How Do Constructions of Race Relate to Construction of Sexuality - Essay Example

Essay Plan Essay How does constructions of race relate to construction of sexuality Introduction: Topic sentence on colour and sex and explanations on race and sexuality. Colonial History: History of constructions on race and sexuality. Miscegenation: Explanation of the term. How it brings about the relations between constructions of sexuality and race. Eugenics: Its definition and construction on race. Heteronormative: Its definition and how it expresses relation of construction between race and gender. Whiteness: Its meaning and expression of constructions between race and sexuality. Conclusion: Concluding remarks on the relations of constructions between sexuality and race. How does constructions of race relate to construction of sexuality Name Course Date How does constructions of race relate to construction of sexuality Introduction Over the decades, people have been known to identify themselves as different from other people by colour and sex. However, these variations have not constantly been identified to be global or natural. These characteristics are the distinctive features of the way the idea of race is used in the currently. Race is a system that groups persons into separate and large populations by cultural, past, belief, linguistic, geological and hereditary relationship. The idea of race as is understood currently became known as it is when exploration. This resulted to interaction between Europeans and people around world. Race also includes the idea of classification and typology in natural sciences (Rothenberg, 2004). On the other hand, sexuality refers to the sexual feelings that define features of romance and relationship. Over the years, the topic on sexuality has been looked at with shame. Parents are known to play a big role in shaping the views that their children develop towards sexuality (Ward & Wyatt, 1994). This essay looks at how the constructions of race relate to constructions of sexuality. Research by Ward and Wyatt (1994) showed that persons who received negative verbal messages on sexuality during their childhood were involved in riskier sexual acts than those who recalled positive messages. Thus, parents and elders have a great impact on the way their young ones understand sexuality. Long ago, slaves, and mostly African women were largely discriminated against because of their skin colour. They were even sexually harassed by their slave masters. In addition, in communities where women were considered less inferior, such as the case of the ancient destitute women of Australia, where women used their sexual power, through prostitution to earn their daily bread. These women of Australia did not have a right to wage until about fifty years ago. Daniluk (1993) stated that, sexual experience and socialization play a major role in shaping sexuality. They noted that it has an effect on the process of advancing individual sexual understanding Colonial History Race along with other thoughts now connected to it became popular during scientific revolution. It brought about advantaged colonization which began the political relations between Europeans and countries with different political and cultural customs. As Europeans explored different continents, they met to people different to them. They reflected on the physical, societal and cultural differences amongst these people. The beginning of the Atlantic slave trade was an encouragement to the grouping of people. It provided a reason for slavery. Looking at their customary origins and their own inner relations there was an antagonism between the English and Irish which powerfully shaped early European outlook about the differences between individuals. Europeans started groping themselves and others into groups in regard to their physical appearances (Rothenberg, 2004). They also began to point to people who made up these groups, their capacities and behaviours as different from them. They embraced folk beliefs that connected the physical differences connecting the groups to behavioural, moral and intellectual traits. In China, an idea that is frequently interpreted as race was associated with descendents who were believed to be from the Yellow Emperor. This term used to stress on the unity of ethnic groups in the Peoples Republic of China. These are just but few examples of fierce disagreements between racial groups which have existed all through history and around the world (Rothenberg, 2004). During the start of the 17th century, sexual practices were not regarded as top secrets. Things were done openly. Words were uttered without fear or shyness. During the 17th century, people used direct gestures and children were very close to their elders. This was a thing that was not seen in the 19th century (Rothenberg, 2004). Two hundred years later, things have changed. The Victorian regime has been the supreme regime up to now. In the 19th century, issues related to sexuality were handled with silence. In those times, oral prudence was very much appreciated. Parents were quiet on issues regarding the custom of sexuality. For example, children were not allowed to have sex. Hence, was not necessary for them to be taken through sexuality classes. In addition, it was forbidden to talk about sexuality. It was also forbidden to practice it in public in many societies. Due to this pretence in these societies, women were sexually harassed. However, they lacked the courage to let it out. As a result, they suffered psychologically. More so, on the basis of their ethnicity, women were sexually harassed. These was mainly for the enslaved women who could not defend themselves nor be defended, women who had no power at all (Rothenberg, 2004). Miscegenation What is miscegenation? Miscegenation is the mixing of various ethnical groups through matrimony, sexual activity and reproduction. The term has been in use from the 19th century. It not only refers to marriages among races but also sexual relations among races. It also, describes racial mixing that has been in occurrence since colonization began. In the past, it was used in the putting up of laws hindering marriage among races and sexual relations that were described as anti-miscegenation laws (Ward & Wyatt, 1994). Miscegenation was described in historical writings during colonization, a time known as the era of discovery. Nevertheless, Asian societies such as those in China and Japan had limitations on marrying with persons from different races (Ward & Wyatt, 1994). Today, the term miscegenation is not popular among many scholars. This is because it implies a real biological incidence, rather than the classification used on certain relationships. Its use in history was on situations that usually meant condemnation. This is the reason why more clear impartial terms such as interethnic, interracial, or cross-cultural are used more in these modern times. The term is utilized by scholars when they are talking about historical practices about multiracialism, like the case of anti-miscegenation laws which hindered interethnic marriages. In these modern times, the mixing of races and ethnicity groupings is broad. Hence the term “mixed races” is commonly utilized. However, the concept of miscegenation is connected to ideas of ethnic differences (Ward & Wyatt, 1994). As from the year 1691, laws banning the race interactions were imposed in some states in America up to the year 1967. In Germany, the Nazis imposed laws prohibiting the same from 1935 to 1945. Also, in South Africa at the start of the Apartheid era, such laws existed. Each and every law largely prohibited marriage between people of different races or ethnicities. Furthermore, these laws banned sexual activities between persons of different races (Ward & Wyatt, 1994). In America, different states had laws banning marriage unions between blacks and whites while in other states, the marriage unions of whites with Asians and Native Americans were not allowed. The laws were commonly known as anti-miscegenation laws. 30 out of 48 states between 1913 and 1948 enforced such laws even though an anti-miscegenation change was recommended to the Constitution in 1871. Between 1912 and 1913, and also in 1928, no law that opposed ethnically mixed marriage unions was passed in the US. In 1967, the Supreme Court generally ruled in the Loving v. Virginia case that anti-miscegenation regulations were not constitutional. On the basis of this verdict, the laws were not operational in all other sixteen states that still had them (Ward & Wyatt, 1994). The Nazi banned interracial sexual practices in 1935. It was part of the Nuremberg Laws. Nuremberg laws had earlier on banned extramarital sexual relations between Germans and Jews. Violating the law was regarded as a disgrace to German society. It was punishable by jail or even death. In South Africa, marriage among races was banned in 1949. It prohibited marriage between ethnic groups, including that involving whites and those who were not whites. Also, the Immorality act which was passed in 1950 made it a violation of the law for there to be any sexual activities between whites and individuals from other races. However, in 1985, these laws were done away with (Ward & Wyatt, 1994). The history of African interracial interactions with Arabs is well known. It is also known of how European men had sexual relations with black African women. Arabs contributed a lot in the African slave trade. Contrary to the trans-Atlantic slave trade, many of the slaves in the Arab slave trade were black women. Many of these women were used as slaves to satisfy the sexual desires of Arabs. In addition, in African countries like Angola and Mozambique, racial mixing between African women and the Portuguese was common. There have also been recordings of Chinese traders and workers taking African women. This was due to their involvement in the building of railways in Africa. The Chinese railway workers were mainly made up of men with very a small number of Chinese female workers. Additionally, in West Africa, there are many cases of Lebanese men involving African women in sexual relations. Many of their offsprings have gone on to take up powerful leadership positions in Africa. Examples of a number of famous off springs of racial mixing includes: Jerry John Rawlings, his father was Scottish and his mother a black Ghanaian. He became the President of Ghana. Ian Khama, son of Botswana’s first president and a British mother is the current president of Botswana. Indian men, who were traders in East Africa, also married the local women. British colonialists brought in workers from India to work on the railway from the Indian Coast to the main land. This increased the number of sexual relations between Arabs and black women from East Africa (Ward & Wyatt, 1994). Eugenics Eugenics is defined as the practice and belief of boosting and enhancing the genetic quality of the human population. It indicates a social philosophy that supports the development of human genetic features. This is done by promotion of greater reproduction of persons with desired traits called positive eugenics, and reduced reproduction of persons with weak traits, called negative eugenics (Osborn, 1926). As a societal movement, eugenics attained its greatest popularity in the start of the 20th century. Then, it was adopted globally and supported by governments, as well as influential individuals and institutions. Many nations endorsed a variety of policies regarding eugenics that included: birth control, genetic screening, promoting differential birth rates, isolation that included ethnic isolation and separation of mentally challenged patients from the society, marriage control, forced abortions, enforced sterilization or even mass killing of people. Disabled persons such as the blind and deaf were secluded from the people. Eugenics became so popular that it was introduced to universities and colleges. The strategy received support from many through financial funding (Osborn, 1926). The practice was recognized all over the world through the International Federation of Eugenic organizations. Its global features included support of laws that permitted the achievement of the aims of eugenics such as sterilization laws. Its ethical characteristics included denial of the principle that all people are equal. It also included the redefining of morality in terms of genetic fitness. Its racially biased features included a chase of a pure Nordic race and the eventual eradication of the so thought to be "less fit" races (Osborn, 1926). Heteronormative Heteronormativity refers to an association of custom in day to day living which state that individuals fall into different but harmonizing sexual features with natural responsibilities in life. It claims that heterosexuality is the only normal aspect in terms of sexual orientation. It also emphasizes that sexual relations between persons of opposite sexes are the only right ones. As a result, a "heteronormative" belief is one which encompasses the organization of biological sex, sexuality gender identity as well as the roles of each gender. Heteronormativity is constantly associated to heterosexism as well as homophobia (Osborn, 1926). Critics of heteronormativity such as Cathy J. Cohen argue that the attitudes in this body are repressive. They disgrace some people when they behave against what the term states as natural and normal. Among those discriminated against are persons who are involved in sex relationships with people of their gender and also those that are part of the racial minority, persons who are unable to express themselves in fear of being regarded as “abnormal” (Osborn, 1926). The racial minorities are not heard out. They may be discriminated against in certain environments such as marriage and employment according to heteronormativity critics. Gayle Rubin who is a cultural anthropologist notes that heteronormativity in an everyday society builds a sex hierarchy which gradates sex practices from fairly "good sex" and turns it to "bad sex." This sex hierarchy groups reproductive, monogamous sexual act between faithful heterosexuals as "good" and categorize any other sexual practices and persons who are not successful to be contained in this group as the ones who practice the bad sex, in this group especially long-term loyal gay couples and immoral gays in between the extremities. In addition, most critics view this sex hierarchy as having an explanation for the discrimination of gay people for commonly "abnormal" sexual acts that are commonly practiced by normal persons as well, like the use of pornography or sexual acts in open places. The heteronormative sex hierarchy is taken to the workplace where lesbians, bisexual and gay persons face discrimination as is in the scenario of the anti-homosexual employment policies that often results in stigmatization and unemployment (Osborn, 1926). In many countries, employees as well as candidates seeking employment can be fired or fail to secure employment respectively for not being heterosexual. A good example is a restaurant Cracker Barrel that drew national attention in year 1991after the management sacked a worker for being a lesbian, stating their policy that workers whose sexual preferences failed to observe the normal heterosexual principles were not consistent with the traditional American practices. Employees such as the fired worker and others, including the effeminate men waiters were legally sacked by the workplace policies against non-heteronormative values (Osborn, 1926). Examining the linkage of heteronormativity and sexual discrimination in the place of work, Mustafa Bilgehan Ozturk points out the impact of patriarchal acts and institutions on the place of employment experiences of gay, lesbian and also the bisexual workers in a variety of backgrounds in Turkey, indicating further the precise historic ties and localized knowledge formations which give increase the professional, physical and psycho-emotive practices of discrimination in opposition to sexual minorities (Osborn, 1926). Today, the family organization differs from what was the ideal nuclear family of the 1950s. Families of the late 19th century and the early 20th century in the US were typified by the passing away of one or both parents for many American children. In 1985, the US is thought to have had roughly 2.5 million post-divorce and step family homes that had children. In the late 1980s, nearly 20% of families that had children headed by a matrimonial couple were stepfamilies (Osborn, 1926). The number of single parenting, cohabitation and divorce has been on the rise in the past 3 decades. Many families in United States at present are moving away from the traditional norm where the father is the only breadwinner and the mother is a housewife and the father bears all the responsibility. Many other countries worldwide are also experiencing the same changes. In the current economic times, these changes are heading towards the scenario where two heterosexual parents both provide resources for their children in marriages. It is also common to get families in the modern society where families are headed by a single parent as a result of divorce or separation. As technology continues to advance, it has become common place to have families that are not necessarily formed by heteronormative union such as cases where artificial insemination is used. As a result, a great debate has been generated on these variations for the children and adults involved. In a 2010 Massachusetts spousal gains case, psychologist Michael Lamb testified and noted that parental sexual preference does not affect development of the child negatively. He argued that, it has been known that young adults and adolescents can respond to variations in their modern families just as in traditional families. Nevertheless, Maggie Gallagher, a columnist, argues that traditional social organizations that are heteronormative boost the society as they are provide the best conditions for developing and nurturing of children. In addition, Margaret Somerville, an Australian-Canadian ethicist argues that by giving couples of the same-sex the right to start a family, it does not link parenthood to biology (Osborn, 1926). Whiteness Whiteness is an idea which regards persons with fair skins to be dominant. This concept links them with privileges in the society. In such societies, white people are accorded societal rights that are regarded superior as compared to black people living in the same social, political and economic areas (McIntosh, 2004). As a concept it refers to a scenario where people of white colour are regarded as superior to people with a different skin colour. As a result, the different people are inferior and discriminated against by the white. In this concept, whites see themselves as normal while people of different skin colour are no normal. In short, whiteness is the definition of normality. Whiteness indicates the underlying issues of inequality in such societies (McIntosh, 2004). In cases of opportunities for employment, whites benefit at the expense of the blacks or rather the non-whites who are regarded as minorities. The sex of the person is not considered in as much as the skin colour. For example, Asian-Americans, even if considered as a representation of minority Chief Executive officers, take about 1.6% of chief executive officer positions job positions. Asian-American constitutes around 4.8% of the total population. In a research published in 2003, Royster, a sociologist, made an assessment based on the sex of the two races of white and black males, who had the same level of skills and had graduated from the same institution of higher learning. By assessing their success and work experience, the sociologist discovered that white graduates were accorded more privileges in that most of them were employed; they were paid more and promoted more. They also held higher job positions. In addition, it was found that the male white graduates did not experience long periods of unemployment as compared to black male students. Because all other factors were similar, it was evident that the variations in the employment experiences were connected to ethnicity and race. This study is one in which one in which sexuality, male, was compared to race (McIntosh, 2004). Conclusion The society we live in at the moment has objectified sex. Sexuality has become a topic which defines most of the societies around the world. Racism on the other hand is still thriving within the confines of many societies all over the world. Racism and ethnicity as shown have a bearing on the construction of sexuality, both in the past as history shows, and in the present day society. Just as women are looked down upon because they are considered the weaker sex, so are certain races regarded as inferior to other races. Sexuality has been used to relate certain roles that are played in society to either sex just as race has been used to relate certain roles to certain races since the days when European countries embarked on colonization. Both sexuality and racism have elements of discrimination in them. These elements are expressed by the way females, who are regarded as the weaker sex, and blacks who are regarded as the weaker race are discriminated against when it comes to issues of superiority. Hence, constructions of race and ethnicity are very similar to constructions of sexuality. References Daniluk, J. C., 1993. The meaning and experience of female sexuality: A phenomenological analysis. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 17 (1). 53-69. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1993.tb00676.x McIntosh, P., 1989. Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack. [pdf] Available at http://www.isr.umich.edu/home/diversity/resources/white-privilege.pdf [Accessed on 18 April 2014]. Rothenberg, P. S., 2004. Race, Class, and Gender in the United States: An Integrated Study. New York: Worth Publishers. Osborn, F., 1937. Development of a Eugenic Philosophy. American Sociological Review 2 (3): 389–397. doi:10.2307/2084871 Ward, L. M. & Wyatt, G. E., 1994. The effects of childhood sexual messages on African American and White womens adolescent sexual behavior. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18 (2), 183-201. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1994.tb00450.x Read More