Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Gender expectations and sexual double standards
Biological influence on sexuality
The historical evolution of sexuality
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Gender expectations and sexual double standards
History defines us. History is what makes changes to both norms of society and what is socially acceptable for any lifestyle. That being said, how does the internet and sexual deviancy play a role in our history and how has it changed through time? What is acceptable in the terms of sexual variation now from our past as a world and as a society? Times changes and so do viewpoints on what is sexually acceptable, however, some forms of sexual deviancy such as pedophilia will never be acceptable by any standards of human decency. Sexual deviancy is defined by Wikipedia as Paraphilia. This term is used to describe sexual objects or images that cause sexual arousal, Paraphilia “involves sexual arousal and gratification towards sexual behavior that is atypical or extreme” (Wikipedia) and viewed as abnormal to the standards that society has set at that time. We as society have come so far in our acceptance of sexual orientation and sexual identity. Some of this due to advocacy, but a majority of these changing viewpoints are due to internet pornography. The internet opens up the world in ways never seen before. Privacy and confidentiality of what happens in ones household in regards to sexual relations are no longer intimate and private but are available for the world to see via webcams and social media outlets. Most people view this harmlessly and use these as an outlet for sexual exploration and endeavors. Other people however, use the internet and sexual pornography for another reason altogether. Pedophiles and rapists use these forms to lure their next victim into their clutches. As our technology increases for the purported betterment of mankind so does the exploitation of that which was meant for good. It wasn’... ... middle of paper ... ...wever, this may also serve as a substitution for the actual acts of sexual deviancy and may act as sort of a safety mechanism for other pathological and sociological issues. Mustanski writes that “the ultimate goal of such research (in sexual studies), will be to understand the timing and mechanism of various etiological factors that influence sexual orientation.” (Mustanski, 2002) However, sexual orientation is no longer considered to be a sexual deviancy in most cultures like pedophilia and rape. However, there are more and more studies showing that there still may be a genetic link in people that triggers something in their thought processes which compels people to act on their sexual urges. Just because a person identifies as either homosexual or heterosexual does not define that they will become a sexual deviant as defined by current society standards.
The first possible cause of homosexuality is genetic factors. Homosexuality is a trait from birth (Buchanan, 2000). Studies found that identical twins share many common traits. A study found that identical twins normally share homosexual behavior if one of them is homosexual. This proved that genes are likely to cause homosexuality. In addition, according to (Santinover, 2002), homosexuality is a heritable behavior. Based on heritability studies, almost any human trait is heritable including the homosexual behavior. He stated that behavioral genes are found in specific chromosome. Thus, the behavior is obviously heritable. Moreover, Italian University of Padova (2004) believes that homosexual trait is passed from mother to male offspring by natural ...
Women have long been exploited through pornographic material, such as videos, photos and literature, these materials, more-so now, than ever, portray women purely as sexual objects. The evolution of the business? popularity has done nothing but help fuel a false impression, subjugating women in modern day culture and society, yet still, banning pornography in the US would be nearly impossible, due to complex issues dealing with the first amendment and obscenity laws. With instances of discrimination based on sexual orientation, race or sex being in most cases illegal, the practice of pornography should most definitely not be acceptable or perpetuated, especially in a country like the US where this said industry defies everything of which our country is founded upon. This rise [in popularity] looks as if it is related, almost in a hand by hand parallel, with growth of sexual violence against women in America.
References to Kurt Freund’s studies to “assess sexual arousal in men and women” and Alfred Kinsey’s “sexual orientation” scale are made to further explain how sexuality and asexuality are not solid concepts with strict definitions of their own but rather more multifarious. For
Sexuality is often looked down upon by mainstream society. Embedded into culture and tradition, sex itself has been made to be seen as a taboo of sorts. Prostitution was made illegal; pornography was made evil. Rooted deep within the teachings of the most common religious morality systems, sex and sexuality is often paired with punishments. Those who explore their sexuality is often shamed, and labeled with words that can ostracize such persons from society. Kant’s view of sexuality almost destroys his credibility as a philosopher by providing unclear and unreasonable points of sexuality and objectification, yet he remains keen on trying to prove that sex, outside of marriage, is the worst possible sin. However, there are those who believe that expressing sexuality is power, and is exercising autonomy. Many existentialists see sexuality as a means of self-expression, and to not be comfortable with sexuality shows that the person inhabits the morality of the sheep.
The issue of homosexuality has been hotly debated since 1960 and scientific discipline, biology, has begun to ask the fundamental question about homosexuality. However, a few years ago, the issue was discussed mostly by people in the social sciences. Psychologists, such as Freud, studied homosexuals extensively and were coming up with an explanation for their "abnormal" behavior. All of the explanations that these people created linked homosexuality to experiences that homosexual have while growing up. Generally speaking, people in the world of psychology believed that homosexuality could be explained by a person's environment. However, in the past four or five years, the subject of homosexuality has gradually moved into the world of biology. Studies have been done recently are coming up with a genetic explanation for sexual preference. The fact that many of the scientists involved into researches of this sort are gays and Chandler Burr, scientist of genetics and biology as well, which explains a lot about the issue, that homosexual people are interested and curious about their “abnormal” nature themselves. It may also serve as an evidence that homosexuality is not the personal choice and also says about the moral competence of sexual minority people. The very term "sexual orientation," which in the 1980s replaced "sexual preference," asserts the deeply rooted nature of sexual desire and love. It implies biology again.
To understand more about obscenity and the Internet, one needs to understand the origins of the subject. Before the Internet was even a concept, obscenity was an issue that arose frequently, and needed to be subsequently dealt with. In the era
“There must be integrity between body and life. You must not do with your body what you’re not willing to do with your whole life” (Keller). Keller is directly talking about our individual sexual morality and how or how not it should be perceived in a social context. Most people think sexual dilemmas of it in a broader spectrum, not directly related to one’s morality, by saying “this act isn’t right” where others may simply say “why not”. Yet, what justifies an act for one person and condemns it for another? More importantly on what grounds do they condone their actions? Sexual morality can be described as: a communal and personal benchmarks for which we model are social relationships, as it pertains to all and every segment of engaging in sexual activities. This is not a limitless definition; it ranges from contact with one’s self or another, the context in which the act was preformed, and in some cases the place where it was performed. It can even be as controversial as what type of physical contact is considered sexual. All these guidelines must be met by our own standards to justify the sexual acts we partake in.
The issues of sexual ethics in relation to morality and perversion have been addressed in depth by each of the gentleman at this table. Sexual activity as described by Solomon and Nagle is comprised of a moral standard and ‘naturalness’ aspect. So, in claiming an act is perverted we must first examine it through a moral framework and understand how this interacts with the ‘naturalness’ of a particular act. Solomon makes the distinction as follows “Perversion is an insidious concept…To describe an activity as perverse is not yet a full blown moral condemnation, for it need not entail that one ought not to indulge in such activities.” Along with the examination of the nature of an act, there must be clear justification as to why sexual acts deserve special separate ethical principles. The question arises: does an act simply due to its sexual nature deserve a separate form of moral inquisition than other acts that occur in nature? In this essay I shall argue that perversion and immorality are not mutually exclusive. By this I mean that a sexual act that is, by my definition, immoral must also be perverted. It is also my contention that if an act is perverted we must also define it as immoral. This second part of the argument is contrary to what many of you have claimed. At the outset of this paper I would also like to state my support of Thomas Nagel’s argument holding that the connection between sex and reproduction has no bearing on sexual perversion. (Nagel 105)
Technology and things like social media have a great effect on sexual views, behavior and practice among generations. Recent advances in technology are influencing sexual behaviors because of things like computers, smartphones, sex technology (sex toys, pornography, etc.). The list is growing and so are the many possible uses of these technologies. In fact, one in every ten websites is a pornography website, (Krotoski, 2011). This alone gives individuals access to the erotic, fantasy world of sex. These advances in technology, and the availability of this information has made it easier than ever to enter the world of sex.
Paedophilia is a concept which has changed throughout the eras the beliefs and attitudes towards paedophilia is something that is seen as a very difficult subject. Social standards are extremely influential when it comes to deciding what is and isn’t acceptable behaviour for a society and over time especially within the western world this is one of the things that have crossed boundaries and become a topic of debate for a variety of cultures. Paedophilia is considered to be an abnormal or unnatural attraction towards children. Throughout this essay there will be an attempt to discuss the constructions that surround the notion of paedophilia with focus on the social and psychological aspects. Firstly it is important to understand the history of paedophilia to be able to fully explore the explanations which we will be presented later on in this essay. Dating back to as far as the Roman and Greek eras where relationships between children and adults were accepted and portrayed as forms of mentorship. Up until the age of enlightenment, there was little more known than the naturalistic approach to maturity and sexuality. La Fontaine, (1990) states a paedophile is generally defined as a person who gains sexual gratification from contact with pre-pubescent children, this is a supported definition from various academics. According to the ICD-10 manual, Paedophilia is ‘a sexual preference for children, boys, girls or both usually of pre-pubertal or early pubertal age’. A person 16 years of age or older meets the definition if they have a persistent or predominant sexual preference for prepubescent children at least five years younger than themselves. Alter...
Sexual addictions of any kind can continue to progress in stages that may include child pornography, violence and pain, prostitution, rape and even serial killing. The overexposure of sexual imagery is creating a tolerance not only to the images presented but also to the crimes that go along the continuous craving for more and more extreme pornographic material to satisfy a sexual need. The key here is that people are after more and more sex, not a sexual relationship. The relationship part is gone and sadly, people just want to live the moment, satisfy a sexual need and walk away without any regard to the damage they might cause.
Sexual deviance is any behavior with a sexual act that goes against the expectations of the society in which the act was performed. To be considered deviant, there are usually consent issues, the people or things involved create a deviant combination, the specific sexual act and anatomy is outside the realm of socially acceptable, or the place involved is unacceptable (Ritzer, 2007). In American society, it appears according to media accounts, billboard advertisements, and daily observation of the people passing by, sex is bought, sold, and traded in the open market; however, just because we see it everywhere, does not mean that it is socially acceptable. As we learned in the Tittle and Paternoster (2000) article, indiscretion is the deviance
This field of Sexology, developed from German and French influences, developed a taxonomy and categorization of sexual ‘deviance,’ in which homosexuality was at first seen as pathological and unnatural. This notion of a ‘degenerate’ sexuality and deviances, political, legal and social groups began to understand homosexuality in medicalized terms. Krafft-Ebbing, Ulrichs, Freud. Paedophilia and greeks.
However, a couple years ago, the issue seemed to only be discussed by people in the social sciences. Psychologists, such as Sigmund Freud, studied homosexuals broadly and were coming up with specification for their "abnormal" behavior. All of the reasons that the people who were studied, created links to homosexuality was because of experiences that homosexual have happened to them while growing up. Typically speaking, psychology believed that a person 's surrounding could explain homosexuality. However, in the past eight or ten years, the subject of homosexuality has and is steadily making it into the world of biology. Studies have been done recently are coming up with a genetic explication for sexual predilection. The fact that many of the scientists taking part into researches of this sort are gays, Chandler Burr an American journalist, scientist of genetics, and biology as well, verbally expressed “which expounds a lot about the issue, that homosexual people are intrigued and curious about their “abnormal” nature themselves”. It may also serve as proof, that homosexuality is not the personal choice, and also saying about the moral competence of sexual minority people. The words "sexual orientation," which in the 1980s superseded "sexual predilection," declares the deeply rooted nature of sexual desire and love. It implicatively
In recent years, pornography has established itself as perhaps the most controversial topic arising out of the use of the Internet. The easy availability of this type of sexually explicit material has caused a panic among government officials, family groups, religious groups and law enforcement bodies and this panic has been perpetuated in the media.