theories. Starting with functional theory, sexual identity is “learned in the family and other social institutions, with deviant sexual identities contributing to social disorder”. Under conflict theory, individuals or specific institutions consider some forms of sexual behavior desirable therefore enforce heterosexism; while symbolic interaction theory views it as “socially constructed when people learn the sexual scripts produced in society” (Andersen,