The Battle for Sexuality Rights - Term Paper Example

Instruction: Task: Sexuality and the Sexuality has been a controversial since time immemorial. Some individuals conform to the normal sexuality where copulation is between a man and a woman, while others do not. The emergence of modern cities has generated varied tastes and preferences in terms of sexual satisfaction. This has been accentuated by the anonymity of the contemporary city where people practice nonconventional and illicit gender practices, for example, gay relationships, lesbianism and other despicable forms of homosexuality. However, it is imperative to note that the cities have cultures that adhere to normative views on sexuality and gender (Bell and Valentine 150). This suggests that individuals are limited by the strictures – in most cultures, homosexuality is deemed as illegal and is punishable by the law. Therefore, this essay will attempt to use some theories such as the queer theory and the urban theory in order to explain the relation between sexuality and the city. On that note, it is significant to observe that the battle for sexuality rights have been waged since the early 70s. For example, lesbians and gays made a fundamental achievement in the formation of Gay Liberation and Women’s Liberation movements. This led to complete transformation of the sexual landscape in the whole country. Similarly, during that period, gay men and women openly came out to affirm their same-sex eroticism (D’Emilio 123). Alternatively, the appeal concerning sodomy laws also triumphed in more than half the states of America. Furthermore, it led to a limited lifting of stigmatization of gay men and lesbians from federal jobs and civil rights protection. Additionally, with the abolition of homosexuality as a mental illness from the psychiatric standards, the Democratic Party included gay rights in their manifesto platforms. Furthermore, there was the expansion of the gay male subculture, especially in big cities, where they were notable. Lesbian feminists strived to establish alternative cultures and institutions that tried to empower persons of the same sex. In addition, they wanted to create a vision of liberatory nature in a conventional society and set a vision for the coming times. However, with the coming of the 80s, the future seemed to turn bleak for the most hyperactive lesbians and gay men (Knoop 140). In other words, the era almost watered down their efforts that begun during the 60s when they had strategies and goals. It is also critical to observe that the same-sex movement was born out of homosexual desires felt in isolation and without the knowledge of the sufferers. This was mostly in the cities around the 60s when the same-sex movement defined history and become a mythology. Furthermore, during the 60s it was clear to describe what the lesbians and the gay felt because there were neither resources nor acceptance to help them understand their situation. Another arising concept entails issues pertaining to urban theory. This is whereby the generation of wealth in the city is facilitated by the available economic priorities. Urban theory encompasses a collection of social theories that may include neo-classical, modern and classical ones. Therefore, in the context of the social theory, there are driving social forces that drive the economic and political empowerment of the city residents. This is where the issues of sexuality fall because people yearn for sexual freedom and autonomy (Bell and Valentine 153). Alternatively, urban theorists also agree that the freedoms that influence urban planning and development should include everyone irrespective of their uniqueness. It is because of these emerging disparities that the queer theory was born in order to counter the pressures of the city stigmatization. Queer theory began in the early 90s as a critical theory of post-structuralism format, and it entails reading of queer texts. This theory takes credit from the early works of Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, Judith Butler and Lauren Berlant. On the same line, it is founded on the challenges that afflict females and the gender affirmation. In addition, the theory concurs that close examination of gay/lesbian relationships is a socially constructed mechanism, which affects urban economics. Furthermore, sexual identities and acts are hinged on the studies that they are both falling under deviant and normative categories. In addition, the queer theory traces the line of relations between gender and sex that differ across several cultures. It is also essential to note the predominant strains of queer theory in respect to the sexual orientations in the context of radical deconstructionism. This means there is the interrogation of sexual tastes and preferences of personalities in relation to their social and political identity. Similarly, there is radical subversion whereby there is the disruption of normal tendencies pertaining to the sexual order. In other words, the queer theory has been at the forefront of challenging the conventional beliefs of heterosexuality (D’Emilio 129). In addition, the social forces guiding the queer theory maintain that an individual’s sexual preference should be in tandem with one’s personality and nature. This manifestation has been observed with the emergence of the modern cities where various factors influence tastes and preferences. For example, there is the environment of one’s upbringing, the political affiliations, modernization and cultural beliefs. Furthermore, the queer theory succeeded in the metropolitan cities because of their close association with gay politics of OutRage! and ACT UP. These groups strived to act for both non-assimilationist and separatist politics. This also augments the point of examining perceived constraints in the conventional traditional politics of self-identity. In other words, there has been a tremendous stabilization of identity labels that concern gays and lesbians by those who accept the queer theory. There have also been reviews of the accessible historical and theoretical approaches that concern relationships, especially modern class and gender ones. This is because studies have discovered a close relationship between capitalism and sexuality, especially in modern cities. There is the relation between heterosexist femininities and masculinities in the maintenance of modern structures of power (Knoop 140). Therefore, it is important to define the relationship between patriarchy and capitalism. For example, there has been a continued misuse of the word patriarchy by modern feminists – they considered it as denoting women subordination. This form of discrimination towards women has been cited as the demerits of capitalism in relation to the sprouting sexuality and gender issues. Alternatively, the emergence of the sex/gender system in the city has been strengthened because of the feeling by the women that they are inferior. Moreover, patriarchy has been pointed out as the driving factor of women’s rebellion in the context of gender issues and sexual orientation. In other words, the gender implications of patriarchy and capitalism have generated much controversy on their fundamental guiding principles. The constant identification of insubordination by radical feminists, eco-feminists and socialist feminist has led to less investigation of the gender debate (Bell and Valentine 157). For example, the social relations depicted in most capitalistic cities have led to the formulation of same-sex seclusion in order to promote gender harmonization. This manifestation was apparent, as in most cities lesbians and gays congregated in enclaves in order to satisfy their desires. These same-sex groups developed their own social worlds where they listened to their own entertainments conducted by lesbian performers. Another crucial factor that ties sexuality and the city entails matters of heterosexism and patriarchal capitalism. This relationship is connected to the sexual behavior in relation to biological reproduction. In other words, this implies that the manipulation of sexual conduct is directly linked to the regulation of fertility and labor power reproduction. Alternatively, heterosexism as opposed to homosexualism is attached to the reproduction of labor power in the capitalism organization. Furthermore, in the context of power relations in the city, the social meaning of gender sexuality is not clear. This is because among other factors there is the issue of regulated sexual behavior (Knoop 143). In the same context, the accommodation of homosexual behavior in most patriarchal societies has led to the increase of same-sex relations in the city. The clear explanation for this goes to the history of the geographical setting and capitalism. Additionally, the defining social construction of homosexual relationships developed because of separatist issues that excluded women from men at the workplaces. In the same aspect, the labor of women was not accounted for because of the limiting patriarchal influences of urban space and gender division. In conclusion, there is a need for tolerance and cooperation from society to understand the driving forces behind same-sex relationships. This can be through offering them platforms and opportunities to vent their opinions concerning their homosexuality stand and the way forward. It is also essential to note that both sexualities and cities manipulate the aspects of social life (Chauncey 134). This is because they reflect the organization of social life in the context of comprehension and representations. Furthermore, the spatial divisions that have gender-based connotations have labor characteristics in the cities, and hence define both homosexuality and heterosexuality. Works Cited Bell, David and Gill, Valentine. Mapping Geographical Sexualities. New York, NY: Routledge, 1995. Print. Chauncey, George. Gay New York: gender, urban culture, and the makings of the gay male world, 1890-1940. New York, NY: Springer. 1994. Print. D’Emilio, John. Capitalism and Gay Identity. Mason, OH: Cenegage Learning, 1983. Print. Knoop, Lawrence. Sexuality and the Spatial Dynamics of Capitalism. New York, NY: Springer, 1995. Print. Read More