Philosophy Gender and Culture - Assignment Example

Explain Hopkins’ concept of heterosexism Heterosexism is also called homophobia. This is a case where gays, lesbians taking control in the society. Gays and lesbians have many terms such as homoerotophobia, homonegativism, homosexism, anti-homosexualism, homohatrated and anti-homosexuality. Theorists have used heterosexism as their common terminology hence relating it racism and sexism. Heterosexism is similar to a political situation where heterosexuality is presented and seen to be natural, practical, moral, and superior to any non­-heterosexual options. Heterosexuals as such are justly given privileges that will offer them political power, religious sanction, sexual freedom, moral status, occupational and tax privileges, cultural validation, freedom to have and adopt children and raise families, recourse against unfair hiring practices psychiatric and juridical non-interference among others (Hopkins 95). Heterosexism does not have any emotional and rhetorical effect that is associated with homophobia. Heterosexism is the most appropriate term to be used in describing the reason as to why television couples are all straight. The reason as to why marriage and joint tax returns are only meant for heterosexuals, why lesbians and gays in the open cannot be elected to office? Why can heterosexuals be allowed to adopt children or be foster parents? On the contrary, heterosexism cannot be used to describe a case that happened in Texas where a group of ten teenagers stabbed a gay man to death. In respect to this, therefore, heterosexism are protected. The term c usually, the first term of binary is always good, but the second term is bad. Heterosexism builds concepts and behaviors to enable hierarchical heterosexist to react to binary hence becoming homophobic. It is not necessary that one should be white to be considered a racist same way heterosexists are perceived as homophobic (Hopkins 96). Heterosexism may be different because its direct and obvious personal threats to gays. It nonetheless puts the political arena in a way that homophobia can continue to exist. Heterosexism is culpable for the production of homophobic. He choose to use the term homophobia for cases like petitions for fascistic law, brutality, fanatic claims or arbitrarily firing gay employees, but it does not always mean to characterize homophobia as clinical or an irrational response because it would be inadequate. Homophobia has evolved as primarily a political term, not as a psychiatric one and does not contradicts claustrophobia or agoraphobia only if political arenas are the same. 2. Explain Hopkins’ concept of homophobia. Make sure to note the connection of the two in defining these terms though Hopkins Hopkins explains homophobia as a similar term as heterosexism. It is used to refer to economic, physical, and juridical abuse faced by gays. There is no clear boundary between heterosexism and homophobia. According to Hopkins, the two words are used, in political environments, to present political needs. Homophobia is somehow dysfunctional to an individual or a group. Homophobic activity has some powers that usually influence. In a homosexual case, the conflicts reaffirm the appearance of a man in heterosexuality hence gaining a sense of safety and stability and oneself. Basing on the childhood modeling, homophobic activity wins approval from peers and authority figure, pretests one from becoming the target of other homophobes, and reaffirms one’s place in a larger context of gender appropriate behavior thus protecting a person’s personal identity. In his hypotheses, Hopkins recognized the fact that there are rational and functional aspects of homophobia especially in a heteropatriarchal context leading to another explanation of homophobia that has reversed the second explanation. The theory explains that queers are a genuine political threat to heterosexuals and do intend to eliminate heterosexual privilege (Hopkins 99). Radical feminist lesbians and certain radical men gays directly challenge the hetero-male dominated structure of society, rejecting patriarchal rule, conventional morality, and patriarchal modes of power distribution. All of the primary institutional sites of power that have maintained patriarchal domination on the state, the church, the family, medical profession, corporation that are being challenged from without any queers who do not want merely to be accepted, or tolerated or left alone but who want to dismantle heteropatrichal society and built something different in its place. In response to liberal heterosexuals who promote the irrationalism theory of homophobia, supporters of this theory might say that many of the so-called ignorant and false. Stereotypes of queers are, in fact, correct, but they are not bad stereotypes, they are good and should be praised, should be referred, and replaced with heterosexual values. Lesbians do hate men. Yes, fags do want to destroy nuclear family. Yes, dykes do want to convert children. Yes, homos are promiscuous. The impetus for this theory of homophobia comes from lesbian and gays who view their sexuality as primarily a political identity. Having chosen to reject heterosexuality, a lesbian or gay develop a political act of resistance. They have chosen this identification because they want to fight, destroy, or separate from a hetero-male-dominated society. According to this theory, homophobia is a perfectly rational reasonable reaction to the presence of queers because queers pose a genuine threat to the status of heterosexual privilege. It is only logical that heterosexual will fight back because if they do not fight back, their privilege, their power and their dominance will be stripped away all the sooner. There are people who seem, at least partially, to confirm this theory. It has been the interest to see that, over the past ten years or so it has become common for neo-conservative activist organizations to use the word family in their names. Among many gay, lesbian and feminist activist, any organization with family as part of its name is automatically suspected to be anti-gay, anti-lesbian anti-feminist. The frequency of the word family has an identification tag is seen as signifying a belief in the moral superiority of the traditional, heterosexual nuclear family. This suggest that some pro-family activist traced and justified the anti-homosexual activism to the belief that lesbians and gays are threatening to destroy the family and thus to destroy heterosexual immorality. Furthermore, It is true that, in the past twenty years or so, lesbian and gay thought has become radicalized in a variety of ways. Lesbians and gays have moved away from merely the hope of demedicalization and decriminalization, with the hope of building cultures, ethics practices, and politics of their own hopes that include the destruction of heterosexist or even heterosexual society (Hopkins 95). There are some radical separatist lesbian and gay separatist gays who view most human behavior in terms of rational, political aims, and for them homophobia is a predictable political response to their own oppositional politics. In nineteen ninety-two, a republican presidential candidate Pat Buchanan was not simply being hyperbolic when he gravely predicted that the 1990s would be the decade. 3. Explain Hopkins’ three types of homophobia There is no clear boundary between heterosexism and homophobia. According to Hopkins, the two words are used in political environments used to present political needs. Homophobia is somehow dysfunctional to an individual or a group. Homophobic activity has some powers that usually influence. In a homosexual case, the conflicts reaffirm the appearance of a man in heterosexuality hence gaining a sense of safety and stability and oneself. Basing on the childhood modeling, homophobic activity wins approval from peers and authority figure, pretests one from becoming the target of other homophobes, and reaffirms one’s place in a larger context of gender appropriate behavior thus protecting a person’s personal identity. In his hypotheses, Hopkins recognized the fact that there are rational and functional aspects of homophobia especially in a heteropatriarchal context leading to another explanation of homophobia that has reversed the second explanation. The theory explains that queers are a genuine political threat to heterosexuals and do intend to eliminate heterosexual privilege. Radical feminist lesbians and certain radical men gays directly challenge the hetero-male dominated structure of society, rejecting patriarchal rule, conventional morality, and patriarchal modes of power distribution. It is not necessary that one should be white to be considered a racist same way heterosexists are perceived as homophobic. Heterosexism maybe different due to its direct and obvious personal threats to gays it places the political arena in a manner that homophobia is bound to thrive. Heterosexism is culpable for the production of homophobic (Hopkins 100). He choose to use the term homophobia for cases like petitions for fascistic law, brutality, fanatic claims or arbitrarily firing gay employees, but it does not always mean to characterize homophobia as clinical or an irrational response because it would be inadequate. Homophobia has evolved as primarily a political term, not as a psychiatric one and does not contradicts claustrophobia or agoraphobia only if political arenas are the same. It is not necessary that one should be white to be considered to be a racist same way heterosexists are perceived as homophobic. Heterosexism maybe different due to its direct and obvious personal threats to gays it nonetheless places the political arena; in a way that homophobia will always exist. Heterosexism is culpable for the production of homophobic. He choose to use the term homophobia for cases like petitions for fascistic law, brutality, fanatic claims or arbitrarily firing gay employees, but it does not always mean to characterize homophobia as clinical or an irrational response because it would be inadequate. Homophobia has evolved as primarily a political term, not as a psychiatric one and does not contradicts claustrophobia or agoraphobia only if political arenas are the same. 4. Critically assess Hopkins’ own hypothesis on homophobia that states that one’s self identity is bound to one’s gender In his hypotheses, Hopkins recognized the fact that there are rational and functional aspects of homophobia especially in a heteropatriarchal context leading to another explanation of homophobia that has reversed the second explanation. The theory explains that queers are a genuine political threat to heterosexuals and do intend to eliminate heterosexual privilege. Radical feminist lesbians and certain radical men gays directly challenge the hetero-male dominated structure of society, rejecting patriarchal rule, conventional morality, and patriarchal modes of power distribution. It is not necessary that one should be white to be considered a racist same way heterosexists are perceived as homophobic. Heterosexism maybe different due to its direct and obvious personal threats to gays it puts the political arena in a way that homophobia is bound to exist. Heterosexism is culpable for the production of homophobic. He choose to use the term homophobia for cases like petitions for fascistic law, brutality, fanatic claims or arbitrarily firing gay employees, but it does not always mean to characterize homophobia as clinical or an irrational response because it would be inadequate (Hopkins 102). Homophobia has evolved as primarily a political term, not as a psychiatric one and does not contradicts claustrophobia or agoraphobia only if political arenas are the same. It is not necessary that one should be white to be considered a racist same way heterosexists are perceived as homophobic. Heterosexism is the most appropriate term to be used in describing the reason as to why television couples are all straight. The reason as to why marriage and joint tax returns are only mean for heterosexuals, why lesbians and gays in the open cannot be elected to office, why heterosexuals can only be allowed to adopt children or be foster parents. On the contrary, heterosexism cannot be used to describe a case that happened in Texas where a group of ten teenagers stabbed a gay man to death. In respect to this, therefore, heterosexism are protected. Heterosexism is culpable for the production of homophobic. Theorists have used heterosexism as their common terminology hence relating it racism and sexism. Heterosexism is similar to a political situation where heterosexuality is presented and seen to be natural, practical, moral, and superior to any non­-heterosexual options. Heterosexuals as such are justly given privileges that will offer them political power, religious sanction, sexual freedom, moral status, occupational and tax privileges, cultural validation, freedom to have and adopt children and raise families, recourse against unfair hiring practices psychiatric and juridical non-interference among others. Heterosexism does not have any emotional and rhetorical effect that is associated with homophobia. Heterosexism is the most appropriate term to be used in describing the reason as to why television couples are all straight. The reason why marriage and joint tax returns are only mean for heterosexuals, why lesbians and gays in the open cannot be elected to office, why heterosexuals can only be allowed to adopt children or be foster parents (Hopkins 105). On the contrary, heterosexism cannot be used to describe a case that happened in Texas where a group of ten teenagers stabbed a gay man to death. In respect to this, therefore, heterosexism are protected. Work Cited Hopkins, P D (2007) Gender Treachery: Homophobia, Masculinity, and Threatened Identities http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/tbettch/hopkins.pdf. Cengage Learning. Read More