This article is about claiming and making visible that third space that has been silenced and historically received hatred and even stated to not exist. I think the main issue that was touched upon in the article was our binary way of thinking and language. Most human beings tend to think in a dual state of mind; man or woman, gay or lesbian, heterosexual and homosexual. Humans have to choose between being one or the other, not both, not neither, but just strictly one side. And this is when those who may not “fit” into a category get marginalized and criticized.
So basically what the gay community are suggesting is not ‘equal rights’ but ‘extra rights’, which leads me smoothly onto my next point. If the government hit their head and in the state of concussion decide to make same sex marriage legal, it would only be fair to make acceptances for other forms of banned marriages, marriages of which are considered incest, bigamy, and under aged. There’s reason we have restrictions placed upon marriage, those mainly being to keep up traditions and to protect the well being of our society. For instance, I’m pretty sure allowing 13 year old love birds to get married wouldn’t contribute to lowering the divorce rate, or condoning brothers and sisters to be wed and fill our country with their disabled offspring is such a good idea. I have come across no compelling reasons that would suggest homosexual marriages are to the well-being of
Lauren Adams Melissa Helton English 102 2 February 2012 Summary of A. Sullivan’s “For Gay Marriage” & W. Bennett’s “Against Gay Marriage”. Andrew Sullivan and William J. Bennett have very different opinions about legalizing gay marriage. Sullivan suggests it should be legal, but Bennett argues that it would ruin everything marriage stands for in America. In his book Virtually Normal: An Argument about Homosexuality (1995), former New Republic editor Andrew Sullivan argues that not having gay marriage is a violation of equality. He points out that he is not referring to religious traditions but suggests, in a public institution, marriage should be available to any two citizens.
Despite the increase in acceptance of homosexuality many Americans still view homosexuality as morally wrong. The degree of sexual orientation is key to one’s self-definition. The lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender individuals are diverse and varied among cultural background, ethnic or race identity, age, income, and place of residence. Research on transgender populations has never been adequate being that most studies misrepresent the transgender populations by including gender-nonconformist individuals such as gay or lesbians peoples who’s gender identity is clearly distinct from their sexual orientation. Other studies have ignored a range of individuals who identify as
I think that the way others perceive the gay lifestyle, as in the cultural perspective, would maybe make me self conscience and would maybe even make me weary of coming out or allowing others to acknowledge that I was gay at all. I think that I may even go through a denial stage because I would not want others to look at me in a negative way or to be afraid of me because I were gay. I also think that the biological perspective may even influence my view of my sexual orientation if I were gay because there would be a possible chance of my selection being genetic or hereditary. I think that biologically my point of view on the gay sexual orientation would actually be more positive than negative because then I would feel a bit more at ease because being gay was not just a choice but the way that I was born. I think that for me being born gay or the thought of being born gay would actually give me a little more comfort in knowing that it is the way that I was created, not that I made what some people would consider a bad choice or a good
LGBT rights and the battle for them is one small part of an overall push to secure basic rights for everyone. Dividing our culture into these subgroups that feel superior to each other creates a rift, which in turn creates conflict. We’ve already drawn a neat little border by alienating heterosexuality and asexuality from the LGBT community. My problem isn’t with sexuality; my problem is with superiority. No one is entitled to anything more than basic rights.
When a minority demands equality with respect to an important right the right should be granted—within reason—especially as the arguments against homosexual marriage is weak . The Australian Liberal and Labour parties have both got strong policies against marriage rights for homosexuals which is undemocratic. The marriage between homosexuals is taking no rights away from heterosexual couples, so why shouldnt they be allowed to get
Stereotypes of disability concentrate on sex because sexual agency is often considered an essential characteristic of adulthood—something those with disabilities are perceived as unable to achieve. What we must realize is that this is not a matter of disability but a matter of impossibility, for the way in which disability studies have explored sexuality reveals that society’s perception of the disabled prevents them from expressing themselves freely. The censorship that has cumulated over decades has formulated our notion than when disabled people are seen as sexual, it is in a deviant manner such as masturbation because as a society we refuse to accept and normalize the fact that disabled people do have sexuality, regardless of their physical or mental
Is Same-Sex Marriage Right? The topic I have chosen to do my discursive essay is if Same-Sex marriage is right or wrong. I will be going over the two different opinions on it if people believe it should be legalised or if it should be banned. I will also be giving my opinion at the end, along with the conclusion. Many people feel that marriage is an institution between one man and one woman.
Back in the nineteenth century having sex out of wedlock was taken very seriously whereas today it is not. Yes some still follow the traditional ways and frown upon premarital sex, it but for the most part the only thing that is really pressed into the minds of our youth is the use of protection. We cannot base our current laws on what people believed in the past because Things have drastically changed. Our circumstances are not what they were back in the nineteenth century. The right’s each of us has through the United States Constitution protects each woman and their right to choose, our advancement in technology has lowered the mortality rate of women who undergo abortion, and our values have changed.