Social Constructionist Theory Of Psychosexuality

From birth, one's sexuality is shaped by society. Cultures institute behaviors that are to be seen as the societal norms, which work to constantly reinforce societal expectations of how genders should act in relation to one another. Although some may argue that one's sexuality is an innate characteristic resulting from genetic makeup, there is a large amount of evidence pointing to its social construction instead. Through the power differences between males and females, established gender roles, and drastic economic shifts, society establishes sexuality and reinforces the behaviors that are expected of its citizens.

The critics of the biological theory say “biological explanations for homosexuality are like I-phones – a new one comes out every year” (Vincent, 2014). This idea is not unreasable as while preparation of this essay, several biological theories were found in different sources (genetic, epigenetic, prenatal, hormonal). The supporters of the moral theory consider that every gay has a choice and the reasons for change of orientation are lack of another opportunity or problems with females. Usually men who become gays had weak or absent father, particularly, have not observed a positive male role in the childhood and as the result it lead to gender identity disorder and change of

Many scientists have a difficult time understanding homosexuality on the evolutionary aspect. They believe a human beings’ main purpose is reproduction, which makes the sexual relationship between two males a confusing concept for most evolutionary thinkers (McKnight 1). Evolutionary thinkers believe that the less desirable genes are removed from the system when they are not breed as often, but this cannot be said for homosexual males who have been a continuing presence in most societies over numerous generations (McKnight 1). These evolutionary thinkers, like most humans, have a need to place others into

A pattern emerges where the scholarly literature exploring this topic is largely focused on males. Reason being is that it appears that males are the sex who are predominantly homosexual in their orientation (LeVay & Baldwin, 2012). However, the sensitivity within the discourse of sexual orientation arises when it is debated upon whether one 's sexual preference is innate at birth, hence a force of nature or biology, or if it is a result of culture, nurture or environmental factors (Emmanuele et al., 2010). Furthermore, an experimental design will be proposed to further examine this topic. Comparing the three chosen studies, it is evident that a biological and endocrinological perspective does account for sexual orientation (Kraemer et al., 2006; Manning et al., 2007; Miller et al., 2008). Of the studies that currently exist on this topic, data shows that prenatal testosterone levels are indicative of sexual orientation (Kraemer et al., 2006; Manning et al., 2007; Miller et al., 2008). This paper addresses a topic that is relevant in today 's society; a topic that has, for the most part, been written off as having any scientific roots (Emmanuele et al., 2010). This paper counters that belief and in reading this essay, it will be evident that biology and endocrinology have a much stronger influence on sexual orientation than previously thought.

He contradicted the argument that homosexual behaviour is related to genetic, hormonal or biological disorder. To abolish these views, the author mentions that ‘no school of medicine, medical journal or professional organization has ever recognized such claims (p. 2) - at least at the time he wrote the article in 1994.

Human sexuality is a common phrase for all, and anything, pertaining to the feelings and behaviors of sex for the human race. Sexuality has been a topic that has been discussed and studied for as far back as 1000 years B.C. and is still being studied today. As the discussion of sexuality has progressed through history, theories have been created based on research and experiments that scholars have implemented, based on their own perceptions of human behavior. Out of the many theories that pose to explain sexual behavior, Sexuality Now explained ten that are seemed to be the most overlapped, and built off of theories. Of these theories, two that were discussed in the text were the behavioral and sociological theory. These two theories cover some of the basic ideas of what could possibly influence a person’s sexuality.

Do people have control over their sexual orientation? Many people believe they were born without a choice. In other words, some people believe they were predestined to be homosexual. Homosexuality is defined as the romantic/sexual attraction between members of the same sex. Currently, the cause of homosexuality has not been determined although many speculations have been made. The cause of homosexuality has been disputed for many years. One could argue homosexuality is caused by hormones, genes and/or a type of social deviance. This research paper will offer another alternative. Specifically, it will argue that homosexuality is caused by epigenetics.

If sexual orientation is something that we can’t change or choose, then how are these specific preferences such as heterosexuality and homosexuality created? How does one person progress to either heterosexuality or homosexuality? Studies showed that there were genetic factors linked to influencing sexual orientation in males before they were born by increasing the female reproductive capacity in mothers during multiple births. (Iemmole, Ciani, 2008: 393) Though that doesn’t mean that there technically is a “gay gene” that has been discovered, just that several human genome studies has suggested promising areas of research that are pointing to that direction. (Iemmole, Ciani, 2008: 393) With more

How is the nature vs nurture debate related to a consideration of the mental disorder, schizophrenia?

There is much debate that homosexuality is a developmental problem caused by a weak bond between a father and son during one’s childhood. A failed relationship with one’s father can lead the boy to not fully internalize male gender identity and develop homosexually (Baird & Baird, 1995). Consider the gender development of identity. Infants indentify with their mother who is the first and primary source of nurturance and care. As girls age, they continue to identify mostly with their mother and boys shift towards their father. Through a father-son relationship, masculine identification is attained which is necessary if the boy is to develop a normally masculine personality (i.e. heterosexuality). This development task helps explain why boys have more difficulty than girls in developing gender identity and may also explain the higher ratio of male to female homosexuality (Baird & Baird, 1995). It is important that

The nature and nature of homosexuality is heavily debated. Some people believe that homosexuality is biologically determined and others believe it’s base on ones environment. This topic can be argue to be base on both nature and nurture. Studies conducted in the past decades support both the biological and environmental aspect of homosexuality.

The world has come very far with all the dramatic changes we have faced over the years. Wouldn’t you agree? As much change as the world has been through there are still numerous social problems that still exist in society today. Amongst those numerous social problems, sexual orientation and inequality stand out to me. Research from biology, psychology, and sociology is where our understanding of sexual orientation comes from. There are two hypothetical theories researchers have discovered examining the biological basis toward sexual orientation. One concept is the neurohormonal theory, biologist contend that homosexuality is caused by abnormal sex hormone levels in utero. The alternative theory is based on behavioral genetics, determining the source and magnitude of genetic impact on sexual orientation. This theory suggested the concept that gay men were genetically female. Later this theory was proven to be false. Homosexuality was considered as a pathology or mental illness. Not every psychologists agreed with that perspective. A researcher by the name of Havelock Ellis stated that homosexuality was congenital and for that reason it could not be considered as a disease. Sigmund Freud another theorist had the concept that everyone is born bisexual and that either homosexuality or heterosexuality is developed through social and personal experience. Ellis and Freud both concurred that homosexuality was not a mental illness. Despite these researchers’ opinions in 1973,

Science is uncovered origins a lot of things over the centuries and the human created much great inventions and even explored the surface of the moon; however, one question still on everyone’s mind and science may have solved one of greatest mysteries yet which is: how did homosexuality and heterosexuality evolve? Many psychologist, biologist and scientist may agree with sexual orientation is output from a combination of biological, hormonal, environmental and emotional factors and those many factors that influence to a development of human sexual orientation. However, being homosexual or bisexual is not mentally ill or abnormal in certain ways, although sexual minority is part of social problems that makes output from misinformation or prejudicial attitude. Diversity in sexual orientation has been a subject that has been seen in different perspectives by the different people (LeVay, 2010). Today there are the homosexuals, heterosexuals and bisexuals orientated people are forming a part of our society. This paper conduct an overall study of important and strong factors and provides accurate information and explanation for those who want to better understand development of sexual orientation.

For more than a century, researchers and psychologists, such as Sir Francis Galton, Charles Darwin, Sigmund Freud and many others, have been trying to understand how people are transformed by their environment. Researchers have mainly argued whether it is in fact our environment or rather genetics, our biological pre-wiring, which has influenced human behavior. This concept ultimately facilitated what is now known as the Nature versus Nurture debate. The Nature aspect states that human behavior is predetermined by our inherited genes or is the product of our innate behavior. The Nurture side of the disagreement postulates that human behavior stems from acquired attributes through individual learning and experiences. Correspondingly, the Object Relations Theory in psychoanalytic psychology supports the position that a person’s natural environment (i.e. family, peers, acquaintances, society) forms human development. The Object Relations theory stresses that it is the relationships between people, more specially family, often between mother and child, that crafts the human psyche.

The question of what causes some people to be sexually attracted to members of their own gender generates many different answers. In recent years, startling new research (Barinaga, 1993, p.17) has indicated that homosexuality is possibly inherited and determined by biological differences in Brain structure and genes. This study raises an interesting question: If homosexuality is hereditary, is there any basis for societal discrimination against something innate? If it is nature, it is good. If it is good, it should be accepted. A genetic component in sexual orientation would send a message to homosexuals and the society that homosexuality is not a fault, and not the fault of anyone other than nature. Gays and lesbians are born in nature, just like some people who are inherited left-handed gene from their parents.