CONSTRUCTION OF SEXUALITY

Posted: September 9th, 2013

CONSTRUCTION OF SEXUALITY

Name:

Course:

Date:

Construction of Sexuality

The author, Jennifer Harding is of the view that sex is a highly sensitive subject in our current societies. She adds that the issue is embedded in various contestations in relation to its definition, explanations and regulation in the society. She states that the essential view of the topic on sexuality is defined by two approaches, which are either constructionist or essentialist approaches. In addition, it is also evident of other divides in the definition of the term sexuality, which the Western cultures have used for a long period: biological, spiritual and social perspectives[1]. She defines the essentialism focuses on sexuality as an entirely natural phenomenon, which is beyond the cultural and societal facets. In essence, sexuality is defined by our natural identities. According to Harding, essentialists focus on the view that the sexual identities are held by the societal as well as the moral, medical and ethical mechanisms.

Constructionists, on the other hand, define sexuality as lacking any inherent importance but are formed and based on the cultural meanings that are part of societal factors such as power.

Essentially, she adds that constructionist views of sexuality are based on the presence of power within the society. Hence, sexuality as a facet of power could be used in society as a means of empowering and degeneration of some sexual forms[2]. This is evidenced by some societal perspectives such as marriage and gender roles assumed by different sexes. This is evident in the modern society by the presence of gender-defined roles such as parenting for females, and provision of security and food for males. We all carry out tasks, which give definition to our individual sexuality or what is termed by the society as fit for a specific sexual form.

           David M. Halperin states that there is no history for sexuality. This according to the author is because of the term sexuality is embedded in the functions of the body hence it is beyond cultural and societal perspectives. According to Halperin, sexuality is given definition by cultural production whereby the various sexual forms are a representation of the various societal ideological discourses. He adds that the definition of sexuality is independent, but within the larger psychological and physical nature of human beings. Essentially sexuality gives people sexual identity. He gives evidence by stating that people are individualized by their sexuality and consequently sexual identities. He defines that sex as an action is founded on the belief of a superior being performing the act on an inferior being. This he states by giving inference to initiation and reception of the sexual act by two people-superior (man) and inferior (female). He adds that the societal differences by different sexes are emphasized by the society[3].

He also defines of the individual functioning of sexuality. Hence, his definition of sexuality on an individualized perspective is based on generation of individual identities because of sexuality. He uses the Mediterranean societies to express his views and support his ideas. This is because the societies identified are among the oldest in the world. In addition, they were ancient societies, which had an elaborate and civilized societal structure. As an individual, I have witnessed women being subjected to sexual harassment[4]. This is evidence that a part of society still has the consideration of women as inferior to their male counterparts. This in essence shows the set out societal differences of male and female which are because of the societal computations about different sexes.

Bibliography

David Halperin “Is there a History of Sexuality?” In The Lesbian and Gay Studies Reader. Ed. Henry Abelove, Michele Aina Barale and David M. Halperin, Pp. 416-431. New York London: Routledge, 1990).

Jennifer Harding “Investigating Sex: Essentialism and Constructionism” in Constructing Sexualities: Readings in Sexuality, Gender, and Culture. Ed. Suzanne LaFont, Pp. 6-17. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2002.