å Monday, March 27th, 2017

I think hetero sexism is a more precise way to analyze a relationship of gender difference because when you think or talk about hetero sexism you are not talking about one gender specifically. Even if it does mean talking about a specific gender, hetero sexism allows a women to have a decision or be on some what of a equal standing to male because their decision will have some consideration in it (they have a say- freedom of speech, and technically males need them to fulfill that gender identity – the genders purpose in life). However hetero sexism has some oppression and it denies everything else besides the ones I mentioned above (including some stuff that I didn’t mention) and many more. For example when men do what a women does (role) in society it is kind of rare and looked down upon because that is what the women should be doing (the sexual stereotypes where women role is at home doing chores and reproducing while the men role is working at factories and supporting family kind of show up on most reading we read as well as this one), but this solely depends on the person and how they were raised. Also hetero sexism allows male to be in control and sometimes women need permission for certain things that they don’t really need permission for (like getting an abortion, contraception,etc…). Hetero sexism has also become the norm for how society functions and people who are in a homosexual relationship can be punished for it due to not following the norm that society (government) has setup which disallows adolescents from exploring what their sexual identity might be.

In Peterson and Parisi’s piece they mention how women aren’t treated as a human agents in relation to economic, social and cultural practices besides the reproductive role they play. This goes back from the early time period in society when someone (I think probably politicians, physicians, and some of those people with knowledge/power to change the society view) put in place the stereotype that women should follow. Things such as not being able to own property, being a housewife, etc… has been around for a long time and it still kind of is today. The government however doesn’t want to really investigate the rights and by regulating women’s body they can determine what will happen to them (in most cases things like what will happen to the baby in the women’s stomach, should it get aborted – is abortion allowed, etc…). This brings up argument that exist today where the government is arguing whether or not the ACA (affordable care act) should be fund programs that will help women through these difficult process (stuff like that). They also want to keep the male dominance over female long lasting since most of the people in the government are mostly old men who are in their 50’s (some maybe younger) and by doing this they can deny a women’s right while also keeping the gender hierarchy in place.

In “Are women human? It’s not an academic question,” V. Spike Peterson and Laura Parisi assert that instead of analyzing human rights as based on androcentrism, we should focus on it in connection to heterosexism. They bring modernist references that assume men as the norm and universal being. From that view, women existed as a subcategory, and were naturally excluded. However, it is not only stemmed from the modern state system. Rather, the institutionalization of gendered relations and biased definition of human rights existed from when the western civilization started. The idea was dominant from Greek political theorizing, and became as a clear normalization since then. Therefore the foundational thoughts were institutionalized for a very long time and this is how feminists analyze the system. Then social inequality arouses naturally based on this idea. There were regulations on sexual activities and prevalence of masculinist laws. The asymmetry in male-centered world had been affecting every part of people’s life. Also, in androcentric feminists’ view, women’s subordination is accepted without a doubt and they deny all other gender identifications. This is problematic thought that justifies the discrimination between gender. According to their theory, gender binary is socially constructed and emphasized by influential scholars such as Freud and Marx. Feminist interrogations of social orders are related to their psychoanalytic and social structural explanations. Distinction of gender and institutionalization became the only norm of sexual identity and also constructed western and liberal definition of the term ‘family’. There is a difference between acknowledging the problem in androcentric way and heterosexist way. Peterson and Parisi argue that we should analyze group reproduction and state making in heterosexist way. In heterosexual contract, all notions such as binary gender identities, social contracts, language codification are tied together. In their sense of normalization and reproduction of gender identities, women acquire reproductive roles.

In the article “ Are women human?” It is not academic question by V. spike Peterson and Laura Parisi is talk about the conflict between the feminism and human’s right. The heterosexual is a normal ways of biology and psychology’s identity. Many people believe “the human right’s in actuality men’s right, which means the inequality gender identity in the society. The ideology of make dominance and masculine is controlling the labor market, political and social life. The oppression of women’s right and sexuality identity is under the law and became unmoral of thinking. They believe the heterosexism is a more precise way of sexuality is difference in psychological, political and social structure.

In the Maxim and his followers’ belief, the labor power and social inequality is controlling of people who has more muscle and power and have economic status, which the masculine ideas more support the political structure. And women are limited of the sphere of home, they are being denied of property rights. The public sphere is only belongs with power and masculinity under the civil war. The political power is change people’s idea of the equalities of sexuality and role of gender.

There is also the psychological belief of Freud talk about the symbolize difference between male and female. The culture maturation and social structure make people believe heterosexual is a traditional way of sexuality. The women are part of reproductive tools and infant’s maturation. In the inequalities social structure, the marginalization of relationship between the human’s right and sexuality, the unequal pay wages and sexual harassment in different gender and race.

“Battle of the cradle” regulation is the role of social religious norms and economy power, people choose the group cultures they preferred and they agree with. There is many family ties, group culture connected to the heterosexuality. People rather believe the heterosexism is precise way of sexuality in political, social and culture.

Peterson and Parisi in their article “Are Women Human? It’s Not an Academic Question”, explain that some feminist researches stipulate that the universal references of what is considered a human are of androcentric character, considering men as standard. They define Heterosexism as the institutionalization of heterosexuality as only natural way in which people express their sexual and social conducts. Heterosexism was institutionalized by the states, which protect but at the same time violate individual rights within public and private sphere.

Historically, women have been dominated and deprived of their freedom and autonomy and a gender hierarchy have been imposed. Heterosexism promotes binary gender identities and the subordination of women to men’s interests. It also promotes heterosexual relation and the inclusion of women in-group projects, but at the same time, it is oppressive, it privileges men’s interest upon of women’s interests and rejects any other sexual orientation or gender identification. They also explain that when children born they must be bred in an appropriate way, which includes a cultural transmission and socialization of group members. In those process is created a gender/race division remarking the inequality among women and men.

With the transition to western civilization was marked a centralization of political authority, which created new laws and a hierarchical division of labor by gender, age and class. As we take modern state making as our pattern to start, that sketch suggested that women were not included into the definition of individual according to discourse of human rights, also women were not considered as person in their own rights to make decision, but according to heterosexist principles of group reproduction, women are tied to the reproductive role. Any action that moves away from what the heterosexism stands for is considered not normal, even for women to be taken into account should seem as possible to the men who are established status.

Heterosexism is believed to be a precise way of analyzing the relationships of gender differences because in heterosexism a gender hierarchy is prevalent. For many years, the idea of heterosexuality has been deemed “normal” and as the true and “right” sexuality for one to follow. However, this sexuality tends to favor the male gender over the female gender. Heterosexism aims to create a gap between males and females, emphasizing not only their physical differences but, their worth. It also aims to deny the existence of other genders and sexual preferences that possess ideologies that are different from the ideas that it upholds. The blatant inequality within heterosexism makes it easy for people to analyze the difference in gender.

Another topic prevalent in heterosexism is human rights. This is a sexuality that favors males over females and heterosexual relationships over other forms of unions. It is structured so that the male upholds their prominent stature at the expense of others which are typically women. The human rights of women are minimized and the oppression they face daily is overlooked because their struggles benefit men. Furthermore, the masculinization of the state further deepens the oppression of women by aiming to control them for the betterment of both men and the state; with the hope of procuring heterosexuality for present and future generations. Human rights are again denied to those who do not conform to the ideology of heterosexism. Those who “rebel” do not receive the same human rights and protection that those who have conformed to heterosexuality obtain. Therefore, those who do not conform are not only forced to fend for themselves but they are not viewed as people who deserve basic human rights. This alternative form of oppression, is another way that heterosexism makes it easy for people to analyze the relationships of gender difference and human rights.

Both Spike Peterson and Laura Parisi believed that heterosexism was precise way to explore the relationships between differences in gender and human rights. In heterosexuality, the gender that you are determines the human rights that you will be given. Also, an individual’s decision on whether they want to follow heterosexuality also influences the rights they will receive. The obvious differences and oppression also make it easier for others to view how and why these issues arise. I believe that the way a person chooses to live their life or the gender a person was born with should not dictate their worth and be the deciding factor in the human rights they will obtain. Once people and the state begin to embrace the differences amongst its population it will move in the direction of equality and acceptance.

V. Spike Peterson and Laura Parisi in their text, Are women human? It’s not an academic question,  argue that we should interrogate the connection of “human rights” in connection to heterosexism rather than focusing on, as other feminists have, the androcentrism of human rights discourse. At the very beginning of their text they essentially answer the question posed in the title. They say only men encompass the term “human” as what is referenced as human are men’s bodies, experiences and stereotypical attributes. As Peterson and Parisi exemplify, men’s traits of reason, agency, and independence are the stereotypical attributes attributed to men. Women’s stereotypical attributes of affect, non-agency, and dependence are not considered when referring to the “human” norm thus making women seem inhuman. Peterson and Parisi’s main point as to how heterosexisum is a precise way of analyzing the relationship of gender differences and human rights seems to be that heterosexuality is the only normal perceived form of sexual identity. Not only that but there is a perceived engraved notion that men must act masculine and women must act feminine. Peterson and Parisi are without a doubt right in their point in my opinion. This ingrained notion that being heterosexual is the only way to be does not let people fully express themselves. Some years ago if a person was homosexual they were far less than human in nearly all of the public’s eye. It was not uncommon for homosexuals to be killed and jailed without any reason. The only true reason this happened was because they were homosexual and nothing more. Even more so in these times, if you were homosexual you were roped in to the same category as pedofiles with basically no concrete basis supporting this. This level of hatred of homosexuals is thankfully not still present but it has certainly left lasting effects. Homosexuality is still seen as unnatural by many and is met with disgust. Times are getting better but it shall be a long time until same sex relations are seen as “normal”.

Due Monday, April 3rd, by midnight. Word count: 300 words. Please make sure everything is in your own words. Absolutely no quotes should be used. If you paraphrase from the text (from Collins’s work or anywhere else), you must be sure to include the proper citation (either MLA or APA).

In her essay, “Learning from the Outsider Within: The Sociological Significance of Black Feminist Thought,” Patricia Hill Collins argues that, “Black women’s experiences highlight the tension experienced by any group of less powerful outsiders encountering the paradigmatic thought of a more powerful insider community” (S29). According to Collins, how can “outsiders” contribute to the field of sociology and our understanding of society and culture?