Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Alfred kinsey influence on sexuality
Alfred kinsey influence on sexuality
Kinsey’s research and sexual orientation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Alfred kinsey influence on sexuality
What is the Current State of Knowledge on Volunteer Bias in Sex Research?
Introduction
Many problems in research concerning sexuality of people are difficult to argue with compared to other ones, such as harmful effects of smoking cigarettes. Volunteer bias in research is one of the problems. In two research studies by Wiederman, and Strassberg and Lowe, volunteer bias in sex research is discussed. Some people like Kinsey in the film Kinsey are not bias, and as such, volunteer sex information whiles others do not. Because people are afraid of volunteering their personal sexual history in a research, it is my opinion they prefer to use anonymity in an interview through the use of questionnaires.
Review and Evaluation of Literature
In a research
…show more content…
He begins the study by approaching the dean of students asking permission to conduct an open-forum “sex course” (Condon 00:33:01). The dean grants him permission with specific instructions that the open-forum will only be for graduates, senior students, teachers, and married students. Most of them were afraid to “share, such an intimate relationship” (Condon 01:24:45). In the first research study, Wiederman (1999) shows that people experienced some discomfort while taking part in the sex research. As he continues to answer questions about sex education in the open-forum, he realizes that the answers are limited by lack of adequate scientific data concerning the sexual human behavior (Wiederman, 1999). Therefore, he looks to science saying, “The only way to study sex with any scientific accuracy is to strip away everything but its physiological functions” (Condon …show more content…
The aim of using the questionnaires is to make sure that people volunteered information without feeling that they are being coerced to reveal intimate details about their sexual lives. The results from the questionnaires puzzle him. He realizes that sexuality among humans is varied more than the way many people think. While “every male have a history of masturbation” (Condon 00:42:18) to experience sexual pleasure, others like to have sex with the same gender. As a result, he was able to find out that some people preferred to be “heterosexual” while others “homosexual” (00:42:36). Those in relationships with the same gender were not afraid of people knowing their sexual history (Strassberg & Lowe, 1995). Personally, he is not biased because he is willing to share his own sexual history in a volunteered sex research interview, saying that he is mostly
Donna J. Drucker, “A Most Interesting Chapter in the History of Science: Intellectual Responses to Alfred Kinsey’s Sexual Behavior in the Human Male”, History of the Human Sciences 25 no. 75 (2012): 79.
In the late 40’s and early 50’s, sex was a topic that was almost never discussed, that most were ignorant to. Things like masturbation and homosexuality were issues many had little to no knowledge about; abstinence was the social “norm”. Sexology was an unconventional topic to speak of or specifically research. Because of the low popularity of the topic, controversial decision to interview, and sexual experiments with volunteers, the Rockefeller Foundation pulled the plug on funding Kinsey’s research. It was gathered that these methods do not cast an accurate depiction of the general population and should no longer be
hand out questionnaires that students are encouraged to fill out concerning their sexual behavior because of no previously recorded research. However, many students failed to respond and Kinsey decided to conduct i...
Everyone has an opinion about sexuality education. From vocal parents at PTA meetings to state governors who must decide whether to apply for federal funding for abstinence-only-until-marriage programs or more comprehensive sexuality programs, or both, or neither. From school pri...
“In a study of 35 Sex education programs around the world, the World Health Organization found there is no evidence that ...
Masters and Johnson were a pioneering team in the field of human sexuality, both in the domains of research and therapy. William Howell Masters, a gynecologist, was born in Cleveland, Ohio in 1915. Virginia Eshelman Johnson, a psychologist, was born in Springfield, Montana in 1925. To fully appreciate their contribution, it is necessary to see their work in historic context. In 1948, Alfred C. Kinsey and his co-workers, responding to a request by female students at Indiana University for more information on human sexual behavior, published the book Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. They followed this five years later with Sexual Behavior in the Human Female. These books began a revolution in social awareness of and public attention given to human sexuality. At the time, public morality severely restricted open discussion of sexuality as a human characteristic, and specific sexual practices, especially sexual behaviors that did not lead to procreation. Kinsey's books, which among other things reported findings on the frequency of various sexual practices including homosexuality, caused a furor. Some people felt that the study of sexual behavior would undermine the family structure and damage American society. It was in this climate - one of incipient efforts to break through the denial of human sexuality and considerable resistance to these efforts - that Masters and Johnson began their work. Their primary contribution has been to help define sexuality as a healthy human trait and the experience of great pleasure and deep intimacy during sex as socially acceptable goals. As a physician interested in the nature of sexuality and the sexual experience, William Masters wanted to conduct research that would lead to an objective understanding of these topics. In 1957, he hired Virgina Johnson as a research assistant to begin this research issue. Together they developed polygraph-like instruments that were designed to measure human sexual response. Using these tools, Masters and Johnson initiated a project that ultimately included direct laboratory observation and measurement of 700 men and women while they were having intercourse or masturbating. Based on the data collected in this study, they co-authored the book Human Sexual Response in 1966. In this book, they identify and describe four phases in the human sexual response cycle : excitement, plateau, orgasm, and resolution. By this point in time, the generally repressive attitude toward sexuality was beginning to lift and the book found a ready audience.
Quindlin, Anna. "Sex Ed." The McGraw-Hill Reader: Issues across the Disciplines. By Gilbert H. Muller. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2011. 275-77. Print.
Attempting to get to the root of how an individual's sexual preference is determined, and the subsequent attempt to designate these individual tendencies into definitive statements regarding large groups in society, has become a seductive topic for numerous media sources within the past decade or so. A closer look at this debate reveals the relative error of exploring one side without an equal exploration of the other. Dean Hamer et al at the National Cancer Institute published the initial paper that is accountable for the explosion of interest and argument regarding genetic determination of sexual preference in 1993 (2). Hamer's study found that, of thirty-two pairs of brothers who were "exclusively or mostly" homosexual, twenty-two pairs of brothers shared the same type of genetic material. This introduced the idea that there is a gene for homosexuality.
Sociologist Laud Humphreys, used deception to observe men, who were unaware of Humphrey’s topic of research, as sources of the daily lifestyles of homosexual males, in order to help him create his book “Tearoom Trade”. Humphreys was able to find the right data was by recording license plate numbers of the participant, so he can find their addresses, go to their homes and interviewed them. When he released his book however, a few social scientist claimed that Humphreys' research was a violation to professional ethics. I happen to agree with the scientists statement, because this project of knowing more about homosexual’s daily life, in my opinion, is not a good research topic.
Milstein, Susan A. Taking Sides Clashing Views in Human Sexuality. Ed. William J. Taverner and Ryan W. McKee. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2009. Print.
Sexuality is a fundamental part of our self-discovery, involving much more than just being genetically or anatomically male and female and it is not defined solely by one 's sexual acts (Ministry of Education 1989, p.79 cited in Gourlay, P 1995). The notion that sexuality is fixed and innate disregards the social aspects that impact ones’ sexualities. Gagnon and Simon (1973) further commented that sexuality is a feature of social
Despite the large collection of literature of sexuality that has been accumulating, human asexuality has been largely ignored. Asexuality is controversially considered to be a sexual orientation and people who identify as asexual are people who typically do not experience sexual attraction (Asexuality Visibility and Education Network, 2013). Though research on sex and sexual orientations has been done for centuries, the first real suggestion that there might be people who fall outside of the heterosexual – homosexual orientation spectrum came from Kinsey and colleagues in 1948. These individuals were put into a separate category and were identified as having no erotic response to hetero- or homosexual stimuli, but otherwise they were largely ignored by the researchers (Kinsey, 1953). Later, researchers linked asexuality with negative traits and pathologies, including depression and lower self-esteem (Masters, Johnson, & Kolodny, 1986; Nuius, 1983). An issue with these studies, however, is that the researchers defined asexuality in a way that most current asexuals do not agree with. For example, in a study done by Bell and Weinberg (1978), there were references made to asexual homosexuals who simply hid their homosexuality. Many asexuals, otherwise known as Aces, would struggle with this definition because homosexuality implies a type of sexual attraction: attraction to your same sex. Because Aces typically do not feel sexual attraction to anyone or anything, they should not be classified under the same label as a closeted homosexual. Another issue is that none of these studies actually focused on asexuality. Instead, they were added on the side and generally ignored.
The significance of this test was to have the person taking the test become aware of the societal bias one is being influenced by. In this case, one is privileged in society when it comes to sexulaity if one is not “different” and is straight. But the problem here is that the difference is not the problem. The “different” have no significance outside the system of privilege and oppression, it is all socially constructed. Society is always reminding us of these social constructions to the point where the “good” and “bad” and “privileged” and “nonprivileged” all becomes second nature to us. I was surprised that even having many friends whom identified as gay, lesbian, bisexual, and even transgender, after that taking the test the data suggested that I have “a slight automatic preference for Straight People compared to Gay People”. At first I was very confused but
Sprecher, S. (1989). Premarital sexual standards for different categories of individuals. Journal of Sex Research, 26, 232-248.
The sexual orientation of a person has been a critical debate over the past several centuries. For several...