Sociology Essay on Intersectionality

Homosexuality is a term to depict an individual explicitly pulled into those of a similar sexual orientation. Homosexuality can be utilized to allude to both gays and lesbians. Oppression homosexuality has represented a significant issue that has delivered various exploited people and it is essential to stop this superfluous demise. The discrimination against homosexuality has been around for a long time. Bachman stated that “homosexuality is both a choice and a threat” (Goldberg: 2011). This means that transgender people have the choice to be whatever they want but at the same time they will live in a dangerous situation. A strategy called conversation therapy is a method for restoring homosexuality. A conversation therapy “expected to reallot sexual direction of its patient. During the 1950s and 1960s, a transformation treatment was finished by forcing its patient to stroke off to an image of those of the opposite sex while they will be electrically stunned when they have demonstrated an image of those of similar sex. Moreover, conversation therapy attempts to limit the desire for homosexuality as opposed to totally dispensing with it. Restricting the case that homosexuality can be cared for, the American Psychiatrist Association has expelled homosexuality from psychological instability and scatters (Herek; 2001). This means that homosexuality is neither a psychological maladjustment nor clutter. It is unimaginable to expect to be restored. Homosexuality is not a decision, a sickness, a way of life, or a pattern, and it can't be altered. Also, forcing sexually oriented to change allows them to face Therefore, this paper will look at the issues that lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people have faced in the United States. Also, by looking at the intersectional perspective, we can see that it shapes how race gender, and sex are allotted to challenge the social response.

Arthur Dong's strong documentary, 'Coming Out Under Fire,' illuminates the present discussion over gays and lesbians in the military by viewing the issue from a recorded point of view. By concentrating on homosexual people who filled in as troopers in World War II, the film gives some setting to President Clinton's 1993 exertion to lift the prohibition on gays in the military and the continuous national discussion (Emanuel Levy: 1994). Dong views the stories of nine gay and lesbian veterans, all shared in detail their recollections of day-by-day military life. “They made you lie,” stated one man. “They made you live an invisible life.” Indeed, “don’t ask, don’t say” became by necessity the motto of patriotic homosexuals” (Allan Bérubé: Feb 6, 1994). This demonstrates that for people who are sexually oriented, there are always too many judging them instead of looking at their performances. Moreover, the documentary also discussed the idea regardless of their different backgrounds, inspirations to join the war exertion, and military professions. The accounts are joined by the people's quality and readiness to serve the nation, despite mistreatment and embarrassing treatment (Levy: 1984). The document shows that the military demonstrated the most creative in its techniques, exposing known gays and lesbians to dehumanize cross-examinations, therapeutic assessments, imprisonment in 'strange stockades' and medical clinics for the lawbreaker and rationally crazy, and damaging as 'sex distorts' (Levy: 1984).

Leaning on what we saw in the document we can tell that homosexuals are still a key issue that people are facing today in the United States. In the late 1990s, a post-closet framework developed arguing that transgender people become progressively normal and less difficult; “American homosexuals have normalized and routinized their homosexuality to a degree where the closet plays a lesser role in their life” (Seidman Meeks and Traschen 1999: 19). Looking deeper at “Intersectionality” is a term related to feminism theory as Crenshaw indicated in her work. Intersectionality highlights how multiple dimensions of socially constructed relationships and categories interact, shaping simultaneous levels of social inequality (Crenshew 1989; 1995). Sociologists have their perspectives and ideas about intersectionality. Three scholar sociologists McCall, Prins, and Hancock emphasize the difference in conducting the appearance of the concept of intersectionality and how it’s understood to apply today. In the article to Practicing “Intersectionality in Sociological Research: A Critical Analysis of Inclusions, Interactions, and Institutions in the Study of Inequalities”

We build on their comprehensive reviews to highlight three dimensions of theorizing that have become part of what “intersectionality” indicates: the importance of including the perspectives of multiply marginalized people, especially women of color; an analytic shift from the addition of multiple independent strands of inequality toward a multiplication in this way the transformation of their particular effects present to interactions; and a focus on identifying multiple institutions as overlapping in their co-determination of inequalities to produce complex configurations from the start, rather than “extra” interactive processes added onto particular effects (Yeon Choo, Hae, and Myra Marx Ferree: 2010).

Given what the three researchers stated, this shows that we construct our understanding through the high purposes of their extent of estimating intersectionality and what it implies. It accentuates that intersectionality demonstrates the significance of incorporating the point of view that we use to treat individuals, groups, or gathering ideas as irrelevant, especially for women of color or transgender individuals. This perspective is like what Crenshaw stated about intersectionality, which focuses on recognizing various establishments as covering their participation in inequalities.

Despite the military’s exclusionary endeavors, the military and homosexual people crashed during World War II. “Military needed to figure out how to endure gays as all men and women were required in the war; however, gay relationships stayed private and were just endure as long as they did not disturb the unit” (Berube: 1991). This policy was an extraordinary change in the lives of homosexual people. Many women found their homosexuality during the war and finished their segregation even though military authorities still policed delicate men and masculine women (Berube 1991: Faderman 1991). This means that because of their sexual orientation, these people were thought to be the most dangerous homosexuals. Thus, homosexuality kept up even with the same sex practices getting increasingly mainstream and available. Connecting to the documentary “Coming Out Under Fire”, we can see that homosexuality itself tends to be an inclination for association and sexual action with an individual of a similar sex. The potential for gay conduct has all the earmarks of being an essential piece of human sexuality. Since many individuals experience gay intrigue, interest, or action at some point in their lives.

In addition, after laying out more on the sociologist's perspective about theoretical meanings of intersectionality, we turn to homosexuality that a few people in the general public believe homosexuality to be a disease and that it could be rectified. The world's biggest relationship of therapists American Psychological Association, expressed that; “homosexuality is not a mental disorder and the APA opposes all portrayals of lesbian, gay and bisexual people as mentally ill and in need of treatment due to their reproductive orientation” (APA: 1997). The issue of destroying homosexuality has turned into a political discussion in America, with political associations supporting the trademark of changing homosexuality through the power of will alone.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

Alternatively, academic research on sexuality started to develop and advance in the issue of homosexuality. For example, Alfred Kinsey (1948) “reported the presence of homosexual behavior in male and female”, however “not really in connection to any social, mental or organic components; homosexuality practices were assessed on a similar worth-free scale” (Valocchi: 1999). Evelyn Hooker likewise gave the main observational that homosexuality was not demonstrative of mental aggravation (1965). This means that Hooker’s examination is significant in the light of the fact that it did not politically abuse the lighted opposition.

In terms of thinking about the view of society on homosexuality through the film, homosexuality is explicitly sensitive; it is seen that different individuals perceive the issue distinctively according to the social views of their society. Gays and lesbians have social equality which bolsters their demonstrations. Sociologists stated that;

Generally, homosexuality is considered deviance and behavior that does not comply with the social norms and values of society, consequently, it is socially created. Since many persons in the United States Society believe that homosexuality is wrongful, society has made and highlighted homosexuality to be a moral wrong. Since moral wrong is relative and not absolute to society (essay on Sociology).

This implies homosexuality is anything but a widespread type of extramarital corruption. Most societies allow and support this sort of homosexuality. Regardless of this, they should comprehend homosexuality is a strategy for endurance for certain people regardless of whether minority in the general public, and they should acknowledge how they are and aren't separating from the general public.

Connecting to what the film shows in terms of homosexuality we can see that today in our society not only race and gender are two different things but also sex and gender are two different things however, they are similar in some ways. In the video, Trans women are not “biologically male” by Riley J. Dennis. Dennis's essential point is trans women are women. In the video, she discussed the difference between sex and gender. She stated Sex was biological, and gender is a social construct” (Riley J. Dennis: 2007). This means sex refers to biological differences like a chromosome, hormones, and internal and external sex organs. Gender refers to the characteristics that society or culture represents as masculine or feminine. Dennis mentioned that sex and gender are different things, but both of them are social constructs in alternative ways. Gender is based on how we identify ourselves as humans identifying ourselves. She would argue that “race needs to go through the same refined process that gender has already gone through” (Dennis: 2007). She claimed some people automatically had the reaction that sex is based on biology, and you can’t change a person’s biology. But that’s exactly what we used to say about gender” (Dennis: 2007). Hence, she illustrates that as we thought that we couldn’t change our gender, some people thought that we couldn’t change our sex. However, we used to think that way about gender, but gender represents a social construct. The video stated, “There’s no reason to divide XX and XY people. That is an arbitrary distinction that does not affect how the person looks or behaves or navigates the world” (Dennis: 2007). The video tries to send a message, that suggests we should rethink what constitutes a man or a woman. According to a speaker, sex can be identified as constructed because it can be manipulated medically. Connecting this to the article “Missing in Interaction” by Sadker. The author starts discussing what might be demonstrated clearly whether there was an approach to see a basic classroom in images, those young men are allowed to overwhelm classroom discussion and young ladies are impugned for doing so, those young men are urged to think dynamically and young ladies are coordinated to stay on point, and that young men receive consideration for 'Boys things' and young girls get consideration for 'Girls things' (Sadker: 1994). In other words, this demonstrates that white boy stands out enough to be noticed in school and get paid the most at work, while young ladies of color get the least and therefore get the lowest rates of pay in the work world. It also refers to transgender people getting stereotyped by others. Some people in society may not accept that transgender, sex, and gender represent a social construct as a race.

Altogether, we discussed how intersectionality was shaping the system and impacting people’s lives. The paper mentioned two styles of understanding intersectionality. Sociologists brought up these ideas that as race and gender represent a social construct, sex became a social construct in some way too. The other way is that Intersectionality showed as a social inequality such as race, sex, gender, and class is reforming the whole society. In addition, it informs how we are acting in society today. Regarding the coming out under fire, the documentary represents emotional scenes from the 1993 Senate hearings, which expose how the American government keeps on propagating and reaffirming its ideology and practice of oppressing homosexual fighters. It did a great job enumerating the lives of gays and lesbians in the US military. This contemporary proves more strength to the various instances of the terrible release of valiant homosexuals. Further, the American LGBT experience during World War II.

References

1. Berube, Allan. 1991. Coming Out Under Fire: The History of Gay Men and Women in World War Two. New York: Plume.
2. Dennis, Riley. 2017. 'No, Trans Women Are NOT ‘Biologically Male.’' Everyday Feminism. https://everydayfeminism.com/2017/02/trans-women-not-biologically-male/.
3. Faderman, Lillian. 1991. Odd Girls and Twilight Lovers: A History of Lesbian Life in Twentieth-Century America. New York: Penguin Books.
4. Homosexuality and its effect on society. (2016, May 12). UK Essays. Retrieved November 6, 2019, from https://www.ukessays.com/essays/sociology/homosexuality-and-its-effect-on-society-sociology-essay.php.
5. Herek, G. M (2000, February 1). The Psychology of Sexual Prejudice - Gregory M. Herek, 2000. Retrieved November 9, 2019, from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8721.00051.
6. Hooker, Evelyn. 1965. “An Empirical Study of Some Relations Between Sexual Patterns and Gender Identity in Male Homosexuals.” Pp. 24–52 in Sex Research: New Development, edited by J. Money. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
7. Goldberg, M (2011, July 11). Marcus Bachmann's Controversial Gay Therapy-and How It Affects Michele's Campaign. Retrieved November 9, 2019, from https://www.thedailybeast.com/marcus-bachmanns-controversial-gay-therapyand-how-it-affects-micheles-campaign?ref=scroll.
8. Kinsey, Alfred. 1948. Sexual Behavior in the Human Male.
9. Levy, E. Coming Out Under Fire. [online] Variety. Available at: https://variety.com/1994/film/reviews/coming-out-under-fire-1200435975/
10. Newcomb, M., Dass, T., Batiste, S., Wilson, S., Law, D., Dew, J., … Williams, K (2014, December 3). iv. Missing In Interaction. Retrieved November 6, 2019, from https://socialdiversitysocialconstruction.wordpress.com/missing-in-interaction/.
11. Seidman, Steven, Chet Meeks, and Francie Traschen. 1999. “Beyond the Closet? The Changing Social Meaning of Homosexuality in the United States.” Sexualities 2:9–34.
12. Sexual orientation & Homosexuality. (n.d.). American Physiology Association. Retrieved November 9, 19AD, from https://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/orientation.
13. Sexual Orientation, Reaffirms Psychology's Opposition to Hemophobia and Client's Rights to Unbiased Treatment. (1997, August 14). American Physiological Association (APA). Retrieved November 9, 2019, from https://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/resolution97.html.
14. Yeon Choo, Hae, and Myra Marx Ferree. 2010. 'Practicing Intersectionality In Sociological Research: A Critical Analysis Of Inclusions, Interactions, And Institutions In The Study Of Inequalities.' Ssc.Wisc.Edu. https://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~mferree/documents/choo_ferree_intersectionality_final0909.pdf
15. Valocchi, Steve. 1999. “The Class-Infected Nature of Gay Identity.” Social Problems 46:207–24. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1062&context=sociology_diss