Additional Topics for Sexuality

Go down

Additional Topics for Sexuality

Post  meyen on Sat Feb 07, 2009 10:19 pm

16. Is homosexuality the result of "nature" or "nurture"? Discuss your choice and provide examples or studies made on this issue.
17. What for you is "sexual harrassment"? Does it only pertain to physical actions or does it include verbal insinuations of one's sexuality as well?
18. As a college student, have you established a sexual boundary? What are these boundaries? How do you know when someone is being friendly or "too friendly"? How do you communicate your boundaries to others?
19. In an article (http://www.stdservices.on.net/std/social_aspects/disability.htm), one physically disabled woman wrote regarding the issues she faced when she became pregnant: "How could you do it?" was a question which had many nuances and was put to me by many people during and after my pregnancy. The GP wondered how I could have had intercourse in my "predicament" . . . you see, not only was it immoral to be an unmarried mother, it was doubly immoral to be an unmarried mother AND a severely disabled person . . .". In your opinion, do you agree with the views of the health care providers on the pregnancy of this disabled woman? If so, why? If not, give your explanation as well.
20. What is your opinion on the escalating openness of the 21st century in discussing sexuality through media and movies where sex has become commonplace and frontal nudity is hardly even shocking anymore?

meyen

Posts : 4
Join date : 2009-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

20. What is your opinion on the escalating openness of the 21st century in discussing sexuality through media and movies where sex has become commonplace and frontal nudity is hardly even shocking anymore?

Post  Conflagration9 on Sun Feb 08, 2009 12:24 am

At this present time, it is only proper to have an openness in discussing sexuality through media. Because as we can see, during the early times, ignorance regarding sexuality is common to people at those times. But showing nudity to movies should be given strict observation by movie creators, meaning, showing nudities on shows should be more educational and entertaining. It should be accompanied with humor when being showed even if concept or theme of the show or movie is some thing serious, on this way people would not take sexual clip seriously. Because as I observed, on my own experience, sexual clips when showed on movies and it seems to be boring because of too much "foreplay", it became very confusing to me. But if the clip would be more entertaining, it do not give an ambience that makes someone arouse.

Conflagration9 a.k.a Mr. Buquid

Conflagration9

Posts : 6
Join date : 2008-12-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

HOMOSEXUALITY: Nurture or Nature?

Post  wyzzah on Sun Feb 08, 2009 6:45 am

meyen wrote:16. Is homosexuality the result of "nature" or "nurture"? Discuss your choice and provide examples or studies made on this issue.

Is it nurture or nature that makes one person homosexual? This has been a topic for debate for quite a long time now. What causes people to be homsexual?

The American Psychological Association has noted, “Research suggests that the homosexual orientation is in place very early in the life cycle, possibly even before birth. It is found in about ten percent of the population, a figure which is surprisingly constant across cultures, irrespective of the different moral values and standards of a particular culture.”

Some of the most cited studies have been conducted on twins – both those that were raised in the same household, and those who were separated at birth and raised in different families. Among both populations, researchers have found ample evidence to suggest a biological connection to homosexuality, particularly among identical twins separated at birth. In these cases, when one identical twin identified as gay, the other identical twin also identified as gay more than 50 percent of the time – despite being raised in a completely separate environment.

Hamer claimed to have found evidence for an unidentified gene on the X-chromosome that was passed from mother to son and had an influence on the child becoming gay. With research about gay brothers, Hamer and his colleagues assert that the Mothers' genetic skew correlates to their gay sons. Hamer is trying to discover a gene through the X-chromosome and find out how it controls the sexual orientation trait. On the other hand, this has been challenged by other scientists who believe that Hamer's evidence and research is too weak and broad. It appears as though many other factors may be influencing each of the mothers' sons, and that a more varied and repetitive research is needed.

On the other hand, Schmidt argues that the way a parent fosters his or her child influences a child's eventual sexual preference. He gives many examples of external factors, such as a son who doesn't receive love from his father, thus always searches to fulfill this emptiness by engaging in relationships with other men. If a child, more specifically a boy, is teased all throughout his childhood by his peers and considered a "sissy," then he will relate more to the girls in his age group and become like one of them, ultimately even liking males. Schmidt also talks about choices. Feminism, he claims, is a big influence on a female becoming attracted to someone of the same sex, as well as people considered to be counter-culture like. Basically, Schmidt believes that homosexuality is a choice, and furthermore a morally wrong one that is only perpetuated by people's decisions to act upon it. He ends his argument by suggesting Christian therapy to help stop homosexuality.


In my opinion, however, homosexuality is a product of both nurture and nature. I think that there is both a biological and environmental influence that predisposes/precipitates a person to becoming a homosexual. The social learning theory (with Albert Bandura as its leading proponent) tells us that people learn from one another. A girl living in a house full of males would most probably ehxibit male-like characteristics, and vice-versa. I think our parents and the way they bring us up influences the way we live, just like how cultures and traditions are adapted by newer generations. On the other hand, studies made by different researches cannot be dismissed (just like the one cited above). Therefore, I think the answer to the question is BOTH. Very Happy

Sources:
http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/1910
http://gayrights.change.org/blog/view/nature_vs_nurture_debates_over_sexuality
http://teachnet.edb.utexas.edu/~lynda_abbott/Social.html


ANNA LUISA O. ARGAO, BSN III-E

wyzzah

Posts : 3
Join date : 2009-02-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Sexual Harassment

Post  FrancescaRaymundo on Sat Feb 14, 2009 1:17 am

17. What for you is "sexual harassment"? Does it only pertain to physical actions or does it include verbal insinuations of one's sexuality as well?

Personally, I think sexual harassment can either be physically or verbally done. I see it as an act in which one violates the sexuality of the other person whether in a form of words or physically, by displaying unwanted or unwelcome actions, intentions or advances that can really intimidate and offend the "other" person greatly. It can also be considered as a form of threat, as to take advantage of the other person which can lead to an unhealthy environment and work performance. silent

FrancescaRaymundo

Posts : 1
Join date : 2009-02-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

16. Is homosexuality the result of "nature" or "nurture"? Discuss your choice and provide examples or studies made on this issue.

Post  kyoyama on Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:25 am

Nature v Nurture: Homosexuality due to genes and environment

The world's largest twin study indicates that homosexuality is due to both nature (genes) and nurture (the environment); however environmental factors that are specific to the individual (e.g., pre-natal exposure to hormones) are more important than shared environmental factors (e.g., parenting).

Writing in the scientific journal Archives of Sexual Behavior, researchers from Queen Mary's School of Biological and Chemical Sciences, and Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm report that genetics and environmental factors (which are specific to an individual, and may include biological processes such as different hormone exposure in the womb), are important determinants of homosexual behaviour.

Rahman explains: "Overall, genetics accounted for around 35 per cent of the differences between men in homosexual behaviour and other individual-specific environmental factors (that is, not societal attitudes, family or parenting which are shared by twins) accounted for around 64 per cent. In other words, men become gay or straight because of different developmental pathways, not just one pathway."

For women, genetics explained roughly 18 per cent of the variation in same-sex behaviour, non-shared environment roughly 64 per cent and shared factors, or the family environment, explained 16 per cent.

The study shows that genetic influences are important but modest, and that non-shared environmental factors, which may include factors operating during foetal development, dominate. Importantly, heredity had roughly the same influence as shared environmental factors in women, whereas the latter had no impact on sexual behaviour in men.

Dr Rahman adds: "The study is not without its limitations - we used a behavioural measure of sexual orientation which might be ok to use for men (men's psychological orientation, sexual behaviour, and sexual responses are highly related) but less so for women (who show a clearer separation between these elements of sexuality). Despite this, our study provides the most unbiased estimates presented so far of genetic and non-genetic contributions to sexual orientation."


What is Homosexuality? According to a psychiatrist Judd Marmor, homosexuality means being motivated in adult life by a preferential erotic attraction to the same sex, and who usually (but not necessarily) engage in overt relations with them. In view of this study, I agree that homosexuality is both the result of nature, the genes, and nurture, the environment. However, in my opinion, the environment on where a person grew up plays a more important role in developing a homosexual behavior. As a boy lives in an environment where his friends are mostly girls, and or a girl with her friends are mostly boys, they might be able to adopt each others behavior. Like for example, when a boy learns to play what the girls most likely wants to play with, barbie dolls and other girl stuff, and he also learns how the girls views and expresses their feelings towards the guys, that boy might also develop the same feeling like the girls have and it's directed towards his same sex. Moreover, not only with the environment of the opposite sex affects people to become gays and lesbians. An example is if a person studies in an all girls school or a boy studies in an all boys school, some of them also might be able to develop feelings towards people around them which are of the same sex. People whom they grow up with, they play with and learned to live with really affects homesexuality...=)


SOURCE:
http://alevelpsychology.co.uk/news/latest/nature-v-nurture-homosexuality-due-to-genes-and-environment.html
http://www.wiu.edu/ucoso/what_is.htm

MAGPANTAY, CREST LYN T. BSN III-E

kyoyama

Posts : 1
Join date : 2009-02-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

What for you is "sexual harassment"? Does it only pertain to physical actions or does it include verbal insinuations of one's sexuality as well?

Post  Zyra Grace Sarmiento on Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:44 am

Sexual harassment, means an unwelcome attention of a sexual nature. It includes behaviors from mild annoyances to serious abuses, which can even involve forced sexual activity. But it does not only pertain to physical actions but it may be through words. It may be an unacceptable sexual advance, comment, expressed or implied sexual demand, touch, joke or gesture. Once a person's sexuality is being exploited, be it verbal or actual, it is sexual harrasment. It can be a physical conduct ranging from the invasion of personal space and/or inappropriate touching to serious assault.
It can happen anywhere but is most common in the workplace, and schools. It involves unwanted and unwelcome, words, deeds, actions, gestures, symbols, or behaviors of a sexual nature that make the target feel uncomfortable.

Zyra Grace Sarmiento

Posts : 1
Join date : 2009-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

17. What for you is "sexual harassment"? Does it only pertain to physical actions or does it include verbal insinuations of one's sexuality as well?

Post  belinda bobiles on Sat Feb 14, 2009 6:08 am

Sexual harassment is defined as "Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute sexual harassment when this conduct explicitly or implicitly affects an individual's employment, unreasonably interferes with an individual's work performance, or creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment. It is also an unwanted sexual attention or unwanted emphasis on your sex or sexual orientation. It includes any unwelcome pressure for sexual favors, any comments, gestures or other conduct which places an offensive focus on the sex or sexual orientation of another person, and any gender-based conduct that is directed at you and that creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working or learning environment for you. Sexual harassment is often confused with sexual assault. Sexual harassment is any unwanted comment, gesture or contact of a sexual nature.
for me, sexual harassment is not only a physical action but rather it is also a verbal insunuations.




BOBILES, Belinda L.
BSN 3-E
source:

http://www.eeoc.gov/types/sexual_harassment.html

belinda bobiles

Posts : 3
Join date : 2009-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

16. Is homosexuality the result of "nature" or "nurture"? Discuss your choice and provide examples or studies made on this issue.

Post  camila tan on Sat Feb 14, 2009 7:09 am

"Jean Foucault argues, "...homosexuality became because we made it so" . Foucault says that the category of homosexuality itself was only created a mere one hundred years ago, after a German neologism coined some twenty years later. Foucault gives root to the social derivation of homosexuality believing that homosexuality appeared as one of the forms of sexuality, only "after it was transposed from the practice of sodomy into a kind of interior androgyny, a hermaphrodism of the soul" . The theorists believe that the homosexual had been an aberration, and had then become a species, justifying itself with a new word." a clip from AllPsych Journal, on the topic of Homosexuality: Nature or Nurture.


In Mr. Ryan D. Johnson’s writings about the nurture aspect, it is made clear that genetics is not the only decisive element to forming ones personality: “Behaviorists believe that some sexual and gender identification differences result from roles imposed by family and friends upon children, such as the masculine and the feminine stereotypes. Problems with this are there is no evidence, social or biological, to support that homosexual children were raised differently than were the heterosexual children. Also, with reinforcement of gender identification norms, one would be led to logically deduce that all of the stereotype reinforcement would ensure a heterosexual outcome. While it is agreed that an element of gender ID is based on the decision made by parents on how to raise the child, the other element is formed with the development of language skills, naming of sexual behaviors and the naming process related to these behaviors. Gender ID is learned over time, and other contributions include the frequency of parental interactions, tolerance of aggression levels, and the vigor of play during childhood. In this, another theory is acknowledged, the Parental Manipulation Theory. This theory is that one or both parents are able to neuter and control offspring to promote their (the parent's) evolutionary fitness, ensuring the passage of genes into the next generation. By selecting only heterosexual practices as acceptable, the parents are attempting to promote their passage of genes . However the Kin-Selection Theory contrasts this. This theory states that it doesn't matter how the genes are passed to the next generation, so long as they are passed along. For example, regardless of a homosexual outcome, the very similar genetic makeup of siblings will still allow for the passage of the family genetics along to the next generation.”

When it comes to the process of our likes and dislikes, even our sexual orientation, we must take into account both nature and nurture. It is really simple mathematics. 1+1=2. Nature + Nurture = personality.
by Camila Tan BSN III-C


SOURCES:

Ryan D. Johnson: Homosexuality: Nature or Nurture, allpsych.com...
Thorp, John. “The Social Construction of Homosexuality.” Online. 8 April 2003. Available http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/med/thorp.html
Taylor, Tim. “Current Theories on the Genesis of Homosexuality.” Online. 11 April 2003. Available http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/timt/ papers/twin_studies/theories.html.

camila tan

Posts : 1
Join date : 2009-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

VIRAY, ANDREA PATRICIA BSN III-C on Homosexuality: Nature or Nurture

Post  Andrea Patricia M. Viray on Sat Feb 14, 2009 8:00 am

camila tan wrote:"Jean Foucault argues, "...homosexuality became because we made it so" . Foucault says that the category of homosexuality itself was only created a mere one hundred years ago, after a German neologism coined some twenty years later. Foucault gives root to the social derivation of homosexuality believing that homosexuality appeared as one of the forms of sexuality, only "after it was transposed from the practice of sodomy into a kind of interior androgyny, a hermaphrodism of the soul" . The theorists believe that the homosexual had been an aberration, and had then become a species, justifying itself with a new word." a clip from AllPsych Journal, on the topic of Homosexuality: Nature or Nurture.


In Mr. Ryan D. Johnson’s writings about the nurture aspect, it is made clear that genetics is not the only decisive element to forming ones personality: “Behaviorists believe that some sexual and gender identification differences result from roles imposed by family and friends upon children, such as the masculine and the feminine stereotypes. Problems with this are there is no evidence, social or biological, to support that homosexual children were raised differently than were the heterosexual children. Also, with reinforcement of gender identification norms, one would be led to logically deduce that all of the stereotype reinforcement would ensure a heterosexual outcome. While it is agreed that an element of gender ID is based on the decision made by parents on how to raise the child, the other element is formed with the development of language skills, naming of sexual behaviors and the naming process related to these behaviors. Gender ID is learned over time, and other contributions include the frequency of parental interactions, tolerance of aggression levels, and the vigor of play during childhood. In this, another theory is acknowledged, the Parental Manipulation Theory. This theory is that one or both parents are able to neuter and control offspring to promote their (the parent's) evolutionary fitness, ensuring the passage of genes into the next generation. By selecting only heterosexual practices as acceptable, the parents are attempting to promote their passage of genes . However the Kin-Selection Theory contrasts this. This theory states that it doesn't matter how the genes are passed to the next generation, so long as they are passed along. For example, regardless of a homosexual outcome, the very similar genetic makeup of siblings will still allow for the passage of the family genetics along to the next generation.”

When it comes to the process of our likes and dislikes, even our sexual orientation, we must take into account both nature and nurture. It is really simple mathematics. 1+1=2. Nature + Nurture = personality.
by Camila Tan BSN III-C


I do agree that personality is greatly affected by both nature and nurture. We have to accept that,schizophrenia is mental but is greatly influenced by environmental stressors inasmuch as being homosexual. One may not have the gene of being "gay" but he might have the gene that makes him "think that he is gay". Moreover, an environment that is inappropriate to one's biological state may alter one's perspective of who he is in order to compensate what is lacking or overwhelming. All of these lead to the existence of homosexuality. Reality speaking, homosexuality didn't exist until we made it, humans are practically human in genetically and naturally.

According to Eberstadt, the most influential factor in our adult behavior is our rearing. Whether we are happy or troubled, whether we succeed or fail to succeed in life, our sexuality, all of this, Eberstadt states, is primarily controlled by whether we had attentive and loving parents. On the other hand, Hammer states that almost every aspect of our behavior is affected by and influenced by our biology in general and our genes in particular. He feels that if you wish to understand people, you would be well advised to look not to the psychiatric couch but to the biogenetic laboratories.

As it relates to human sexuality, Herbert (1997) calls these clashing claims the nature vs. nurture models of human behavior. Essentially, the question associated with these two perspectives is: Are people born gay or are psychological and social factors more influential than biogenetic factors in determining whether a person is homosexual? A good deal of the early research attempting to answer this question focused on either looking for support for biogenetic influences as the primary determinants of sexuality or on looking for psychosocial and environmental factors as the primary determinants (Money, 1999).

sources:
Moberly, Elizabeth R. Homosexuality: A New Christian Ethic. James Clarke and Co.; Cambridge, MA, 2004.
“Biological Basis for Homosexuality.” Online. 8 April 2003. http://www.geocities.com/southbeach/boardwalk/7151/biobasis.html

Andrea Patricia M. Viray

Posts : 2
Join date : 2009-02-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Bauza, Ken Marvin M. BSN 3E

Post  dleai_17 on Sat Feb 14, 2009 8:33 am

belinda bobiles wrote:Sexual harassment is defined as "Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute sexual harassment when this conduct explicitly or implicitly affects an individual's employment, unreasonably interferes with an individual's work performance, or creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment. It is also an unwanted sexual attention or unwanted emphasis on your sex or sexual orientation. It includes any unwelcome pressure for sexual favors, any comments, gestures or other conduct which places an offensive focus on the sex or sexual orientation of another person, and any gender-based conduct that is directed at you and that creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working or learning environment for you. Sexual harassment is often confused with sexual assault. Sexual harassment is any unwanted comment, gesture or contact of a sexual nature.
for me, sexual harassment is not only a physical action but rather it is also a verbal insunuations.




BOBILES, Belinda L.
BSN 3-E
source:

http://www.eeoc.gov/types/sexual_harassment.html


I agree because harassment is defined in the dictionary as to irritate or torment persistently. Once a person violates or invades another's privacy or sexuality through any means, it is considered as sexual harassment and one can sue.

dleai_17

Posts : 3
Join date : 2009-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Bauza, Ken Marvin M. BSN 3E

Post  dleai_17 on Sat Feb 14, 2009 8:37 am

Conflagration9 wrote:At this present time, it is only proper to have an openness in discussing sexuality through media. Because as we can see, during the early times, ignorance regarding sexuality is common to people at those times. But showing nudity to movies should be given strict observation by movie creators, meaning, showing nudities on shows should be more educational and entertaining. It should be accompanied with humor when being showed even if concept or theme of the show or movie is some thing serious, on this way people would not take sexual clip seriously. Because as I observed, on my own experience, sexual clips when showed on movies and it seems to be boring because of too much "foreplay", it became very confusing to me. But if the clip would be more entertaining, it do not give an ambience that makes someone arouse.

Conflagration9 a.k.a Mr. Buquid


i think the times today have changed and that nudity, sex, violence and more accepted today. Unlike in the past, it is highly forbidden. A good example is that a lady wouldn't show his legs in the past while today, women would all have reveal their cleavage to attract and show their beauty. For the only thing that is constant in this world is change.

dleai_17

Posts : 3
Join date : 2009-02-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

LLAMOSO, Paul Andrew de Luna, BSN III - C

Post  PauLlamoso on Sat Feb 14, 2009 9:56 am

Yep, i agree that Change is the only thing that stays.Razz

and yes, i have observed, before, ladies do not wear short shorts! as much as possible they wear jeans or long skirts. but now, "Oh my Lord Jesus!" as Sir de Lara says. now, they're like in a competition of "PAIKLIAN!! hahaha!
avatar
PauLlamoso

Posts : 11
Join date : 2009-02-03
Age : 29

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Additional Topics for Sexuality

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum