Soble outlines “Kant’s sex problem” and Kant’s solution, Soble also gives his own solutions, and in learning both I feel the solution is in externalism. Immanuel Kant defines his second formulation of the Categorical Imperative as knowing the value of a person. It is demeaning to use a person without his or her consent for self-gratification, especially sexually. Kant describes this as using a person simply to serve a means rather than an end, simply put rather than being a concrete loving act with the end of creating new life sex treated as only “scratching an itch”. The idea that Kant, “must take on the other’s ends for their own sake, not because that is an effective way to advance my goals in using the other,” is a way of saying that a man must care enough about the other person treat them as fairly and justly as he wants to be treated (Soble 228).
Both Butler and Foucault believe that there is no interior truth to the self, and for Butler, gender identity. Gender is instead, “inscribed on the surface of bodies” through the repeated and ongoing performance of words and acts (Butler, 136), and discourses on power and culture. Butler explicates Foucault’s arguments and concludes that he takes for granted his assumption that the body is a stable entity before culture imposes on it. Foucault’s philosophies inadvertently surmise the existence of a body before discourses on power and performativity; that the body is its own entity, and culture acts upon that. If bodies are constituted within a specific network of cultural influencers (which Foucault argues that they are), this presupposes that there is a materiality -or ontological independence- of the body outside of those specific regimes.
It is essential to the discussion that a proper definition of sex be established before addressing any other issues. I plan to establish a proper definition of sex with an account of sexual perversion and then continue on discussing the nature of cybersex, infidelity, and love. Sex is generally defined the medical definition involving the sex organs, and participation by more than one party, but as humans are complicated beings this is insufficient to provide an account of sex. In Thomas Nagel’s essay “Sexual Perversion” he addresses the psychological account of sexuality with a phenomenological approach. Nagel describes a scenario of Romeo being aroused by Juliet, and Juliet being aroused by Romeo, and Romeo being aroused by Juliet’s arousal, and so on and so forth (Nagel 37).
In Sartre's case however, it is not mind and matter but consciousness and its opposite: "nothingness" and "being." This irreducible dualism is the key to the trouble human beings have with existence. Humans try to deal with the tensions implied by this dualism by trying to pretend people are not subjects but objects. Sartre calls this "bad faith." He begins by attempting to take human sexuality seriously as a fundamental category, but ends by abandoning the effort in favor of other substitutes.
With sexual identity at the f... ... middle of paper ... ...ntity categories. The deconstruction of binary oppositions grants people acceptance for their unfixed place within a spectrum, as demonstrated through the indefinable nature of each character’s sexuality. Queer theory denies categorical placement as a tool to adhere individuals to oppressive structures, insisting that true freedom is found in self-informed notions of what it means to be a complex range of male, female, gay, and straight, rather than those imposed. The rejection of heteronormative expectations creates an equal playing field, tearing down the social hierarchy of patriarchal ideals. As shown in Angels’ version of San Francisco, this is prophetic of ruin and social destruction to some, and a ray of hope to others.
Integrating scripting theory with the compulsory heterosexuality theory, a heteronormative, dominant sexual script was explicated, the Heterosexual Script (Sorsoli; Collins; Zylbergold; Schooler & Tolman 2007 p. 145-157). Traditionally, societies have encouraged both men and women to obey different sexual scripts (Laws and Schwartz 1977). This heterosexual scripts has been commented to be extremely gendered as well as breeding gender inequality (Pascoe 2007) and this essay aims to depict the means in which it is gendered along with its influences towards men and women in Western’s
The concept of hegemonic masculinity is criticized for being framed within hetero-normative conception of gender that divides male-female difference and ignores difference and exclusion within the gender categories. Through this theory, many heterosexual and homosexual individuals find their sexual identities through their moral beliefs about their sexual behaviors and dictate whether they are virgin or non-virgin. With the flexibility about virginity loss and the different meanings of what it is being a virgin revolves around complexity, therefore we cannot give a set description of the sexual identity of virginity because of our multiple acts of coitus and sexualities such as gay, lesbian, or bisexual sexual behaviors. The reason why I propose this is because with the given different types of coitus, and dependent on the social group and social factors that play within the role of identity is far more difficult to come to an exact meaning of considering who and what makes you a virgin or non-virgin.
While lesbian culture is meant to be a challenge to these heterosexual norms, and yet its definition of butch-fem roles performs its own marginalization that ultimately reinforces traditional male-female roles. Interestingly, it also uses this power structure to establish the racial exclusions of non-white women that can be traced through the history of European colonization. In relation to how sexual minorities like lesbians are marginalized by the power elite in society, Judith Butler explains the politicization of sexuality through the performance of sexual identity by constantly rearticulating and re-establishing heterosexuality as the norm. Ironically, the term “heterosexual” cannot claim authority as ... ... middle of paper ... ...lizing oppositions. Yet, why are these clear defined boundaries of sexuality placed with such importance?
Furthermore, supporting Kjersti Jacobsen’s statement, ‘Sex does not cause gender, and gender cannot be understood to reflect sex’. So, there are no clearly defined borders between gender and sex. Thus, according to the theories of Judith Butler, ‘If the post human being is a construct, it can be reconstructed as man, woman, transvestite, or fully transsexual being, and as homo-, hetero-, or bisexual.’
They were seen as a violation of marriage bonds, the law and with these a violation of what was naturally determined. (Foucault, 1990, p. 38) The modern concept of homosexuality comes from a desire to see sexuality as a fundamental aspect of who we are. But is this desire correct? And more importantly: Is sexuality a part of identity within the terms of Foucault’s theory? To be able to answer this question it is first noted to make clear what is meant with the terms of “sexuality” and “identity”.